We Must Be Doing Something Right
I guess the "cables" are taking the place of the "internets."
(Tip 'o The Energy Dome to Crooks & Liars.)
5,000,000
Woot! Sometime last night or this morning, the ol' Site Meter hit five million visitors—which, of course, means a toast is in order!
Slainte Mhath, Shakers!
The Virtual Pub Is Open
Happy Fookin' Fourth, Shakers!
Belly up to the bar
and name your poison.
(I'm opening the pub a little early; new posts below.)
Brand New Americans Celebrate 4th by Heckling President
Welcome to the country, patriots!
President Bush invoked the memory of Thomas Jefferson Friday in welcoming new U.S. citizens at a naturalization ceremony at Monticello, saying "I'll be proud to call you a fellow American."What I love about this country is pretty much wrapped up in that story, right there. And it's got nothing to do with partisan politics, and everything to do with the spirit of yelling with purpose at the goddamned president, no matter who s/he is, even and especially on the Fourth of July.
On his final U.S. Independence Day as president, Bush told an audience Friday at the home of the Declaration of Independence's author that he was honored to be present for the naturalization. Shouts from protesters were heard during Bush's remarks, and the president responded by saying he agrees that "we believe in free speech in the United States of America."
It's a Girl!
Congratulations to Thomas and Nancy Beatie on the birth of their daughter. Yay!
Thomas Beatie became widely known earlier this year as the "pregnant man" when he decided to become pregnant (a choice made possible because he is a trans man) when his wife could not as a result of a prior hysterectomy.
Father and child are reportedly doing just fine.
Friday Blogaround
My blog post and your blog post, sitting by the fire; my blog post said to your blog post, "Your blogging's been on fire!"
Pam: Charlie Crist's Getting Hitched...to a Woman
Kevin: Black Voices on Barack Obama’s Presidential Bid
Matttbastard: 21st Century Law Enforcement at its Finest
Jessica: This Is Funny...Why?
Mannion: The Ghost of Gas Prices Yet to Come
Leave your links in comments!
Jesse Helms Dead
Former senator Jesse Helms died of natural causes this morning. If someone has something more insightful to say, feel free.
The Glorious Fourth
When I was a kid I was very outgoing in putting up displays for the holidays -- Memorial Day, Christmas, the Fourth of July -- I liked the flags, the lights, the stuff. It was cool to make a big splash. But as I grew up I grew out of it, and today I don't go much for things like that. I don't have a flag to fly on national holidays, and the most I'll do for Christmas is a wreath on the door because it has good memories and the scent of pine is rare in subtropical Florida.
I suppose it has something to do with my Quaker notions of shunning iconography -- outward symbols can't show how you truly feel about something on the inside, and more often than not they are used to make up for the lack of a true belief. This is also true of patriotism: waving the flag -- or wrapping yourself in it -- is a poor and false measure of how you truly feel about your country.
There's an old saying that there is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come. As Benjamin Franklin noted, no country had ever been formed because of an idea. But when the Continental Congress met in Philadelphia in 1776 and passed the resolution embodied in the Declaration of Independence, that was what was being done. To create a nation not based on geographical boundaries, property, tribalism, or religion, but on the idea of forming a new government to replace the present form because the rulers were incompetent, uncaring, and cruel. The American Revolution wasn't so much a rebellion as it was a cry for attention. Most of the Declaration is a punch-list, if you will, of grievances both petty and grand against the Crown, and once the revolution was over and the new government was formed, the Constitution contained many remedies to prevent the slights and injuries inflicted under colonialism: the Bill of Rights is a direct response to many of the complaints listed in the Declaration.
But the Declaration of Independence goes beyond complaints. Its preamble is a mission statement. It proclaims our goals and what we hope to achieve. No nation had ever done that before, and to this day we are still struggling to achieve life and liberty, and the pursuit of happiness goes on with no sign of let-up.
