The Chronic Curmudgeon

December 21, 2006

Merry Christmas?

People are stupid. That's the only logical conclusion anyone can come to after reading about the saga of Washington state's ongoing battles over holiday displays.

Look, I'm as anti-church & state mixing as anyone you will ever meet; I think it's a bad idea and thought so even before the extremist right wing Christian Taliban took control of the Republican party and started trying to make fundamentalist Christianity the law of the land. Crossing religion and government is like crossing the streams in Ghostbusters -- it shouldn't be done, for fear of opening an interdimensional rift. It's my opinion that you can't have a fully functioning democracy devoted to protecting equal rights for all if there is governmental endorsement or embrace of a specific religion.

But as for Christmas trees being put on display in public places owned by a municipality or state, I have no problem with that. Hell, it's not like non-Christians can pretend it's not Christmastime or avoid references to it. And let's face it: Christmas, as observed in this country anyway, is more a secular and materialist holiday than a religious one. (Literally every one of my Jewish friends observes the gift-giving part of the holiday, as far as I am aware, for example.) So the whole pulling Christmas trees out of the airport thing seems to me to be silly, an overreaction to a deliberate provocation (kind of like the imams on the plane in Minneapolis, who went out of their way to stage a confrontation, only to be met with an overreaction by the airline and its passengers that played right into the provacateurs' hands). I don't see the Christmas tree as a religious symbol, I see it as a material one -- and I have no issue with them being on public property.

But if the city of Seattle or the state of Washington were going to react to the whole provoked controversy by putting a menorah up, then a little consistency would be nice. See, the menorah is a religious symbol, not a secular one. And while I have no problem at all with euqal recognition of other religions' holidays, it's not like the menorah is just a fancy blue and white banner reading "Happy Hanukah." The menorah is religious. Yet the state is going to argue that they can't put a Nativity scene up because it's explicitly religious and could constitute endorsement of a religion by the state? Well, what the heck is a menorah, boys and girls? It's a religious symbol as significant to those of the Jewish faith as a Nativity scene is to those of the Christian faith. If you're going to ban one as a religious symbol, ban them all. If you're going to allow one in the name of diversity, allow them all -- because allowing only the menorah but not the Nativity is exclusionary in the opposite direction of what we traditionally are concerned with over the December holidays.

I'd be happier if all religious symbols -- Nativity scenes, menorahs, Ten Commandments, crescents, what have you -- were not displayed on public/government property; I don't think that it's the governmental role to celebrate religious holidays or rites. But if you're going to put a menorah on public municipal or state property, you might as well throw a Nativity scene up there too. Just be consistent, Washington. Don't be hypocritical or have one set of rules for one religion and not another. It's not too much to ask.

Posted by Christopher at 11:26 PM | Comments (0)

November 28, 2006

Pot, Meet Kettle

So Jesse Jackson has decided that he's so upset about Michael Richards' meltdown that people should boycott the Seinfeld DVDs. See, he thinks that people shouldn't be using the N-word, and to send that message, he's urging that people not buy the DVD set featuring Richards.

Not that I'm defending Richards in any way shape or form, because I think he's an asshat for what he said. I don't buy the "I was angry" thing either, because as ticked as I've ever been at anyone, making lynching references has never occurred to me. But count me as one liberal who's had it up to here with the predictable faux outrage and clamoring for the cameras -- not to mention the outright hypocrisy -- of Jesse Jackson.

You want people to boycott pieces of entertainment because of the use of the word, Jesse? Hmm... so where's your call for a boycott of all 50 Cent, Tupac, Ice Cube, Snoop Dogg, and a hundred other rappers? Where, Jesse, is your indignant call for a boycott of the movie Training Day, or Dave Chapelle, or of all Richard Pryor's DVDs? I guess you won't call for those boycotts, though, will you?

Being upset at Michael Richards' ignorant rant is totally expected. Wanting to address racism (which does flow both ways, Jesse) is to be lauded. Selectively choosing who you will boycott for the use of the n-word, and whom you'll merely scold... that's hypocritical. And I've grown so tired of your hypocritical crap that your voice has ceased to be one that earns my attention. I don't mind being challenged on things... all I ask is consistency from those who do the challenging.

By the way... the best discussion of why it's stupid and offensive for black people to use the n-word in reference to one another came from, ironically enough, Richard Pryor himself. See below...

In 1979, he flew to Kenya. It was a trip recommended to him by his psychiatrist after his wife Jennifer hauled him out of a house full of hookers and drugs. After touring Kenya's national museum, Pryor sat in a hotel lobby full of what he described as ''gorgeous black people, like everyplace else we'd been. The only people you saw were black. At the hotel, on television, in stores, on the street, in the newspapers, at restaurants, running the government, on advertisements. Everywhere."

That caused Pryor to say: ''Jennifer. You know what? There are no niggers here. . . . There are no niggers here. The people here, they still have their self-respect, their pride."

In ''Pryor Convictions," Pryor said that he left Africa ''regretting ever having uttered the word 'nigger' on a stage or off it. It was a wretched word. Its connotations weren't funny, even when people laughed. To this day I wish I'd never said the word. I felt its lameness. It was misunderstood by people. They didn't get what I was talking about. Neither did I. . . . So I vowed never to say it again."

More on Pryor's evolution in his view of the word in Derrick Jackson's fantastic op-ed from the Boston Globe last year on the occasion of Pryor's death, from which I borrowed the excerpt above.

Posted by Christopher at 01:02 AM | Comments (4)

September 15, 2006

Sign of the Apocolypse: Mudge Defends The Pope

Talk about things you never thought you'd read, huh?

It seems that something the Pope said last week in Germany has Muslims all around the world, including the Parliament of Pakistan, all upset and up in arms (again!). In a speech at Regensburg University, Pope Benedict apparently quoted a 14th centruy Byzantine emperor who was critical of Islam. Almost predictably, the practitioners of the religion with the world's thinnest skin have begun to muster their usual 'outrage' and complaints.

Muslim clerics, organizations and Web sites have expressed outrage at the pope’s remarks. Turkey’s top Islamic cleric asked Benedict to apologize and unleashed a string of accusations against Christianity, raising tensions before the pope’s planned visit to Turkey in November on what would be his first papal pilgrimage to a Muslim country.

Not to be insensitive here, but can anyone outside of Islam even mention the word "Islam" without upsetting the bulk of its practitioners? Geez... people are upset about the term "Islamo-fascists" (which I have no issue with, by the way, but that's a subject for another post); they're upset about newspaper cartoons; they issue fatwas over a book of fiction by Salman Rushdie... seriously, the whole "you have insulted us, we are outraged" thing is just getting a little old by this point. Religions get criticized, guys. (And yes, "guys" is the appropriate phrase here.) It happens. It's inherent in being a major religion. If Christians got this upset any time anyone questioned anything about the religion or even insulted its practitioners, the world probably wouldn't exist by this point. Grow a thicker skin, kids. You want to be on the big stage, then you need to be able to take a few catcalls. Get over it. Especially given some of the vile garbage that has spewed from the mouths of some of your more prominent member-leaders.

Bardakoglu said that “if the pope was reflecting the spite, hatred and enmity” of others in the Christian world, then the situation was even worse.

You'll want to grab a mirror, Mr. Bardakoglu, and take a long, healthy gaze. If you honestly feel that mere words can be that damaging, then there's a whole bunch of Wahabi'st clerics' words you need to take a look at... and Pakistani leaders... and Shi'ite leaders in Iraq... and so on, and so on, and so on.

Look, I am a fair-minded guy. I remind myself all the time, when watching the world news, that what we see almost every day in the world is not an accurate portrayal of all Muslims; that the wholescale murder and violence we see every day in the world is the work of people who have perverted the actual intent and spirit of Islam to the same extent that the KKK or extremist social conservatives have perverted the actual intent and spirit of Christianity. I understand that. And the mantra that "it's not all Muslims, Islam is a religion of peace" has been drilled into my head by rote for the past half decade. So I get it. But.... I have no tolerance for hypocrisy, whether practiced by US Republicans or Islamic leaders, and I call it out when I see it. The croccodile tears that get shed any time someone isn't glowingly positive about Islam have become tiresome, and they're prime examples of the kind of hypocrisy I cannot and will not abide.

