Saturday, February 26, 2011

Not that I can blame them, in this case

Have a look at this Toronto Star piece on Arizona and Utah's race to be the first states to designate Official guns.

What’s next? Will crime-ridden Louisiana adopt the MAC-10 machine pistol, firing 1,000 rounds a minute? And how about Sarah Palin’s beloved Alaska, with its 1,500-pound coastal brown bears? The Marine Corps M72A7 anti-tank rocket, perhaps?


You know, I'm not sure, but I think the Canadlians just might be mocking us.

Friday, February 25, 2011

Stay well, Roger. We need you.

Roger Ebert reviews Hall Pass, a movie I had no intention of seeing, and have no intention of seeing, but may be worth existing just for inspiring his review:

It is perhaps hard-wired into men that their eyes should be constantly on the prowl. Maybe it's an evolutionary trait, and our species has developed it to encourage the sowing of human seed in many fields. Women, by contrast, have evolved to be sure their mates gaze in admiration at them alone and nobody else. There's a famous story by Irwin Shaw, “The Girls in Their Summer Dresses,” about an estranged couple who decide to make up. They go for a stroll down Fifth Avenue, but break up all over again because the man can't prevent his eyes from straying. He loves his mate — yes, he really does — but you see the girls are so pretty in their summer dresses.


WTF else do you know who makes literary references in the middle of a review of a movie by the same makers as the Goodbye Girl remake?

The plot of the movie is meh. It involves the lads and their posse being cycled through several unsuccessful and quasi-slapstick situations showing their cluelessness, immaturity and how women easily see straight through them. Meanwhile, the wives and their posses have a great time on a getaway retreat. Women seem to get along perfectly well when set free from men, but men seem uncomfortable without women. It probably all involves which gender has the greater need to be reassured.

God bless you, Tennessee.

I take back everything I ever said about you. No really, I do. I know, you think I'm being ironic because of that whole Tennessee Stage Company/my play, "The Girl in the Boat" thing, but nothing could be farther from the truth.

I take it all back: You know, about Tennessee being insane and all. I have decided to take this step because I've realized how much I should really appreciate you. You're always there for me whenever I want illustration of how republicans are, by definition, big flaming hypocrites.

Case in point:


Tennessee Jumps on the Anti-Sharia Bandwagon



While a number of other states have filed legislation seeking to keep Sharia out of the courts, Tennessee is going one giant step further by attempting to outlaw it entirely.
(emphasis mine-BV)


Senate Bill 1028, introduced by State Sen. Bill Ketron, gives the state Attorney General authority to designate "Sharia organizations," defined as "two (2) or more persons conspiring to support, or acting in concert in support of, sharia or in furtherance of the imposition of sharia within any state or territory of the United States."


Hm. That seems un....something. Oh darn, what is it, it's on the tip of my tongue...oh yes: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." (again, emphasis mine)


The bill states its intent is not to outlaw free religion, or the practice of Islam. It claims that Sharia presents a real threat to Tennessee.


Trust me on this one: I pose a more real threat to Tennessee.


Tennessee is just the latest in a string of states to consider anti-Sharia legislation. But unlike in some other states, where the language in the legislation avoids explicitly mentioning Sharia by name, Tennessee's bill goes so far as to call Sharia "treasonous" and incompatible with the U.S. Constitution.


"...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" (Once again...ok, you get it).

This may be the part of this I most dearly love. They've devised an excuse to violate the Constitution on the grounds that this thing they've invented is incompatible with the Constitution. Beautiful.

Tennessee....I really just have to just stand back in awe. Thank you, Tennessee. For the love...for the laughter...For the Boys.

Thursday, February 24, 2011

There's an AP story going around today about "Obama's Shifting Stance on gay marriage."

A couple things I feel compelled to comment upon.

You likely know how I feel about the overarching issue. In a few words: Full legal rights. Now. This is a position that has the dual advantages of being one, right, and two, growing in popularity.



Opinion polls show a steady rise in Americans' embrace of gay rights, and young voters solidly back positions their grandparents opposed, including gay marriage.


But as ever, I am left speechless (well, almost) by the statements of the anti-gay marriage politicians...although I suppose the larger point is that there are fewer of them:



Five or so years ago, Obama's decision might have touched off fierce Republican criticisms. But reaction Wednesday was comparatively sparse and muted from mainstream GOP groups and individuals.


Still:



One exception was former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, an evangelical minister who is considering a second try for the presidency.