That is the true glory of America. Not that we complain -- and we do -- but that we work to fix those complaints. To put them right. To make things better than they were. To give hope to people who feel that they have no voice, and to assure that regardless of who they are, where they come from, what they look like, who they love, or what they believe, there will be room for them to grow, do, and become whatever it is that they have the capacity to be. It's a simple idea, but the simplest ideas often have the most powerful impact.
This nation has achieved many great things. We've inspired other nations and drawn millions to our shores not to just escape their own country but to participate in what we're doing. And we've made mistakes. We've blundered and fumbled and bullied and injured. We've treated some of our own citizens with contempt, and shown the same kind of disregard for the rights of others that we enumerated in our own Declaration of Independence. We have been guilty of arrogance and hypocrisy. But these are all human traits, and we are, after all, human. The goal of government is to rise above humanity, and the goal of humanity is to strive for perfection. So if we stumble on the road to that goal, it is only because we are moving forward.
I love this country not for what it is but for what it could be. In my own way I show my patriotism not by waving a flag from my front porch but by working to make things work in our system and by adding to the discussion that will bring forth ideas to improve our lives and call into question the ideas of others. It is all a part of what makes the simple idea of life, liberty, and that elusive happiness so compelling and so inspiring, and what makes me very proud to be a part of this grand experiment.
Go forth!
(Originally posted at Bark Bark Woof Woof on July 4, 2005.)
!!#@$!!!@*!&*#$*&@
Everyone in the world has sent me the link to this AP story about an interview Obama did with Relevant Magazine, a Christian publication, in which he reportedly said that "mental distress" shouldn't qualify as part of the mother's health exception to late-term abortion bans. I quite honestly could not believe this was being reported correctly, so I looked out the original article.
And, sure enough, that's what he says all right.
Strang: Based on emails we received, another issue of deep importance to our readers is a candidate's stance on abortion. We largely know your platform, but there seems to be some real confusion about your position on third-trimester and partial-birth abortions. Can you clarify your stance for us?I just honestly don't even know what to say. Part of me wants to explore the bloody fucking obvious hypotheticals that make this position totally untenable (e.g. a pregnant woman under such psychological distress that she is a danger to herself and ergo necessarily the fetus), and another part of me just wants to point out how gobsmackingly offensive (and misogynist) this is.
Obama: I absolutely can, so please don't believe the emails. I have repeatedly said that I think it's entirely appropriate for states to restrict or even prohibit late-term abortions as long as there is a strict, well-defined exception for the health of the mother. Now, I don't think that "mental distress" qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term. Otherwise, as long as there is such a medical exception in place, I think we can prohibit late-term abortions.
That is, unless Obama believes that psychological health doesn't "qualify" as an intrinsic part of every human's health—a position so extraordinary I cannot believe he would hold it. (Would he also argue that psychological care should not be covered under his universal health insurance plan?)
And, if he doesn't believe that, then he evidently believes acute psychological distress "qualifies" as a serious health issue for everyone except pregnant women.
Certainly his defenders will say he didn't mean it that way, and of course he didn't. What he meant is that he doesn't think all those irresponsible, fickle, ninny-brained straw-women who decide willy-nilly they want abortions in their third trimester shouldn't be allowed to get one by claiming "mental distress" swoon swan get thee to a fainting couch. He's breathing life into the damnable lie that there are legions of women who seek out late-term abortions just because they've changed their silly little minds and make up lies about "mental distress" to get them.
Unfuckingbelievable. I am absolutely furious.
Question of the Day
Playing off my QOTD from yesterday:
When is the last time you were shopping for a gift for someone else, only to wind up purchasing something for yourself?
I love my shirts. Hee!
WWJS*
I don't often open spam but this one somehow managed to get past my filter and the title ("Donation") made me give it another glance thinking someone may want to donate to Shakesville, as occasionally people use the ShakerGourmet email to talk about site stuff.
I was just a wee bit wrong:
Dearest in Christ,Little Billy Evans, is that you?
Greetings in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, I am Mrs marilyn wells. from Kuwait. I am married to Mr. johnson wells who worked with Kuwait embassy in Ivory Coast for nine years before he died in the year 2004.We were married for eleven years without a child. He died after a brief illness that lasted for only four days.Before his death we were both born again christian.