Not being particularly religious, I'm not sure exactly which book it was that contained the passage "People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones." But it's a wise verse all the same. Before you guys go criticizing the pope, or talking about words that reflect spite, hatred and enmity... clean up your own dad gum house. Then maybe you can turn to asking the Pope to choose his words more carefully.

Posted by Christopher at 06:32 AM | Comments (1)

May 26, 2006

You Can Enron, But You Can't Hide

Judge: Bailiffs, place the mayor under arrest.
Sideshow Bob: What? Oh yes, all that stuff I did.

Allow me to add my voice to the chorus of those cheering the convictions of those no-good bums from Enron, Jeff Skilling and W's friend "Kenny Boy" Lay. Convictions came on 25 of 34 counts, including all six that Lay was charged with. For what those bastards did -- to their investors, and (more importantly to me) to their employees -- they deserve not just a 200 year prison sentence, but a nightly visit to the weight room with Bull, Snake, and Razor. Thousands lost their life savings because of the greed and avarice of Lay, Skilling, and those they surrounded themselves with; no penalty could be too great.

I'm also frustrated with them on another level. I work in the corporate world; until I finally finish that Great American Novel and become everyone's favorite best-selling author, this is where I've chosen to make my way. I take pride in being a professional, and I like my company. And when gutless wonders like Lay and his pals behave like cartoonish stereotypes of rich white men, it gives the entire corpoate world a stain. In some eyes, we're all guilty by association. And while it's understandable, it's not fair -- no more so than associating all football players with OJ Simpson, all backup dancers with Kevin Federline, or all Texans with George W. Bush. Business is honorable, full of honorable people, for the most part. The few place the many under suspicion. And I resent them for it.

But most maddening was the inability of either Lay or Skilling to grasp that what they did was wrong. Even after the verdicts were returned yesterday, both men still clung like barnacles to the idea that they were innocent scapegoats caught up in a feeding frenzy.

“I firmly believe I’m innocent of the charges against me,” Lay said. “I believe that to this day.”

Outside the courtroom after court was adjourned, Skilling said, "We fought a good fight. Some things work. Some things don't."

There's a cognitive dissonance at work with those two -- indeed, it was pervasive throughout Enron's corner offices -- if they're still looking at what they did as "the good fight" and believe themselves innocent. They're in the same class as star athletes who seem to believe that the rules don't apply to them.

Then Lay walked outside the federal courthouse and declared himself blessed because “we believe that God in fact is in control, and indeed he does work all things for good for those who love the lord.”

Oh.... so God told you to screw thousands of people out of their life savings? Amazing how the conspicuously faithful can always invoke God no matter what they've done or how far they've transgressed.

Whatever, "Kenny Boy." I hope you spend thousands of long nights being made someone's bitch. And while you're in there, save a spot for Dick Cheney, will you?

Posted by Christopher at 06:37 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

February 19, 2006

Bad Customer Service

I got an envelope in the mail yesterday from a national publication that I subscribe to. (I won't tell you which one, but it starts with a "P" and ends in "ayboy.") Screaming across the envelope in big, bold letters was the warning, "SUSPENSION ADVISORY."

I thought back. Had I bounced a check? Not bloody likely. Failed to update credit card information? Possibly, but since I pay by mail for this one it was a moot point. Written disturbingly stalker-like fan letters to their, uh, staff? No comment, but how would their accounting department know?

When I opened up the envelope, it turned out that it was simply a notice that my subscription is about to run out, and that to ensure uninterrupted service I need to resubscribe now. And I thought, "couldn't you have just said 'RENEWAL NOTICE?' I mean, now the mail carrier thinks I'm delinquent on my bills. This is the postal equivalent of a clerk asking for a price check on condoms at the drug store when you're 16! Totally unnecessary, and I don't like the implication.

It bugged me. Still does, in fact. So much so that I'd cancel my subscription.... if there wasn't a chance that this rumor might be true. Sigh.

(And by the way, I really do read the articles. There's a feature this month on the rapid advance of global warming that will scare the living spit out of you.)

Posted by Christopher at 01:17 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

February 14, 2006

V.D. Part II

I hadn't planned on doing a Valentine's Day post; I figured that I said all I had to say about the "holiday" last year. I was going to focus on the good news of the day: pitchers and catchers report tomorrow. But then Beav mentioned over IM today that she'd been expecting a full-on, patented Curmudgeon rant about VD, and I had a couple of other people mention that they either missed the rant or look at the holiday with similar cynicism, so now I feel kind of like I ought to do some sort of venting -- for you more than for me, kids.

Thing is, I really don't have anything else to say about it, and can't vent it any better than last year. So while it might be the lazy way out, here's last year's VD sucks post. No, my perspective hasn't changed. Yes, I actually can be a romantic, I just hate being told to do it by Hallmark and Kay Jewelers. (No, I have never diamond shopped in a mall jewelry store and never will; the selection was made on purpose to drive home a point.)

Happy VD, all you happy couples. Snoogans.

Posted by Christopher at 10:32 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

February 08, 2006

Dog Bites Man

When even George W. Bush gets that reliance on foreign oil is a threat to the stability and safety of the United States, you know that the big oiil companies have to realize that the trough they slop at is in danger of drying up. So it's not surprising to see Big Oil fighting back -- not to do the right thing by its customers, but to protect its gravy train.

Exxon's Senior Vice President, Stuart McGill, in essence threw down the gauntlet to even his loyal ally Bush yesterday in a speech in which he proclaimed that the US will always be dependent on foreign oil, and that we'd better get used to it and stop even trying to become energy independent.

“No combination of conservation measures, alternative energy sources and technological advances could realistically and economically provide a way to completely replace those imports in the short or medium term.”

In other words: come and get us, W. You want to wean the US off of foreign oil? Not gonna happen -- we're not going to let you. See, we like the stranglehold we have on the throat of the American people, the one that allows us to price gouge our way, during natural disasters and times of war, to record profits. We like making American consumers squeal like a pig. They have purty mouths. And if you think, George, that just because we and Dick Cheney's friends installed you in office that you actually have any power to curtail us, think again. We're not going to let you. Understand?

In Big Oil, America has our very own set of classic villians -- Dickensian in their disdain for the public they serve, and Ludlum-esque in their arrogance and shadowy control. And with this speech, McGill and Exxon were sending a message that Big Oil will not allow even their hand-picked president to affect the system they've spent decades perfecting -- not even when even the president knows it's in the best interest of the country. Come and get us, Big Oil just said. You can't do anything about it. Don't even try.

Posted by Christopher at 06:51 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

January 07, 2006

Punkz and Thugz

Two athletes on my list of people who are splashing in the shallow end of the gene pool:

1. Bode Miller. Seriously, this guy is like 29 IQ points short of the short yellow bus. And at this point I'm kinda thinking I should've taken him in the Dead Pool. I mean, this might be one of the more irresponsible things I've ever heard an athlete say:

Bode Miller knows he puts his life at risk when he skis drunk, but the outspoken Olympic favorite admits he may try the dangerous activity again. “Talk about a hard challenge right there ... If you ever tried to ski when you’re wasted, it’s not easy,” Miller told “60 Minutes” for a segment that will air Sunday. “Try and ski a slalom when ... you hit a gate less than every one second, so it’s risky. You’re putting your life at risk... It’s like driving drunk, only there are no rules about it in ski racing.” Asked if the risk meant he would never ski drunk again, Miller replied “No, I’m not saying that.”

This little weasel is just asking for the Sonny Bono ending. And when it happens, no one should feel any sort of sympathy for him whatsoever. I just figured out who I am rooting against in Turin. He qualifies as the "punk" in this story.

2. Marcus Vick. This thug is gonna end up going the Maurice Clarett route; I'm willing to bet you $20 that Marcus Vick is in jail within three years. And it can't happen soon enough for me. Vick, you may have heard, has been kicked off the Virginia Tech football team -- and gee, I'll just bet you he won't be bothered with school anymore either -- for cumulative on field unsportsmanlike conduct and maturity issues, and repeated off-field arrests and transgressions and not-getting-into-legal-trouble issues. The straw that broke the camel's back was Vick's deliberate stomping of an opponent during January 2's Gator Bowl; the opponent's offense was apparently tackling Vick.