"I think it was an absolutely boneheaded political move, and I think it was a boneheaded policy move," Huckabee said in an interview. He said Obama seems to say, "I don't answer to the voters."


Read the very first quoted paragraph in this post again, and then read that Huckabee quote again. See the first problem? Second problem is, last time I looked, we don't elect politicians to do exactly what the majority wants on every issue.

We can discuss whether that's good or bad, but we don't. We choose who we think is the best person (ideally), and if we don't like how they do the job, we fire them. That's how they answer to us. Not by being passive instruments of our will.

Incidentally, here are a couple of things in which Mike Huckabee believes with which a majority of Americans disagree:

Evolution. Huckabee doesn't believe in it. As of last year only 40% of us agree with him.

The Bible. Huckabee believes it is literally true. Not only is that belief shared by only one-third of us, but more of us could name the ingredients in a Big Mac than could name all 10 commandments. (Personally, I couldn't do either. I'm a Buddhism-influenced person, and I prefer Burger King).

I'm sure if Huckabee were to be elected president (a scary but unlikely thought) we could count on him to set policies which "answered to the voters" on those issues, aren't you?

The AP piece continues:


Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., said Obama cares little about the Constitution...


Except for the 12 years he spent teaching and lecturing about it, of course.

Again: Though surely we can disagree about how he interprets it, to just blithely assert that he doesn't care about it? The President?

This is the sort of thing that makes me think Republicans show up to a battle of wits half-prepared.

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

This is turning out to be a more popular feature than I imagined.

That's right kids, it's time once again for another episode of...

"Who's searching for me now?"

Tonight's contestant comes to us from an IP Address for something called Optimum Online (Cablevision Systems) in Brooklyn, New York, here in the great USA. To my knowledge, I do not know anyone in Brooklyn, New York.

But whoever this is, he, she or undecided (and with some of my friends past and present it's hard to tell) found this blog by Googling my name; stayed around for almost eight minutes and did at least some searching of my posts from the last few years, finally leaving after looking at this open letter to Elizabeth Hurley .

Do you suppose it was Miss Hurley, her cleavage, or my usual sort of useless witty remarks that drove them away?

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

Monday, February 21, 2011

One for the '80s electronica lovers out there

It was John Hughes & Molly Ringwald's birthday recently, and I should've taken note, (among other reasons) because their movie Pretty in Pink brought me OMD.



Who remain one of my favorite groups; I love this song from their recent reunion LP. The video's really fun, too; full of "souvenirs"...how many can you spot?

Tuesday, February 15, 2011

Proof yet again that conservatives should never try to be funny

It's just not their métier.


Andrew Breitbart, at it again?

The conservative blogger – who is at the center of a lawsuit over a video his site posted depicting a government official as racist – now has a cartoon on his Big Government site portraying First Lady Michelle Obama as a plump, hamburger-scarfing glutton.

In the cartoon, posted over the weekend, the First Lady is sitting at a dinner table with President Obama.

"I've stepped up my efforts to control America's eating habits by telling restaurants to lower portion sizes and fat content," a double-chinned Michelle Obama says, referring to her anti-obesity campaign
, which celebrated its one-year anniversary last week.


I've seen one or two people comparing this to the hay that was made from Nancy Reagan's "Just Say No" campaign, in the '80s. Thing is, people who made fun of that did so because they felt it was an overly simplistic slogan that didn't take into account the realities of addiction as a sickness. IIRC, that was usually made clear by the comedians who made fun of it..

Cartoonists James Hudnall and Batton Lash' motive, however...well we have to consult the article linked above to know that because otherwise there's no way we would, based on the work. But they say they're making fun of the First Lady's anti-obesity campaign because
"We find the 'do as I say, not as I do' approach of the Obamas hypocritical and ripe for ridicule. The First Lady seeks to enforce healthy eating on the nation, while indulging on snacks in public appearances," said Lash, pointing to the recent White House Superbowl menu, which included deep-dish pizza and buffalo wings.


I suppose there might be a case to make for that. But I also feel that the cartoon is both unfunny, which may be a matter of personal reaction, but at least as importantly doesn't make that case. I defy anyone to tell me that's what they got out of that cartoon, like it or not.

Also I think Lash, sadly, apparently misunderstands the difference between enforcing and encouraging. So far as I know, no police are raiding homes because children reported their parents for eating hamburgers and pizza.