Since his death I decided not to remarry or get a child outside my matrimonial home which the Bible is against.When my late husband was alive he deposited the sum of US$3.5million dollars in a Bank here in Abidjan Cote d'Ivoire. Presently, this money is still in bank.Recently, my Doctor told me that I would not last for the next Eight months due to cancer problem. The one that disturbs me most is my stroke sickness.
But it really disqualifies me/us from meeeeeellions of dollars shortly:
Having known my condition I decided to donate this fund to a charity organization that will utilize this money the way I am going to instruct herein. I want an organization that will use this fund for orphanages, school and church ,widows, propagating the word of God and to endeavor that the house of God is maintained. The Bible made us to understand that "Blessed is the hand that giveth".I took this decision because I don't have any child that will inherit this money and my husband relatives are not Christians and I don't want my husband's efforts to be used by unbelievers.Me? Ungodly? Never! *gasp*
I don't want a situation where this money will be used in an ungodly way. [...]
So preying upon the religious 'sensibilities' of the sucker who would fall for this bullshit, here is the point to steal said sucker's money all snuggled up in the bosom of Jesus:
I know that I am going to be in the bosom of the Lord. Exodus 14 VS 14 says that "the lord will fight my case and I shall hold my peace". I don't need any telephone communication in this regard because of my health hence the presence of my husband's relatives around me always. I don't want them to know about this development.With God all things are possible. As soon as I receive your reply I shall give you the contact of the Bank here in Abidjan Cote d'Ivoire.Uh-huh. *What Would Jesus Steal?
Contact me on this email xxxxxxxxx@xxxxx.xxx delay in your reply will give me room in sourcing another church for this same purpose. Please assure me that you will act accordingly as I Stated herein. Hoping to receive your reply. Remain blessed in the Lord.
Hey, Barack Obama: My black neighbor sometimes plays her music too loud. What do you think about that?
So, I'm reading this article about a jazz singer, Rene Marie, who was hired to sing the National Anthem at Denver's State of the City speech this week, but substituted the lyrics to Lift Ev'ry Voice and Sing, a song also known as the Black National Anthem. Drama ensued, natch.
But this post isn't about that. The post is about how the article is headlined "Obama chimes in on song debate: 'There's only one National Anthem'," and begins thus:
Sen. Barack Obama said today that a jazz performer's decision to sing the "Black National Anthem" at Denver's State of the City speech this week was wrong.Um, okay. So I read the rest of the article trying to figure out what Obama has to do with this story, and why he was asked to comment. And…yeah. There's no reason.
"Well, 'Lift Ev'ry Voice and Sing' is a beautiful song that has been sung in African-American churches and other events for a very long time," the presumed Democratic presidential nominee told the Rocky in a telephone interview on his way to North Dakota. "We only have one National Anthem. And so, if she was asked to sing the National Anthem, she should have sung that. 'Lift Ev'ry Voice and Sing' is a beautiful song, but we only have one National Anthem."
Except, of course, that his own patriotism is questionable, so I guess we need to make sure that he doesn't support this rogue anthem-singer. If he did, that could be evidence of a nefarious plan to chuck The Star-Spangled Banner into the bin the moment he takes office, and replace it with Fuck tha Police.
And I suppose this is only the first time that a possible future president will be treated like America's Token Black Guy, asked to issue an opinion on the behavior of a black person to whom he has no connection—because that's the thing about being the first, or even a prominent member, of a historically marginalized community to go into a new space: You become the de facto expert on everyone else in the rest of the community, and you are damn well expected to answer for it when someone in that community does something wrong. (Or "wrong.")
Speaking of wrong, is it wrong that I hope the next time he's asked to comment on something like that, he simply replies, "I'll bring it up at the next meeting," and let America sort out the snide irony of that retort?