However, it's not like the stomp was an isolated incident. During the season, Vick threw an elbow into the back of the head of West Virgina's coach on the sidelines, and flipped the bird to West Virginia fans. Off the field, Vick has been in legal trouble repeatedly since arriving at Virginia Tech. He was arested in February 2004 for providing alcohol to 14 and 15 year old girls (and convicted that May of contributing to the deliquency of a minor); he was charged in July 2004 with reckless driving and possession of marijuana, and was suspended for the 2004 football season after pleading guilty to those charges. Then in December, he was pulled over for speeding and was found to be driving with a suspended license. And he's all of 21. Yeah, a real good egg, this one; a real prince. He's got a great future ahead of him in license plate production.

Of course, did he learn anything after being kicked out of college football? DId he understand that his personal conduct was out of line, was unacceptable, and had consequences? What do you think?

"It's not a big deal. I'll just move on to the next level, baby" he said.

First of all, I am begging the teams of the NFL not to draft this pathetic loser. Drafting him sends a horrible message that there is no accountability in sports, and Marcus Vick ought to be allowed to continue his inevitable path of destroying his own life and heading toward a 12 year prison sentence without interference from the NFL. Vick has no place in anything that calls itself "professional."

But secondly, Marcus Vick represents everything I despise about most modern athletes, and the reason I can barely watch or even care about sports anymore. He very obviously believes himself above reproach, as an untouchable whose actions will never have any consequences. The arrogance with which he's just decided and proclaimed that it doesn't matter what kind of trouble he's in, because he'll just go pro, is EXACTLY the problem with most college athletes today; they're shielded and coddled from any kind of personal responsibility, and they feel entitled to just be professional athletes no matter what. Again, to the NFL, I'm begging you: don't draft this little thug. Let hm play the Arena League for a season and a half before he assaults someone or drunkenly crashes his car into a bridge abutment or something. Don't reward a punk like this with anything. Cut him loose.

Posted by Christopher at 01:10 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack

January 06, 2006

Smite Wing Conspiracy

Pat Robertson's at it again. An evangelical Christian combination of Osama bin Laden and Tom Green, Robertson has a knack for saying incredibly stupid things for effect, things that would be simply unfunny if it weren't for the flock on unthinking, blithering sheep who are ready to follow his every word and die for their religious cause. This week, he's decided that an overweight 77 year old in poor health having a second stroke is somehow God's wrath.

“God considers this land to be his,” Robertson said on his TV program “The 700 Club.” “You read the Bible and he says ‘This is my land,’ and for any prime minister of Israel who decides he is going to carve it up and give it away, God says, ‘No, this is mine.”’

Ariel Sharon's sin, in Robertson's eyes, seems to be that Sharon withdrew from Gaza and pursued peace talks with the Palenstinians. Yeah, peace.... what an unGodly concept, huh? Robertson also invoked the 1995 assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, suggesting that Rabin's death too was God's retiribution for working for peace with the Palestinians. “It was a terrible thing that happened, but nevertheless he was dead,” he said.

Unlike some people whose opinion I respect, I don't see Robertson as a harmless sideshow freak, a distraction not to be taken seriously. The man's a menace to society. The man has a dedicated flock of bleating sheep a couple of million strong who are willing to accept at face value the idea that he is in effect speaking for God. And he's out there suggesting that even assassinations are simply unfortunate expressions of God's wrath. Case in point:

Robertson spokeswoman Angell Watts said of critics who challenged his remarks, “What they’re basically saying is, ‘How dare Pat Robertson quote the Bible?”’ “This is what the word of God says,” Watts said.

When you have an Islamic fundamentalist suggesting that holy texts and the word of God include assassinations and death as retribution for crossing his version of God's will, we call him Osama bin Laden. The only difference between bin Laden and Pat Robertson is the Prophet they follow and the book they believe is holy. It's not too far of a stretch to predict that Pat Robertson could eventually start calling for Christian suicide bombers to die for God's word in the holy battle against the heathens, and to start exacting retributions on "enemies of Christianity," like oh, say, Muslims or Arabs first, then homosexuals, then women's clinics, then liberal Hollywood... and his sheep would follow.

(Don't think he'd say something like that? He's already called for the assassination of Hugo Chavez, so it's not like you can say he takes those whole Commandment things seriously or anything. Don't think the sheep would follow? Ask Eric Rudolph why he set bombs off at women's clinics and gay nightclubs, or committed terrorist attacks on the Atlanta Olympics. Ask any of the murderers who've shot doctors who perform abortions. Don't think it couldn't happen, kids, or that Robertson's above it. It could, and he's not.)

Note to God: If you're in a smiting mood, I'd strongly -- if humbly -- suggest Pat Robertson. He's giving you an awful bad name down here, and is dangerous enough to harm an awful lot of people. Of course, Robertson is 75 years old... so you wouldn't have to do anything dramatic like raining down sulphur or turning him into a pillar of salt. You could just give him a stroke, and I'd take it as proof of your displeasure.

Posted by Christopher at 05:25 AM | Comments (8) | TrackBack

December 28, 2005

Infected

Somewhere along the line this morning, I appear to have picked up a piece of malware or spyware; my computer is infected worse than an 8th Avenue hooker during convention season. The culprit appears to be something called "Spy Axe," which masquerades as a spyware blocker, but is in fact spyware itself. Among the annoying elements is that it produces a perpetual bubble on my screen -- designed to look like a Windows warning -- that informs me that "dangerous malware infection" has been detected on my PC. Of course, the Spy Axe IS the malware; nice that it detected itself.

And it's proving excessively difficult to get rid of. I'm more than ready to commit several violent felonies on the goatsuckers that built this crap -- for real, I'm reporting them to the Better Business Bureau, and I'm looking on line for groups of people taking collective action against this bunch of elephant dung. I doubt that this company will do anything more than laugh at complaints from customers, but perhaps complaints from the BBB and maybe some state attorneys general or something will catch their attention. Either that or flamethrowers outside their homes. ;-)

In the meantime, while I plot violent and painful fantasy retribution against these bastards, if there's anyone out there who knows how to get this garbage off an infected system, I could really use the help.

Posted by Christopher at 11:43 AM | Comments (10) | TrackBack

November 07, 2005

American Girl Power

Don't anyone make the mistake of thinking that the evangelical Christian right-wing boycott of American Girl is simply a philosophical disagreement. This stunt is just more of the same from the extremist Christian right wing -- more attempts to intimidate and/or silence anyone who doesn't hold their point of view.

For those who've missed it or don't have daughters, American Girl dolls -- in contrast to Barbies or other empty-headed examples for young girls -- come with a whole book about who she is and the period of American history she hails from, and encourages positive self-images and education. American Girl partners with Girls, Inc., sponsoring math, science and athletic programs with the organization, whose mission is to promote self-esteem and self-reliance among girls.

What could be wrong with that, you ask? Ah, there's that whole pesky problem the Christian Taliban has with women actually having control of their own bodies and morality, and with people's sexuality being their own business. Girls, Inc. supports Roe vs. Wade, and supports homosexuals' rights to live as freely as anyone else. Heaven forbid! And of course, the right wing extremist nutjobs are screaming and out in force about it.

"Girls Inc.," one mother warned, "is pro-abortion and pro-contraception and pro all the other lies the secular world wants our girls to believe."

Yeah, what a dangerous agenda, huh? Pro-math, pro-science, pro-technology, pro-self reliance, pro-positive body image, pro-athletics, pro-healthy sexuality, pro-confidence, pro-education... what dangerous ideas to get behind, indeed, you Nazi cow. (Though I can see how the whole education thing frightens the Christian right; the more a girl learns, the less likely she is to be intimidated or misled by the ridiculous campfire stories that evangelicals like to brainwash people with.) Meanwhile, these allegedly "pro-family" goon squads are planning to descend on American Girl stores on the day after Thanksgiving, when hundreds or thousands of pre-teen girls will be shopping with their parents, with the extremist right-wing's traditional faked, sensationalistic depictions of supposedly aborted fetuses. Because it's pro-family to expose 8 year olds to phony, sensationalized violence, and to try and intimidate and scare little kids who are just trying to do holiday shopping. Yeah huh.