Unlike what happened in the Reagan '80s with one or two stoner parents. I'm just saying is all.

What the hell kind of a sick, fucked-up list of movie dragons doesn't include...



Toothless Fish Plz by *BellaNique on deviantART


...or the dragon in Dragonslayer?



This kind.

Monday, February 14, 2011

Rebel, Rebel

Shirley Sherrod is suing Andrew Breitbart. And while I wish her luck, part of me feels in a perverse way that we ought to thank him, as well, for reminding us of how the Obama White House, which just loves to piss on its progressive base, well, when a dirty right-wing flack like Brietbart says jump, they say how high?

Thursday, February 10, 2011

Sometimes, it is about how you say it

...social scientists at Tufts University's School of Arts and Sciences have found that outrage talk is endemic among commentators of all political stripes, but measurably worse on the political right.


Hands up, the first person who's surprised. But wait a minute.

Granted that these folks are scientists and I'm not, the example they give of "outrage talk" from both the left seems to me to be at least flawed, and maybe even totally incompatible with the example from the right

Those examples are

"Whether it’s MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann spitting out his coffee because of some conservative transgression or radio host Michael Savage venomously impugning the character of immigrants, cable television, talk radio and blogs overflow with outrage rhetoric, and even mainstream newspaper columns are not above the fray," they said.



Well, as I say...wait a minute. Keith Olbermann spitting out his coffee (it's called a Spit Take, o bright sparks of Tufts Uni) is by definition an attempt at a comedic reaction. We can discuss whether or not it succeeds as comedy in any given case, but a person who uses the spit take is at least trying to be funny. I would argue they're not even being satirical, but (more importantly) they're certainly not spewing venom. Just coffee, I guess.

But Savage, on the other hand...well, take a look at the most recent handful of quotes as tracked by Media Matters, just as some examples. Forget whether or not you agree with what he's saying, that's not my point (and if you're reading my blog, there's like a one percent chance that you do, anyway). Look at how he's trying to say what he's saying. Is he even trying to make a joke? Forget failing/succeeding, is he even trying?

My point is not that Keith Olbermann has never said anything that went over the top, rhetoric-wise. He has and he's been quick to admit it. My point is, rather than spotlighting the finding that the right is considerably meaner than anything on the left, these scientists appear to have thought they had to tie their own hands by assuring us of their finding, "Oh, but the left is mean too!"

Well, no wonder that's their finding...if they're counting a spit take in the same category as Michael Savage saying that immigrants expect free education, that they are to blame for the bedbug epidemic (and that leprosy, tuberculosis & cholera will follow in their wake). And yes, both of those are real.

It's that old demon bugaboo false equivalence, and unfortunately, it is very, very...President Obama. I do not think we will ever rise above this tragically dark cloud until we accept the truth that when we are talking about vitriol, we are talking, overwhelmingly, about the right.

This is not to say that no one on the left ever has their little slips of frustration, either (including me). But with the right, I think, it isn't little slips. It's their everyday mode of discourse, 24/7.

But of course, I'm not a scientist.

This is a surprisingly great article

...on how Conan O'Brien was able to come back riding on "the wave of the future," in other words the digital media audience. I say "surprisingly great," because you don't always find two big chunks of Truth in articles about TV stars, but this one has these:

"The boomers have overstayed their welcome," declares the man credited by many with creating the phrase "viral video," Douglas Rushkoff, the author most recently of Program or Be Programmed, a book about digital media. "Generation X is finally at the stage where they can have the jobs the boomers had, and the economy crashes. There's nothing left for them...


and

O'Brien sits back in his office, guitar in hand, trying to make sense of his personal and digital evolution. First he thinks it through as a performer: "The Beatles were trying to be the Everly Brothers, and they couldn't quite pull it off. Elvis really wanted to sound like Dean Martin. But, you know, by failing …" He stops and starts again. "You have an image in your head of this iconic person. For me, it might have been Johnny Carson, where you grow up with him, and you think, 'Well, that's who I need to be' -- to realize that feeling I had when I was 8, sitting in my parents' house and watching him. And then things happen, and you think, 'Oh, my God, I didn't -- that fell apart.' But it's the failure to be that person or to completely follow through on what he did that leads you to something that's much better."

Monday, January 31, 2011

The moron strikes back

Once again, I have received a comment from a critic of President Obama.


How's that Obama thing working out for you?


I won't pretend that every single thing he's done has been a winner with me, but...pretty good, actually.

