Repeat reader at A Rrose in a Prose (and former author here) Ross Lincoln is part of a really interesting panel discussion on the future of gaming. They cover everything from sexism to nerdism to a wish-list over the future of gaming, and while I don’t agree with everything all the panelists say, Ross is pretty fucking dead-on.
… and a new name!
Someone (not our group, that’s for sure) put some posters on some light poles downtown a couple months ago–at least FOUR of them! That’s completely illegal, and I say that anyone who does it should be punished to the fullest extent of the law, far more than a mere $312.
Yet the name in the city officials’ misspelled documents was so wonderful, I had to steal it. Serves those vandals right!
So, compelled by the spirit of Dadaism, our literature/poetry/memoir/erotica/essay/rant event is now called:
The next one is September 23. Please come.
The Jimmy Cliff interview I did a couple weeks back is now on the L.A. RECORD website.
by champoyhate
Okay, so this is a personal request, done late late late in the day. But can I ask why one of my personal heroes is a right-wing fuck, and has been for years?
Well, let me say this, I read the National Review cover to cover. Check in at Townhall.com every day. Check the Washington Times daily. Listen to Dennis Prager and Michael Medved on a regular basis. Read Mark Steyn with regularity. Read the Weekly Standard. So, yes, I do vote Republican. As the pundit Hugh Hewitt has observed, there are indeed two Americas: Serious America and Silly America. The Democrats seem bent on turning this into Silly America, so I stick with those who wish this to remain Serious America.
So, now that it’s six or so years since you said those flippant words, and Bush has proven to be the most wasteful, unconstitutional, and deceitful president we’ve ever had, can I get a retraction from the man whose comedy I love so dearly? I can understand that as the writer and actor on an underdog show, Mike Nelson might have sympathy for Bush, a president whose lack of popularity surely puts him in the “cult following” category of presidents such as Fillmore or Taft. But jeezuz, Nelson, your show is so much better than your politics. Maybe your inability to see the continuity between Republican pro-rich policies and the current economic fiasco we’re in stems from watching all those plotless Coleman Francis movies?
The best thing I can say about Nelson is that because he never wore his politics on his sleeve, he was able to make me laugh, and poke fun at movies without revealing how truly enthused he was about some of their saccharine religious plot-points. But jeezuz, your people destroyed our country. I hope Joel Hodgson rips your heart out of your chest with his teeth and videotapes it, so he can make fun of it later.
Vermont legalized gay marriage today! And they were the first state to do it in the legislature. They even garnered enough votes to override any potential veto by their Rethuglican governor:
The House recorded a dramatic 100-49 vote, the minimum needed, to override Gov. Jim Douglas’ veto. Its vote followed a much easier override vote in the Senate, which rebuffed the Republican governor with a vote of 23-5.
On the one hand, this makes me mad at Californians, who went to the polls in droves to vote for Obama, yet turned to the next page in the election booklet and punched a hole for hate. But on the other hand… I’m even MORE mad that California received the brunt of the anti-gay agenda’s money! I’m no research journalist, but I imagine that the funds from such organizations as Focus on the Family were so drained by our losing battle in California, that they had no more funds to spend limiting gay rights in the heartland. And the anti-gay marriage crowd seems to back that up:
Craig Bensen, a gay marriage opponent who had lobbied unsuccessfully for a nonbinding referendum on the question, said he was disappointed but believed gay marriage opponents were outspent by supporters by a 20-1 margin.
“The other side had a highly funded, extremely well-oiled machine with all the political leadership except the governor pushing to make this happen,” he said.
Just days ago, Iowa legalized gay marriage, and now Vermont’s historic win proves that gay marriage is growing in popularity as Gen X and Gen Y rise up in the spirit of “eh, why not?” We love our gay friends and don’t see what the big fuss from the religious right is all about. Actually we DO see it, and we’re beginning to call it out for the stupidity it is.
I expect bias from the Fox News folks (more on Victoria Jackson later), but why are all the press rooms today full of malarkey stories about Obama’s “earmarks,” as though Republicans aren’t asking for some of the biggest earmarks, and as though a bill with 1.9% of its money going to earmarks is somehow full of pork?