This is, like everything else the extremist evangelical sect does, about power, control and intimidation. And it's our collective responsibility to help stand up against it. Tonight, I made a contribution to Girls, Inc. If you've got even a little bit to spare, I urge you to do so as well. This is a good and honorable organization, doing good, much-needed positive things for the girls of America, and they need our help to stand up to a gang of narrow-minded bullies intent on silencing anyone who doesn't think or act the way the Christian Taliban approves. They need your help.

Posted by Christopher at 10:26 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

October 26, 2005

The True Republican Character Revealed

You've got to love when the Republicans keep showing us incontrovertibly the kind of people they really are.

"The principle of the rule of law -- equality under the law and a clear standard for perjury and obstruction of justice -- was the overriding issue in this impeachment," said Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, who also voted 'guilty' on both counts." -- Kay Bailey Hutchinson, Republican Senator from Texas, talking about a Democratic presidentDallas Morning News, February 13, 1999

"And secondly, I certainly hope that if there is going to be an indictment that says something happened, that it is an indictment on a crime and not some perjury technicality where they couldn't indict on the crime and so they go to something just to show that their two years of investigation was not a waste of time and taxpayer dollars." -- Kay Bailey Hutchinson, same Republican Senator but now talking about a Republican administration, Meet The Press, October 23, 2005

There it is, ladies and gentlemen. Republican strategy -- and Republican values -- out there for the world to see. When a Democrat does it, it's grounds for impeachment; when a Republican does it, it's a "technicality" that's a waste of taxpayer money. This is the kind of people they are. Thiese are the "values" that they purport to share with you and I. (Well, not me, I guess. I'm one of those evil elite liberals who've wrecked this country. But these are the values they purport to share with you.) Seems to me that unless you value blatant two-faced hypocrisy, abuse of power and the idea that selected people can place themselves above the law, the Republican Party is a mite out of touch with the values of real Americans.

This is who they are, kids. Don't ever forget it.

Posted by Christopher at 03:29 AM | Comments (0)

October 21, 2005

Overpopulating the World... One Ignroant Redneck At A Time

Thanks to Eden for linking to this -- one of the funniest columns I've read in a while, and one whose sentiment I couldn't agree more with. I'm sure you've read/heard about that idiotic redneck couple down in Arkansas (where else could they be?) that has set about becoming personally responsible for trying to increase the world's population by another billion. The Duggar Family (hmm... sounds kind of like the Manson Family, doesn't it) just whelped its 16th child from the same mother. (No word on whether it's her husband, brother, uncle or son who's responsible for knocking her up this time.) Well, Mark Morford of the San Francisco Chronicle has trained his considerably acerbic sights on this couple and the mindset that leads to people like them... with heavily saracastic, hysterical result.

If I re-pasted every great line from this column, I'd end up pasting so many excerpts that I'd need to go to a "click here for more" link in order to not take up too much real estate on the main page here... so I'll lead with his angry and dead-on conclusion. That's the part I'm endorsing most strongly -- his denunciation of these idiots and the mindset that massive overbreeding is God's wish. That's the part I want people to see even if they don't click through to read this guy's great funny lines throughout the rest of the column.

Note to Michelle Duggar: If God wanted you to have a massive pile of children, she'd have given your uterus a hydraulic pump and a revolving door. Stop it now.

Ah, but this is America, yes? People should be allowed to do whatever the hell they want with their families if they can afford it and if it's within the law and so long as they aren't gay or deviant or happily flouting Good Christian Values, right? Shouldn't they? Hell, gay couples still can't openly adopt a baby in most states (they either lie, or one adopts and the other must apply as "co-parent"), but Michelle Duggar can pop out 16 kids and no one says, oh my freaking God, stop it, stop it now, you thoughtless, selfish, baby-drunk people.

A-freaking-men, man. Preach on, brother Morford. I like children. Many of my friends have children. I'd like kids myself at some point (if I ever decide to stop being one, that is). But what these Cletuses have done isn't about liking children. It's about having some serious wires loose. I'd like to formally and officially petition the US government that not one dime of my tax money should go to any social services these irresponsible yokels are sucking up. Hell, use all of my money for bombs and I'd still feel ethically better than encouraging crap like this.

But I have to tell you... the rest of the column masks that anger in some absolutely hysterical lines, man. Just one example, about their family picture...

.... this might be the most disquieting photo you see all year, this bizarre Duggar family of 18 spotless white hyperreligious interchangeable people with alarmingly bad hair, the kids ranging in ages from 1 to 17, worse than those nuked Smurfs in that UNICEF commercial and worse than all the horrific rubble in Pakistan and worse than the cluster-bomb nightmare that is Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise having a child as they suck the skin from each other's Scientological faces and even worse than that huge 13-foot python which ate that six-foot alligator and then exploded.

Great stuff, man. Great stuff. He's got great one liners about how they're naming these kids, and about how scary it is that this mindset seems to only afflict three-toothed red-staters... and he's got a really funny sacrastic call for some good left-coasting, blue-stated, thinking types to start matching these folks brood for brood to equalize the voting blocks later on. It's one of the funniest columns I have read in a while -- all while making an outstanding point. Read it here.

Posted by Christopher at 02:57 AM | Comments (1)

August 25, 2005

Thuggins Fired...

University of Cincinnati basketball coach Bob Huggins (hereafter referred to by his unofficial nickname, "Thuggins") has finally been released by the school's president, Nancy Zimpher, after years of embarrassing personal behavior and an utter lack of standards for either the academic or personal conduct of his players.

Thuggins cares so little about the reputation of the school he is supposed to represent that he'll recruit anyone from any league... junior college or, a la Ricky "Wild Thing" Vaughan, the California Penal League. In 16 years, 21 Thuggins players were arrested or charged with various violations. His graduation rates were among the lowest in the nation. Worst of all, Thuggins' cavalier attitude toward personal conduct extended to his own; he was arrested in 2003 for drunken driving... hardly a pillar of the community.

Yet sadly, there is outcry in Cincinnati over Thuggins' release. The town seems to basically be admitting that winning a sports game is far more important to it than integrity, respect for the law, or reputation. That's pathetic. It reflects incredibly poorly on a city that its residents are so insecure and so unprincipled that such a premium is placed on winning at sports, at the expense of what really matters -- at an academic institution, and in life.

Sadder still are the predictable -- and wrong -- claims from some corners that the move is motivated simply by racism. For example, the Kansas City Star's Jason Whitlock -- a writer whose work I usually respect -- has gone completely Johnny Cochran over the situation. In a column on ESPN2, he writes,

She basically fired Bob Huggins for recruiting too many poor, academically and socially underprepared black kids... Yes, the saga continues. Another institution used poor blacks for its benefit, disrespected them in writing and then kicked them to the curb.

Not only are analyses like this just simply wrong, they're also insulting.

What Whitlock is basically saying is, "It's okay for a black kid to behave any way he wants, get arrested, do whatever... because he's been underprivileged by a racist system, so society has no right to expect any standard of conduct from him." What he's saying is, illegal or dangerous behavior is okay when committed by black kids who can play basketball. What he's saying is, if held to society's standards of proper conduct, black kids are at a disadvantage, and the only way to even up the system is to not expect young black men to behave themselves in accordance with the law.

I can think of few more insulting and more racist arguments. For one, I believe that it's true of any kid that if you tell him he is expected to conform to a standard of behavior, and then hold him to it, he will. Or he'll be gone. It works at the military academies, for example - and plenty of both white and non-white kids graduate with their officers' commissions every year. It works at other basketball powers... many coaches achieve improvements in graduation rates and manage to recruit kids of all colors who don't break the law and don't embarrass their program and their university.

Yet somehow Whitlock and others like him want to excuse the atmosphere Thuggins has created at Cincinnati. They tell us that whatever happens is okay, even if it's against the law, because an unjust system excuses any behavior from those oppressed by it. They tell us that those demanding basic standards of behavior (like "don't get arrested," or "go to class at the school that's paying for you to be here") from student athletes (remember the "student" part of college sports?) are simply racists without the white hoods. It's an unfortunate argument, and does a tremendous disservice to the very kids it purports to defend.

Bob Thuggins got exactly what he had coming this week. He built a lawless program that for sixteen years was never held accountable by anyone for its collective behavior. He embarrassed the institution he was supposed to represent, and he failed the kids he recruited by refusing to hold them responsible for their classwork or conduct.

Bob Thuggins represents much of what is wrong with sport today. Those defending him represent the rest.