Coverage You Can Count On
Check out this headline from a German news site: "Heidelberg Woman Bites Rapist's Penis And Escapes." Did you notice something? (Besides being reminiscent of this incident.) The editors at The Local actually used the word "rapist" to describe the attacker. Imagine that. It's a concept seemingly foreign to other news organizations. Good on you, German news eds, for not mincing words!
I want to be Eric Boehlert when I grow up.
'Cuz:
[W]hat elevated the outlandish Swift Boat allegations that Sen. John Kerry had lied about his war injuries in Vietnam, and what gave the allegations legitimacy and legs, was the fact that the mainstream press not only showered the Swift Boat attacks with voluminous coverage (CNN aired nearly 300 segments on the topic), but that the press completely failed, in a timely fashion, to ferret out the lies the Swift Boat Vets were peddling as part of their elaborate campaign season hoax.Go read the whole thing—in which he positively eviscerates that casual rewriting of history.
That's the sad truth. And that's why a line from a recent New York Times report caught my attention. The article was on how billionaire Swift Boat backer T. Boone Pickens was basically welching on the reported wager he'd made to give $1 million to anybody who could disprove the Swift Boat Vets' claims against Kerry. (A group of Kerry-backing veterans took Pickens up on his challenge; he promptly changed the ground rules of the wager and refused to pay.
But the Times piece suggested that, regardless of Pickens' refusal to pay up, it was common knowledge back in 2004 that many of the Swift Boat accusations were hollow and that the accusers were often at odds with the facts and themselves.
"Of course, none of this is really new," the Times reported. "Extensive media accounts undermined the Swift Boat charges in 2004, pointing out that some of the Swift Boat critics had written statements during Vietnam lauding Mr. Kerry for extraordinary bravery in the incidents they later said he made up."
Really? Is the Times actually suggesting that the media did their due diligence during the dog days of August 2004 and quickly highlighted the holes in the Swift Boat allegations? That the press unmasked the Swift Boat accusers and dirty tricksters and held them accountable? That Beltway journalists stepped forward and conducted robust fact-checking and concluded that the partisan Swift Boat accusers were not to be taken seriously?
What campaign was the Times watching? (Reminds me of that great Kim Richey song, with the chorus, "You remember the way it never was.")
Why Pandering to Conservative Evangelicals Is a Bad Idea
Because good little sheep never leave the herd.
At a meeting Tuesday in Denver, about 100 conservative Christian leaders from around the country agreed to unite behind the candidacy of John McCain, a politician they have long distrusted, marking the latest in a string of movements that bode well for McCain's general election prospects among the Republican base.Those are people who cannot be won over, not with all the faith-based bullshit in the world.
"Collectively we feel that he will support and advance those moral values that we hold much greater than Obama, who in our view will decimate moral values," said Mat Staver, the chairman of Liberty Counsel, a legal advocacy group, who previously supported Mike Huckabee's candidacy.
…A second person who attended the event, but asked not to be named, said that the group was motivated principally by a desire to defeat Barack Obama. "None of these people want to meet their maker knowing that they didn't do everything they could to keep Barack Obama from being president," the participant said.
Every election, it's the same thing—the highly-paid Democratic strategists with their careful calculations and rhetoric about delicate balances and weighing just how many more secular progressives (by which I mean atheists, agnostics, and religious people who firmly believe in a secular public sphere) they can afford to alienate to pick up those frustratingly elusive conservative evangelicals.
I really wonder when the Democrats will finally realize that there isn't a price you can pay for these idiots and still be a Democrat.
SYTYCD: The hottness edition
You're still watching, right? What about last night?! It's a toss-up, for me, on my favorite routine. I mean, just damn:
But this routine was just sexy:
*Fans self*
One of my favorite couples thus far (besides Twitch and Kherington) is Katee and Joshua. I adored their samba last week:
Can I just say how glad I am that Chris (Comfort's ex-partner) is gone? Ugh, he bugged me. As much as I think Comfort benefited from having Thayne as her new partner, I think they'll be in the bottom again because of being out shined by better dances/choreography this week, not because their own routines were bad. Make sense? So who do you think will be ousted this week?