I wouldn’t have bothered blogging about it–the media bias has become so common in the last decade and a half that I think it’s not worth parsing through–I usually leave that to The Daily Howler, one of my favorite blogs. But then I logged into my yahoo account and saw this:
Yahoo, what the fuck? Note that they fucking lead with “Obama defends pet projects.” What about “Obama Passes Monumental Spending Bill?” or “Obama signs Omnibus Bill, but Cautiously,” or “Obama Signs Spending Bill, Cautions Against ‘Business as Usual,’” or one of the many fucking things that would be more succinct and to the point than this gobbledygook that obfuscates the real lead here, which is that a potential boon to the economy just passed, and that we should maybe make sure the money is enough and gets used wisely?
I have no problem with criticizing Obama. Hell, he sucks Clean Coal’s dick, he’s a shitty negotiator with the Republicans, and he lets bigots such as Rick Warren give his invocation. But to lead with “Obama defends pet projects?” That’s like a headline saying “FDR Owns Gramophone Recordings of The Mikado, but Declares War on Japan.” Less than fucking 2% of this bill was used for earmarks, and half that money roughly was earmarked by Republicans anyway, and a lot of that money will still indirectly stimulate the economy by providing jobs. As I learned today from a shockingly well-written and informative Republican blog, six of the ten highest earmarkers on this bill were Republicans. And of what’s left for the Dems, maybe two things are “pet projects” of Obama. So why lead with a sentence that refers to maybe 0.03% of a spending bill that, as John Stewart pointed out tonight, has less potential defects than a can of apricots? Why put the pork guilt on Obama?
But what reaaaaallly makes me mad is that jab at the Kennedys, which in the context of this Yahoo splash page is basically another jab at the Dems. Kennedy = liberal elitist from New England, and money for Kennedys = waste, right?
But I did the math. According to the pandering asshole loser, I mean, AP reporter Steve LeBlanc, a bunch of earmark money is going to the Rose Kennedy Greenway in Boston, plus like $22 million is going to the John F. Kennedy Library and Museum, and a smaller chunk is going to the Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the Senate. That’s 32.8 million total.
Don’t get me wrong: to me, 32.8 million dollars is a lot of money, and I would gladly drink Drano for that amount. But let’s look at the data from Taxpayers for Common Sense, not a liberal organ by any means. According to their documentation, $51,075,000 in earmarks is set aside for the Eisenhower Executive Office Building Phase III, accompanied by $14,700,000 for the Eisenhower Executive Office Building CBR, whatever that is. That’s over $65 million for one building named after a Republican president. When you tack on the $333,000 for the Eisenhower Foundation, Washington, DC (“to replicate and evaluate job-training and supportive services programs for disadvantaged workers in Des Moines, Iowa”), you wind up seeing that $66,108,000 was spent on Dwight Eisenhower alone, more than twice the amount spent on three different Kennedys added together.
So, why did Steve LeBlanc craft an article together about Kennedy-funding earmarks, instead of “Dwight Eisenhower Takes Earmarks from the Grave,” or just simply “Millions in Earmarks Spent on Dead Presidents?” Maybe it’s for the same reason that Yahoo put two anti-Dem articles in their email landing page today, or the reason that we see no articles about the Republicans such as Sen. Arlen Specter who decry earmarks while at the same time making them, or the reason that we NEVER saw articles during the primo Bush years that watered down his decision-making with scrutiny (they did start aiming criticism at him, eventually, but not until about 2005, after he’d already lied, tortured, spied, and Patriot-ed till the cows came home, literally). It’s that the media has a hard-on about shooting down Dems.
Once again, there is plenty about Obama and the Dems in general to get riled up against, in particular their wormy weakness and their poll-driven poker faces. They have two branches of government that they are just squandering, and it makes me want to puke. But this spending bill was remarkably lean, and the fat was purely bipartisan. The media wants you to believe that Ted Kennedy and Barack Obama crammed this bill into their own home-made pork barrel behind the Bobby Kennedy Special Interest Pig Barn, and that just ain’t the fucking case.
This is so funny. What’s the point in replying when the posts answer themselves?