Posted by Christopher at 10:46 PM | Comments (2)

August 18, 2005

9 - 11 Below Zero

I bet if someone asked you to make a list of the top al Qaida targets in the United States, you'd miss the place that's number one on their list. The Statue of Liberty, you say? Sorry, Captain Obvious. The US Capitol? Buzz! Thank you for playing. DisneyWorld? LAX? The Sears Tower? Golden Gate bridge? Nope, unh-unh, not, no way Jose.

The number one American target of terrorists, according to Congressman Don Young (R-Alaska)? The sparsely inhabited coasts of Alaska.

Accordingly, says Young, New York Representative Peter King should not be the next chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee. No, says Young, no New Yorker could possibly understand the needs of Homeland Security, nor the terrorist threat that we still face, like an Alaskan. So Young is challenging King for the chairmanship of the committee.

"It [the committee] affects my state probably more than any other state, because of the Coast Guard here" and the state's extensive shoreline, he said.

A ha. Gotcha. Alaska's extensive shoreline makes it more affected by homeland security than any other state. In the immortal words of Dr. Evil, "riiiiiiiiiiight." Never mind that New York and the DC area not only were the areas targeted on 9/11, but are loaded with additional targets both symbolic (Statue of Liberty, Empire State Building, Times Square, Washington Monument, Lincoln Memorial), economic (New York Stock Exchange, Wall Street, Federal Reserve) and political (White House, Senate and House office buildings, K Street). Never mind that no Alaskans died on 9/11, or that the last time hostile forces affected Alaska, Alaska wasn't even a state yet (Attu, anyone?). Ignore all that, says Young. He's the man for the job. (Even though he bitterly opposed the creation of the Homeland Security Committee in the first place.)

"I've been chairman of two committees, and he's never been chairman," Young told the Daily News, adding that aside from experience, it makes more sense for him, a resident of Fort Yukon, Alaska, population 700, to head the Homeland Security Committee than a congressman from the state hurt most by 9/11.

Young's not just arrogant, insulting and crazy, he's also the undisputed champion of wasting your money. In the most recent transportation spending bill, Young -- who just happens to run the Transportation committee -- managed to get about $1 billion in funding for his state (the least densely populated state in the country, as opposed to states like New York, California, Michigan, New Jersey, Georgia... with transport systems that are actually used by millions of people every day). And wow, lookee here -- $231 million of that will go toward building a bridge (named after Young, natch) that even the Anchorage Daily News says the state doesn't want.

But even in Alaska, the pork is not entirely welcome. According to an Anchorage Daily News editorial, the earmarked money won't cover the cost of either bridge, and half of it represents a carve-out from regular funding, to the possible detriment of other roadwork in Alaska.

Put this pork guzzling jackass in charge of homeland security, and you know what happens? New York, Washington DC, Los Angeles, the ports of New Orleans, Newark, Houston and Seattle, and nuclear plants in the lower 48 will go unprotected and tens of millions of Americans will be in greater jeopardy... while the Iditarod will become the most secure snowball fight in history.

Posted by Christopher at 03:22 PM | Comments (3)

August 13, 2005

What About Nunchucks? When Do We Get The Nunchucks?

On the day after we were reminded of the horror of 9/11 by the release of hours of audio tape from the New York Fire Department, comes perhaps the most asinine proposal ever to come out of the government. Not just the Bush government, but any government.

On the levels of sheer and utter stupidity, this ranks right up there with trying to destabilize Castro by making his beard fall out, or making ketchup a vegetable.

The Transportation Security Agency -- the body charged with making sure we're safe when we travel on airplanes -- has submitted a proposal that would allow ice picks, 5 inch knives, Chinese throwing stars, and bows & arrows to be brought on board planes. I'm not making this up. I couldn't make anything this utterly freaking stupid up.

The TSA memo proposes to minimize the number of passengers who must be patted down at checkpoints. It also recommends that certain categories of passengers be exempt from airport security screening, such as members of Congress, airline pilots, Cabinet members, state governors, federal judges, high-ranking military officers and people with top-secret security clearances.

The proposal also would allow ice picks, throwing stars and bows and arrows on flights. Allowing those items was suggested after a risk evaluation was conducted about which items posed the most danger. [Emphasis mine.]

Why stop there? Why just throwing stars and ice picks (both of which are travel necessities, of course)? If we're gonna turn US domestic flights into the NRA's wet dream (everybody's armed! all weapons, all the time!), let's do it up right -- let's authorize bowie knives, 9 mm Berettas, and nunchucks on air flights too! In fact, let's mandate hand to hand combat as in-flight entertainment on every flight of less than three hours. It's Pilots vs. Passengers in The Octagon!

Edmund S. "Kip" Hawley, an assistant secretary of homeland security, directed his staff to propose changes in how the agency screens 2 million passengers a day... "The process is designed to stimulate creative thinking and challenge conventional beliefs," said TSA spokesman Mark O. Hatfield Jr.

Creative thinking? Challenge conventional beliefs?? Listen, you sloth-brained, short-bus riding buffoon: your process is designed to keep me from being turned into an unwilling guided missile when I'm flying, okay? You want to do creative thinking or challenge conventional beliefs, go join a performance art colony just north of Los Angeles, okay? I don't want creative thinking in my security; I want competence. The TSA is displaying neither.

Between work and pleasure, I travel a lot. I've flown close to 250,000 miles in the last three years. I get mildly annoyed by the extra time you have to spend going through security at the airport. I have grudgingly removed my shoes before walking through the metal detector so often that I've begun wearing loafers when I fly just so it's easier to slip them off. But my attitude toward the whole process isn't "This is ridiculous! They should really find ways to not have to do this." My attitude -- and that of every other frequent traveler I know -- is, "Yeah, it's a pain in the ass, but better safe than sorry."

Kip Hawley (wasn't that the name of the character Tom Hanks played on Bosom Buddies?) has obviously been ingesting or inhaling something that would make it illegal for a pilot to fly a plane in his little system. This person, along with everyone in the TSA who contributed to this little "creative thinking" exercise, should be fired for gross dereliction of duty and sheer incompetence.

Anyone wondering why need only listen here.

Posted by Christopher at 09:23 AM | Comments (4)

August 09, 2005

Can A Jury Be Tried?

The problem with jury trials in America is that juries in America have to be made up of Americans. And with some notable exceptions, we're just not a very sharp lot.

A case in point: just a few weeks removed from the Michael Jackson Touches Little Boys Trial, two of the jurors who acquitted him are now doing interviews saying they regret it, and that they're sure Jackson did Beat It with the Pretty Young Thing.

"No doubt in my mind whatsoever, that boy was molested, and I also think he enjoyed to some degree being Michael Jackson's toy," [juror Eleanor] Cook said.

No doubt in your mind that the boy was molested? No doubt? And yet you voted to acquit? And you also think he enjoyed it? Somebody fetch me a rope.

Cook and Hultman said they agreed to go along with the other jurors when it became apparent that they would never convict the pop star.

Wait... you felt he was guilty, but when you thought that you couldn't get a conviction, you just rolled over and changed your vote and let a man you believed was guilty to go free? That just might be the most gutless, chickenspunk piece of garbage I've ever heard. Quite frankly, if you're not capable of standing up for what you believe is the truth, then you're flat out unworthy to serve on a jury. And if you're that unable to withstand peer pressure, well... more girls like you should have gone to my junior high.

Added Cook: "I'm speaking out now because I believe it's never too late to tell the truth."

Well, except for when you're in a jury room, apparently.

Of course, there is another possibility. It's possible that Cook and Hultman, instead of being spineless cowards who let walk a man they believed to be a child molester, are just trying to stir up interest in their upcoming book deals. If that's the case, they ought to be taken to court by Jackson for slander.

Look, I think the freak did it. I think he's touched more 13 year old weiners than the hot dog vendor at Yankee Stadium. But if two jurors who voted to acquit are now choosing to say publicly that he's actually guilty, just so they can sell more books, then they ought to be called on it. And not just for the profits of the book, either; they ought to be taken for what they had before their book deals, too.

The perfect sentence for these two? Their grandkids should have to spend a shirtless month at Neverland Ranch.