BTW, the link in the poster's screenname leads to nothing. But searching that name suggests they are Rick Fader, an Ohio resident of Hungarian descent who fancies himself good with tools, and a graduate of Wayne High School in Huber Heights, OH (Class of 1988). God, I love what the internet has done to would-be anonymous cowards.

Anyway, as happens too frequently to be merely coincidence with these kinds of comments, he seems not to have cared that the post he's commenting upon is over two years old. I guess that he couldn't slow down long enough to notice that in his hurry to call me a

Moron.


This is ridiculous, of course. If I were a moron, I'd be running NBC (and/or MSNBC).

To get back to this timely comment: He responds to my querying of the qualifications and experience of Sarah Palin and Dan Quayle by first using a snark term apparently favored by "birthers," then adds:
I mean at least [Obama] had experience as a COMMUNITY ORGANIZER....Hahahaha What a JOKE.


Well, first of all, the American people chose President Obama. They must've thought he was experienced enough for them. John McCain and George H. W. Bush chose Palin and Quayle, respectively...and the American people made them pay for it to greater and lesser degrees.

But also, say what you will about Obama, and I've said some good and bad...but it's hard to deny he's smart. I mean, he's not an idiot. You can't say that about the other two.

Please don't hesitate to write if you have any other questions or witty observations.

Friday, January 28, 2011

Come on down!

Time once again for another episode of...

"Who's searching for me now?"

Tonight's contestant comes to us from an IP Address for something called Newnan Utilities in Sharpsburg, Georgia here in the great USA. To my knowledge, I do not know anyone who works for a utility company in Sharpsburg, Georgia.

But whoever this is, he, she or undecided (and with some of my friends past and present it's hard to tell) found this blog by Googling my name, looked around for exactly one minute and then motored.

Your move, o mystery utilitarian.

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Friday, January 21, 2011

As most of you know...

... West Wing creator Aaron Sorkin is one of my writing icons (and a good bet to win a screenwriting Oscar this year for The Social Network).

Here's info on his new HBO show, and movie on the John Edwards affair (which he is also set to direct).

Thursday, January 20, 2011

Hey Joe, don't let that door hit you in the ass on the way out, mmkay?

Joe Lieberman went on TV recently to insist that there really were Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq.

...or er, at least, that Iraq was "developing" them.

Now this is, in itself, no surprise. Joe Lieberman is a boob, and a two-faced one besides. We've long known that. So it's no shock, just kind of saddening in a wholly expected way, to see him trot out this old chestnut in a Q & A with Arianna Huffington (and others):

I'm basing it on the so-called Duelfer Report. Charles D-U-E-L-F-E-R conducted the most comprehensive report on behalf of our government. And it was, nobody thought it was partisan. I want to be very clear: he didn't find big caches of weapons of mass destruction. But he found, and proved I think, that Saddam had every intention, and particularly to develop nuclear weapons, was developing chemical and biological weapons, and had a structure in place including nuclear scientists that he was prepared to support if he broke out of the sanctions, which he was inclined to do.


God in Heaven, Joe. I have every intention of developing my own TARDIS so I can have Cameron Diaz, Winona Ryder, Jennifer Connelly, Helena Bonham Carter, Natalie Portman and Laura Prepon when they were good. Which I am inclined to do. Doesn't mean I can be sued for child support as the father of Natalie Portman's baby.

Another thing: Here is an item about the report he cites from the AP:



Wednesday, Oct. 6, 2004; 5:53 PM
Contradicting the main argument for a war that has cost more than 1,000 American lives, the top U.S. arms inspector said Wednesday he found no evidence that Iraq produced any weapons of mass destruction after 1991.


Y'get that there, Joe? "No evidence."

Also, from a related Washington Post article on the same report:


Duelfer's report said that no chemical weapons existed and that there is no evidence of attempts to make such weapons over the past 12 years


As I say, all this, like the fact that Lieberman is a two-faced boob, is what we already knew. But what we didn't know, or at least I didn't, is just how patronizing he could be to a woman...who just happens to have better information than he.

Because when Ms. Huffington quiered his assertion, the following exchange took place:

LIEBERMAN: ... these are not unfounded. Go read the Duelfer Report.

HUFFINGTON: There is nothing in the report that proves anything that you have said.


Dripping with condescension, Lieberman retorted, "I don't think you've read it, sweetheart."


(emphasis mine)

Ooh-boy...