You arragont democrat.. I have been supporting my family and working and paying taxes for you stubid people way to long… and i have lost my job a few times.. every time your stubid democrats get in charge and mess the economy…
I will comprimise.. tell you what to not take any more of my money and let me decide where i want to spend it.. how is that..
You are clueless… obvious. I worked mydelf through college, raised a family and managed to not aske the governemnt for any help.. so do not pratronize us real performers in america.. you takers are dependent on us .. so suck it up..
There’s so much to love about this quote. I won’t get into the amazing misspellings, but really, you went to college and think you never got any government help? You didn’t learn that grammar at a private school. And if you did, you should ask for your money back.
Just for the record, I hate George W. Bush. And virtually everybody involved in his cabinet deserves to die painfully, or at least to be tried as a war criminal. And in particular, I am ashamed that anyone would even attempt to defend Bush’s atrocities. During his tedious and evil reign, every moment his spin-masters protected Bush from the media and therefore from public scrutiny, I felt we lost precious time for peace, and I often expressed rage at those who provided that spin and gave Bush that time. In fact, I publicly rejoiced at the death of Tony Snow, an opinion for which I incurred serious anger from a few folks who previously kind of liked me.
But Jeezuz and Gomorrah, how could I feel ill will towards the lovely Dana Perino, Snow’s replacement as Bush Press Secretary, and the angel of many a Republican’s wet dreams?
Okay, okay, I know that part of this comes from some ugly, sexist component of my brain, and I’m as disturbed by it as you are. Not only am I sexualizing a successful public figure simply because she’s a woman, but I’m also sending the clear message that if you’re cute and kind of dumb and a woman, you get a free pass when you fuck up, because hey, you’re just a gal! Our expectations are lowered by your gender (perhaps coupled with your news-anchor hotness). We didn’t expect hard reality from a blonde cutie anyway. When we heard Perino spin Bush’s ridiculosity for us, we just laughed it off as we would any woman’s estrogenic ramblings.
I know it sounds like that, but hear me out, and not just to assuage my own sexist guilt. Though I acknowledge having a really twisted crunch on Dana Perino somewhat similar to Drew Grant’s admitted hotness for John McCain, you know that there was something different about Perino’s approach to Press Secretary than her predecessors’. And it’s not just her womanhood.
By contrast, let’s take the late Tony Snow. Though I don’t believe Tony Snow actually drank the White House Kool-Aid (ironically, because he was far too right-wing), he certainly played the indignant, smug role well. He lied like it was breathing, he spoke arrogantly to reporters, he turned questions into excuses to insult people. He basically took Fox News and put it in the White House.
Perino had an entirely different tone. She was more human, less smug, and though I think she was definitely a dyed-in-the-wool Bushie, she was incapable of the glib lying her predecessor excelled at. According to conservative pundit Ronald Kessler, “what you notice when she is interviewed on TV is her expressive delivery. You stop and listen for her interesting nuances of emphasis. She doesn’t project the total confidence of the polished newscaster, and as a result, she inspires more trust.”
He was right, in a sense–she inspired more trust because we knew her lies were lies, or at least that she was reciting the lies with a knowing glance, like she was in on the hilarity of it all. It was her job to protect Bush, not to beat up on reporters, and she had the air of someone who’s just doing her job. Sometimes she would nearly level with the press, giving answers that amounted to saying “okay, I’m going to give the ‘official’ Bush White House account of what happened, and I know you won’t believe it, and neither do I, but I have to say the words written on this little paper anyway.”
Anyways, maybe in all of my lust, I’m actually picking on her, and that’s not even fair–she went to the same college as me (sadly, graduating a year before I got there), but then went on to grad school, which I didn’t even do, and worked her way into the public eye largely based on her merits.
And after last week’s appearance on the Daily Show, I can’t decide, in the parlance of Vice Magazine’s “Do’s and Don’ts,” whether I want to fuck her or be her. This is just too amazing.
What a nightmare we’ve been in! It’s been such a joy today to realize that the Bush administration is finally over.