Posted by Christopher at 08:39 PM | Comments (2)

August 06, 2005

Gun Nuts Go Nuts

I try to understand gun freaks. I really do. I've tried to figure out what it is about guns that makes gun nuts love guns more than they love life, and why their right to own and shoot a gun is so much more important to them than my right and yours to safety and life itself. And while it may seem like I am trying to make a rhetorical point here (when don't I?), I genuinely have tried to understand where these guys are coming from -- and why one reading or interpretation of one Amendment (which part of "well-regulated militia" don't they understand?)is so much more important to them than any of the others.

What I usually end up concluding is that the NRA represents "gun owners" in the same sense that Earth First represents "environmentalists." Take the most radical and dangerous members from the fringe of a legitimate issue, put them in charge, and you get EF or the NRA.

This occurred to me yet again when reading about the NRA's latest policy demands (they never make proposals, only demands). The NRA is urging its members to boycott Conoco Phillips oil company because Conoco Phillips has instituted a policy saying that employees can't bring guns to work.

"Across the country, we're going to make ConocoPhillips the example of what happens when a corporation takes away your Second Amendment rights," NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said.

Well, first of all, this left me wishing that ConocoPhillips had gas stations in the northeastern US, because I'd be going to their stations from now on even if it meant paying an extra quarter per gallon.

In this age where shootings in workplaces from post offices to aircraft assembly plants to software companies claim innocent lives every year, the National Rifle Association thinks it's a good idea to make sure that employees can be armed when they come to work. Because lord knows, in the stress-filled, pressure-cooker, 25x8x366 world that is the American workplace these days, what we really need are more people running around the office halls or plant floors with Glocks and Berettas.

(Oh, and now thanks to the NRA and its puppets in the Senate, if a gun dealer sells your office psycho one of these beauties illegally and the psycho turns around and shoots you, you can't sue the dealer for his negligence. It's not enough that the NRA wants to enable workplace shootings. Now they want to absolve anyone from blame for them too. Watching the Senate cave before pressure from this extremist group last week made me think that NRA stands for Nutcases Rendered Authority.)

Remember the "Bad Idea Jeans" commercial parody from Saturday Night Live a few years ago? It's come to life in Oklahoma, thanks to the NRA. Guess I'm proud to be on this list.

Posted by Christopher at 10:31 AM | Comments (5)

July 09, 2005

Reaction To London

Okay, it's been two days and the bombings have had their chance to sink in... which I suppose means that I'm supposed to analyze the situation now. (Doc in particular pointed to my lack of analysis or perspective in Thursday's post as something not in my style... perhaps that was accurate.) A few thoughts, then, that have occurred to me since Thursday:

1) I couldn't help thinking this week about what might have been. You know, what might have been different about this week if that criminal in the White House had actually finished the job against our true enemy, instead of diverting resources, attention, and troops into Iraq for oil profit and to satisfy a perverse family blood feud.

If Bush hadn't so arrogantly lied to the world and been so hell-bent on Saddam, perhaps we'd have spent the last three years pursuing al Qaida to all ends of the earth and erasing them from existence. Instead, Bush created a new breeding ground for al Qaida in Iraq. If we had spent $200 billion since 2002 going after the enemy that attacked us (and continues to), perhaps we'd have finished them off. I have faith in our military, and had they been allowed to do the job, it would have been done.

I am not saying we (the West) asked for Thursday; we didn't, and anyone making that argument is an ass. But what I am saying is that the fact that al Qaida exists today with enough strength to carry off a London rests squarely on the shoulders of the Bush Administration and its lapdog at 10 Downing Street. This disgrace of a president has failed in his "war on terror," because he simply hasn't fought that war since the summer of 2002. What happened Thursday happened in part because George W. Bush and his minions were derelict in their responsibility to our nation, derelict in defending our nation against its true enemy. And failing to carry out his oath to defend our nation against its enemies is an impeachable offense.

2) Pound for pound, pacifists might actually be more infuriatingly annoying than neocons. The blog board at work was hopping on Thursday, and I ended up being in a very unique and extremely unusual position: I was the one sounding like a neocon and arguing that sometimes you have to fight. A cadre of pacifists (most of them from a country up north that hasn't ever felt terrorism on its shores like the US and UK have) descended upon the company blogs to argue for peace, love, and understanding... that we need to understand al Qaida's goals and agenda, and that while bombs are never right, what happened in London was little different than when the US and UK bomb Afghanistan and Iraq.

Leaving the question of Iraq out of this, I thought this was the most childish and asinine equation I've ever seen. First of all, while most terrorist organizations (be they Palestinian groups, Northern Irish, Tamil Tiger, Basque separatists or whomever) do have some sort of a political agenda (usually wrapped around the concept of a homeland), al Qaida has only one agenda: kill anyone who is not an Islamic fundamentalist. There's nothing to understand, nor is there anything to negotiate toward. These people have to be eliminated from the planet, and that's all there is to it -- it's them or us. (And by "these people," I mean al Qaida, not Muslims.)

More importantly, equating the deliberate targeting of civilians with bombing in Afghanistan is just freaking moronic. Yes, there are civilian casualties, for which we in America feel deep regret. But they're not the main targets, they are accidental bystanders -- our main target is the enemy which was allowed to take root in Afghanistan by the then-leaders of that nation. We didn't start that war; it was brought to us.

America has every right to defend itself against al Qaida, and the suggestion otherwise -- especially coming from a Canadian who doesn't know jack about having to watch buildings in his cities burn and his neighbors die -- is the most arrogantly pathetic thing I have ever heard. If someone feels like assigning blame for civilian casualties and misery in Afghanistan, there is only one place to look: Osama bin Laden and al Qaida. Period. End of sentence.

Posted by Christopher at 11:15 AM | Comments (9)

June 30, 2005

Die, Comment Spamming Scum

Whoever you are, you'd better hope I never figure out who or where you are. If I do, the best thing that happens to you is my lawyer gets involved. Otherwise, it'll be my softball bat that gets involved.

On your skull.

Yes kids, a chickenspit little coward with a very small penis has taken to comment spamming my blog... about every third day I have to delete about 40 spam comments advertising gambling sites or viagra... and of course those sites don't have a "contact us" feature that would allow a displeased victim to respond, opt out, or threaten. Banning IP addresses doesn't seem to work; I think they're riding on IPs that aren't theirs anyway, and though I have nearly 100 banned addresses so far, it doesn't seem to stop our minisculely endowed hacker.

If anyone's got a recommended solution, I am all ears. I do have the function on this site to require registration and for me to approve all comments before they're posted... but that seems highly draconian, and wholly inconvenient for both you and me (since most people seem to comment during the day... meaning that I'd have to be approving comments from the office -- something I'd rather not do).

But I am sick of spam for viagra, online pharmacies, and online casinos filling up my comment pages. So unless someone's got a better solution, I may have to do this registration thing. Unless of course I find this little punk first, in which case he'd better hope my lawyer gets to him before I do.

Posted by Christopher at 11:32 PM | Comments (0)

June 26, 2005

Class War Declared

Hell has officially frozen over.

There's been a controversial Supreme Court decision, and not only do I agree (vehemently) with the conservative minority opinion, but with conservative commentators like Glenn Reynolds. (I know, start looking for the four horsemen.)

The Court decided 5-4 that people's homes can be seized not just for eminent domain for the greater public good, but for private development that may generate greater tax revenue. The case stemmed from a case in New London, Connecticut, where a private developer wants to rip down a working class neighborhood in order to build a riverfront hotel, health club and office complexes.

The decision means that cities now have wide power to bulldoze residences for projects such as shopping malls and hotel complexes in order to generate tax revenue. You read that right; the rich can now seize the homes of the working class, in order to build projects that none of the working class can afford to live, work or play in. The rich can now take the homes of the poor in order to build further playgrounds for the rich.

Amazingly, the five jackassed idiots who've effectively declared class war on the working class in this country aren't the usual conservative suspects. The five jackassed classist idiots were the court's lefties: Ginsberg, Breyer, Kennedy, Souter, and Stevens.

I can't begin to write the fury this decision elicits in me. This is for all intents and purposes a return to feudalism. The wealthy have been given greater right to land than the poor -- and if the rich want something the poor have purchased... too bad, Joe Six Pack, because Chaz Limousine Liberal now has the trump. If you're a worker who saves and buys his low-end row house or buys into a working class neighborhood, it must feel so comforting to know that even though you bought your home, made the payments, built equity, and lived your life there... it's not yours; it still can belong to some rich puck at the drop of his well-heeled hat.

Malcolm X once was asked if he predicted a civil war in this country; the questioner obviously expected Malcolm to invoke some sort of race war. Malcolm answered instead that while he did indeed expect that there could be a civil war one day, he believed instead that it would likely be a class war, with the poor of all races rising up against the wealthy. Decisions like this week's make such an uprising all the more justifiable. And those five "justices" ought to be the first five people whose homes are seized to make way for a strip mall.

Posted by Christopher at 08:51 PM | Comments (0)

June 22, 2005

Remember This?

You'd never know it by listening to Bush or any Republican, but there's actually another war going on -- this one actually against forces that really did attack the United States and actually do represent a threat. Unfortunately, that war is also facing its challenges -- though I'd wager that had Bush not lied to the American people just to settle a family score, and actually done his duty as president by defending the nation from threat, things would be much different.

As it stands, the Washington Post ran a very interesting article today about how the war on the ground in Afghanistan against the Taliban is going. After reading it, I found myself really liking and respecting the batallion commander profiled in the story, Lt. Col. Mark Stammer -- and after reading about what they face every day, I found myself wishing that we'd had a real president four years ago who would have finished the Afghanistan war and decisively wiped out the Taliban.

Instead, we had a traitorous coward who let go those who'd attacked the US and killed 3000 Americans, just so he could pursue a personal vendetta in Iraq.

Posted by Christopher at 09:06 PM | Comments (1)

June 16, 2005

No Cents At All

I hate pennies.

I suppose it's unusual to be set off on a grumpy rant by a tiny piece of copper. But I suspect that I'm hardly alone in disdaining the most useless element of America's financial scene this side of that 9/10 of a cent they use in gas prices. (And don't even get me started on that conspiracy.)

In a nutshell, pennies suck. There's simply no reason for them. 10 billion pennies are minted every year. For what? When was the last time a penny bought anything? Anything? A candy bar? A piece of gum? A favor from a crack whore? Anything? The government prints and mints money so that we can use it, right -- that whole funky exchange of goods and services thing someone tried to teach us about back in third grade. Well, if no one can use a coin to actually buy anything, then what's the point of minting it?

As near as I can tell, pennies exist for only two reasons. The first is so that retailers can play mind games with buyers about the true cost of an item. "No sir, it's not $100... it's $99.99!... Oh! Well in that case, it's not as expensive as I thought, I'll take it." There's a psychological barrier about nines and going up in price from three digits to four, or four to five, or what have you. Were there no pennies, retailers would not be able to use that barrier to sucker us into buying stuff we don't need.

The second, equally nefarious reason pennies are made is to create a market for the companies that make the little blue plastic "take a penny, leave a penny" bins. Without the US Treasury's continued minting, the whole take-a-penny-bin industry would enter free fall, putting thousands of automated factory machines out of work.

Believe it or not, the US Treasury claims that pennies are profitable. "Each penny costs .81 of a cent to make, but the United States Mint collects one cent for it. The profit goes to help fund the operation of the United States Mint and to help pay the public debt."

Okay, first of all, the last time anyone looked, that extra 19/100 of a cent here and there just wasn't doing a whole lot of good in paying off the public debt, which as of Wednesday was closing in on $8 trillion dollars. I mean, if we're all that concerned with knocking down some of that debt, couldn't we find a more efficient method of payment than 19/100 of a cent at a time? This is kind of like someone who makes $10 minimum payments on a $2000 credit card balance, pays $28 in interest that month, and then claims to be paying down his credit cards. (Actually, were the metaphor extended all the way out, the person here would actually use the credit card to pay to print out the $10 bill he was using to make that minimum payment, thus increasing his overall balance by printing the money with which to pay it off.)

However, it's good to know that every morning when I'm in the company cafeteria and buying my French Roast or Colombian Supremo, and I drop those three useless pennies into the little blue take-a-penny bin (made by automated machines in a factory somewhere that I am helping to keep employed), I'm actually doing my civic duty by contributing 57/100 of one cent toward paying the country out of insolvency. At that rate, I can have us paid down in about 3,582 millenia, give or take a couple of months.

Don't say I never did anything for you.

Posted by Christopher at 10:03 PM | Comments (0)

June 15, 2005

CSI: Pinellas

The autopsy results came back today for Terri Schiavo. And guess what? The results prove what every informed medical opinion had been saying all along: Terri Schiavo was brain dead, and there was nothing anyone could have done to revive her. That's the same conclusion, of course, that the courts repeatedly found, time and time again -- despite the best efforts of religious zealots and fundamentalists to deny science and reality.

"The brain weighed 615 grams, roughly half of the expected weight of a human brain," [the coroner] said. "This damage was irreversible, and no amount of therapy or treatment would have regenerated the massive loss of neurons."

You'd think that a definitive scientific fact such as this would finally get the zealots to let the poor woman rest in peace. Unfortunately, her parents -- probably prodded by others -- continue to deny reality. They're considering other legal options, according to their attorney. Of course these are the same people who insisted that Terri Schiavo was following their eyes and balloons and was watching them; the autopsy proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that Terri was in fact blind.

But since when has reality been a barrier for religious conservatives? And of course, the zealot-in-chief is leading the charge.

In Washington, White House press secretary Scott McClellan said that the autopsy results did not change the president’s position on her case.

Yep, you heard it straight from the White House, ladies and gentlemen. This president still believes that calling a special session of Congress and railroading through legislation designed to forcibly keep alive a woman whose brain has been scientifically proven to have atrophied away and who was definitively blind and could not be following motions with her eyes... was still the right thing to do. Even knowing that science and observation proved that she had massive brain damage and couldn't see, Bush still thinks that stuffing the government's nose in the family's personal affairs was a good plan.

God bless America, indeed. If I were in charge, I'd make Terri's parents issue a formal, public, strictly worded apology to Michael Schiavo -- and to the citizens of Florida -- for wasting his time, and I'd make them repay every penny of his legal costs.

Posted by Christopher at 11:50 PM | Comments (1)

June 13, 2005

Free To Beat It Again

Apparently, in California it's okay to touch little boys.

Yes, for the second time in a decade, the citizen jurors and court system of the state of California provided us with a ridiculous verdict in which an obvious criminal was set free to walk the streets again. And for the second time in a decade, the jurors had no other choice due to the presumption of innocence and the burden of proof being on the prosecution. Reasonable doubt having been raised, the jury had no other choice.

That doesn't mean Jackson the Freak is innocent; far from it. It just means that the jury could not vote to convict under the letter of the law. Presented with a case only slightly less obvious than the O.J. Simpson case, the D.A.'s office screwed things up to the point that "not guilty" was the only real option the jury had. I'm not sure what the qualifications are to become a D.A. in the Golden State, but I think my cat's probably met them.

Just like ten years ago, the state's case was undermined by unsympathetic elements in the prosecution, and it cost them a guilty verdict. In 1995 with the O.J. case, the truth was likely that the police tried to frame a guilty murderer. In 2005, the truth is likely that Michael Jackson molested a con woman's son. Both times, a man who to any unbiased eye seems guilty instead walked free. Both times, it was the right verdict thanks to horrendous prosecution.

If I ever think about breaking the law, I'm going to move to California first.

Posted by Christopher at 09:13 PM | Comments (0)

May 26, 2005

Brain Wide Shut

I'm certainly not the first blogger to say this -- in fact, in my little circle alone, both Pete and Eden have already weighed in on this subject with similar senses of outrage. But this is one that I can't let go uncommented upon.

As you've probably heard by now, Tom Cruise -- he of the no medical training whatsoever other than belonging to a freakish cult -- has publicly called out Brooke Shields for criticism because of her use of the drug Paxil to help her recover from post-partum depression.

"Here is a woman, and I care about Brooke Shields because I think she is an incredibly talented woman. You look at, where has her career gone?"

Well, first of all, her career's currently starring on the London stage as Roxie Hart in a critically acclaimed production of Chicago. My career should disappear so well someday. But Cruise then continues with what might be the most infuriatingly asinine statement by an actor since Mel Gibson last opened his mouth.

"These drugs are dangerous. I have actually helped people come off... When you talk about postpartum, you can take people today, women, and what you do is you use vitamins. There is a hormonal thing that is going on, scientifically, you can prove that. But when you talk about emotional, chemical imbalances in people, there is no science behind that. You can use vitamins to help a woman through those things."

So nice of Dr. Cruise to enlighten all of us, isn't it? Oops, wait... he's not a doctor, is he? He's just a Scientologist. But that must make you feel smarter than you are. Just what the world needs -- a cult that has the same impact as staying in a Holiday Inn Express.

Having never had the requisite parts to carry off a partum, much less a post-partum, I cannot speak to what it's like to have post-partum depression. But I can speak with some authority about what it's like to have depression as part of bipolar II disorder. I consider it something of a minor miracle that I'm around to do so. And I can assure Mr. Cruise that there in fact is an emotional, chemical imbalance in the systems of depressed people. I can assure him that the drugs used to treat those imbalances are not "dangerous," but are life-savers.

Cruise's lack of sympathy for what can be a debilitating, crippling, and most importantly, medically triggered condition is ignorant at best. But his presenting himself as an expert -- "I've helped people come off (drugs)" -- and trying to inflict his cult's bizarre, wholly medically unfounded theories on his fans and the rest of the public goes beyond ignorant. It's dangerous, and it contributes further to the stigma and misunderstanding surrounding depression. He couldn't have done much more harm if he'd suggested that one could get AIDS from a drinking fountain or a toilet seat.

The last thing people who suffer from a misunderstood illness need is a prominent celebrity further muddying the waters with ignorant statements and misinformation. Especially when that celebrity is a brainwashed cult recruiter seeking to indoctrinate further followers.

Speaking of that, I just had to mention this... Cruise claims there's "no science" behind the idea of chemical imbalances causing mood disorders. Here's what Scientology teachers about the cause of mental illnes:

Scientology religious doctrine holds that all illnesses, both physical and mental, are caused by "engrams" of negative energy in a person's "thetan."

Hmm... engrams of negative energy in my thetan. Wonder how much science is behind that idea, you brainwashed, Major Do-channeling, zombie-like, junk-science buying drone?

By the way, what does Scientology suggest is the cause of the condition when celebrities with something to hide engage a series of ever-less impressive beards to be seen with them in public?

Cruise really just needs to shut the hell up. I hope his movie coming up becomes this summer's Waterworld. And I hope his thetan falls off.

Posted by Christopher at 11:32 PM | Comments (9)

May 17, 2005

Kansas Lernin'

Among red staters' favorite whines is how blue state folk are elitist and look down upon them. Well kids, if you want to know a big reason why we do this, you might consider that you choose to bend proven science to fit your primitive, cro-magnon beliefs -- and then force feed this so-called edjumucation to your children. Like in Kansas, for example.

The Kansas school board's hearings on evolution were not limited to how the theory should be taught in public schools. The board is considering redefining science itself.

Advocates of "intelligent design" are pushing the board to reject a definition limiting science to natural explanations for what's observed in the world.

Redefining science in order to contort it to their religious beliefs. Yeah, Columbus could have really freaked Kansans out if he showed up with knowledge of a solar eclipse... Kansans would believe that it was a vengeful and angry God was swallowing the moon to punish them for their sins.

Now that I am getting into a position in my career where I have influence over who gets hired and who does not, I can honestly say that wherever I have any say in th
Now that I am getting into a position in my career where I have influence over who gets hired and who does not, I can honestly say that wherever I have any say in the decision, no potential employee who grew up in Kansas will ever get my thumbs up. This isn't out of some blue-state vendetta, but simply because scientific understanding, critical thinking ability, and knowledge are key factors to success in today's business world. You need these things to compete.

And the Kansas school system is frankly inferior, thanks to these cretinous ostriches who would rather brainwash than teach. Their students will no longer receive a sufficient education to be successful in the modern world. No American business can expect to remain competitive if forced to hire unprepared workers. And Kansas, at this point, is a liability.

Below is a list of further suggested topics for the Kansas school board to force into the curriculum:

-- The world is flat. Asia is simply a mass conspiracy by liberal cartographers.

-- The sun revolves around the earth; Copernicus was a sinner and a blasphemer. Any suggestion otherwise is a blatant attempt by homosexuals to intoxicate our kids with their perverse agenda.

-- Medical attention is to be limited to diagnosing patients by measuring the bumps on their head (phrenology), the use of leeches for treatment of illness, and prayer for the treatment of injury. Physicians and RNs are servants of the devil, and it is an abomination that they practice their satanic magic while clothed in white.

-- DNA does not exist. It is simply one more example of how the liberal establishment chooses to subvert God's majesty and power with the hubris of man. Accordingly, Kansans will continue to suffer from any disease or condition that these so-called healers might otherwise treat, alleviate or cure.

-- Fluoride in water is a conspiracy by the Communists to rob us of our precious bodily fluids.e decision, no potential employee who grew up in Kansas will ever get my thumbs up. This isn't out of some blue-state vendetta, but simply because scientific understanding, critical thinking ability, and knowledge are key factors to success in today's business world. You need these things to compete.

And the Kansas school system is frankly inferior, thanks to these cretinous ostriches who would rather brainwash than teach. Their students will no longer receive a sufficient education to be successful in the modern world. No American business can expect to remain competitive if forced to hire unprepared workers. And Kansas, at this point, is a liability.

Below is a list of further suggested topics for the Kansas school board to force into the curriculum:

-- The world is flat. Asia is simply a mass conspiracy by liberal cartographers.

-- The sun revolves around the earth; Copernicus was a sinner and a blasphemer. Any suggestion otherwise is a blatant attempt by homosexuals to intoxicate our kids with their perverse agenda.

-- Medical attention is to be limited to diagnosing patients by measuring the bumps on their head (phrenology), the use of leeches for treatment of illness, and prayer for the treatment of injury. Physicians and RNs are servants of the devil, and it is an abomination that they practice their satanic magic while clothed in white.

-- DNA does not exist. It is simply one more example of how the liberal establishment chooses to subvert God's majesty and power with the hubris of man. Accordingly, Kansans will continue to suffer from any disease or condition that these so-called healers might otherwise treat, alleviate or cure.

-- Fluoride in water is a conspiracy by the Communists to rob us of our precious bodily fluids.

Posted by Christopher at 08:56 PM | Comments (0)

May 11, 2005

Love Thy Neighbor... Unless He's A Democrat

By now, you've heard of the Republican activist masquerading as a jackass preacher -- I mean Baptist preacher -- down in North Carolina, who kicked congregants out of his church for not supporting Bush (all while hiding behind the facade of a religious organization to avoid paying taxes on his political activities).

The Rev. Chan Chandler (R-North Carolina) resigned from his church Tuesday, saying that remaining would cause more hurt for him and his family. (Mudge says: Aww, it'd be a real shame if this guy and his family had to hurt.)

But it wasn't this incident that surprised me or even made me angry; we see this kind of single-party, single-mind, one-acceptable-way-to-think stuff out of Republicans each day of every week. No, the thing that got me to post on this story was the reaction of one of Rev. Chandler's sheep -- I mean flock -- I mean, congregants.

I don’t believe he preached politics,” said Rhonda Trantham, one of Chandler’s supports. “I don’t believe anyone should tell a preacher not to preach what’s in the Bible.

You know, admittedly I didn't pay very close attention during Sunday school. But wrack my heretical brain as I might, I can't for the life of me recall where in the Bible it states that Democrats ought to be run out of the church. Perhaps Ms. Trantham might be willing to enlighten us as to which chapter and verse she saw that particular passage appear. Because I'd really like to know where, specifically, in the Bible that it states that "anyone who plans to vote for John Kerry needs to repent or resign."

The abuse by Republicans of American traditions and the tax-exempt status of churches continues. If I'm ever elected to office, one of the first things I'm doing is introducing legislation that specifically revokes the tax-exempt status of any church that engages in political activity or so much as whispers a hint of politics in a sermon. And no, that's not a violation of either free speech or freedom of religious practice. No one is saying churches can't endorse whoever they want, nor enforce a specific belief code on their followers. All I'm saying is that if they want to do so, they need to pay taxes like every other political organization in this country.

Posted by Christopher at 08:51 PM | Comments (1)