One of the best things I got to do today was peruse the new whitehouse.gov site! Besides just generally looking awesome now that Whistle-ass’s face is off the damned thing, it’s really informative and interesting to read Obama’s agenda all in one official and officious place that has “.gov” at the end of it.
In particular, this section on Ethics is really encouraging:
Sunlight Before Signing: Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them. President Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days.
I mean, if Bush had honored that rule after 9/11, we might not have the Patriot Act! And then we wouldn’t see things like this, a woman who went to jail for three months and lost custody of her kids because she spanked her kids and then sassed a flight attendant, in a New York Times story from today:
A flight attendant confronted Freeman, who responded by hurling a few profanities and throwing what remained of a can of tomato juice on the floor.
The incident aboard the Frontier flight ultimately led to Freeman’s arrest and conviction for a federal felony defined as an act of terrorism under the Patriot Act, the controversial federal law enacted after the 2001 attacks in New York and Washington.
“I had no idea I was breaking the law,” said Freeman, 40.
After three months in jail, Freeman agreed to plead guilty in exchange for being released on probation. A court-appointed attorney told her that a plea deal would be the fastest way to see her children, who had been taken back to Hawaii and put into foster care.
Her probation required her to stay in Oklahoma City, where she grew up, and prohibited her from flying. Meanwhile, legal proceedings in Hawaii have begun to allow the children’s foster parents to adopt them.
Freeman has been denied permission to attend custody hearings in Maui over the last six months, court records show.
“I have cried. I have cried for my children every day,” Freeman said. “I feel the system is failing me.”
Congress and Bush failed us when they passed the Patriot Act, and I’m glad Obama is addressing things like this from day one. Clearly we’ve been going about it the wrong way for far too long. God, I can’t wait to return to a time when laws kind of make sense, and transparency and rationality returns to legislation and executive power. Obama better not break his fucking promises (except the one about not bringing Bush to justice–it’s okay by me if he wants to flip-flop on that).
button seen at last summer's Republican convention
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: we’ll soon be seeing an about-face on the concept of “legislating from the bench,” a practice that Bush and the Republicans adamantly talked shit about for the last eight years. Unfortunately for them, on a Federal level, that’s about the only place they’ll be legislating for a while, and they know it and are beginning to savor it.
Luckily, the new Congress is hip to it, too. The first thing they did last week was undo Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
It was no accident that the first piece of major legislation the House of Representatives passed last week was a rebuke of one of the two justices President George W. Bush put on the Supreme Court, Samuel Alito.
To open the new Congress, the House passed a bill which seeks to undo the 2007 Supreme Court Ledbetter decision which Alito wrote.
House Democrats weren’t shy about pointing the finger at Alito as the man they saw as the culprit in the 2007 decision.
Rep. Rush Holt, D-N.J., said Alito “wrote the flawed decision…. Lilly Ledbetter was denied justice and the rights afforded to her under the Civil Rights Act. Justice Alito’s opinion runs contrary to decades of civil rights law.”
And Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., who has often led the opposition to Bush’s judicial nominees, said in 2006 that Alito is one nominee he wished he had done more to block. “My greatest regret in the last two years is that we didn’t stop Alito…. You don’t filibuster unless someone is way out of the mainstream…. Alito clearly seemed to me to be that,” he told reporters.
Bad news is, the Justices Bush appointed are going to be around, like, forever.
But Alito at age 58 is likely to be on the court for at least another 20 years.
Chief Justice John Roberts, nominated to the court by Bush in 2005, is 53 years old. If he serves as long as Justice John Paul Stevens, who is the court’s oldest member, Roberts will still be on the high court in 2040.
Even more striking: Bush appointee Brett Kavanaugh, a judge on the powerful United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, is only 44 years old.
Though during the civil rights era, the Supreme Court did a decent job of upholding the constitution in the face of evildoers, let’s not forget that some of the worst policies of discrimination in this country’s history were enshrined by the Supreme Court and other Federal courts in years past. The Judiciary, being a non-elected body, has a unique ability to lean against the winds of change. Since we can all agree that Hurricane Hope is more or less a blowin’ again, those of us who aren’t atheists might do well to pray for Samuel Alito to get Typhus or somethin’.
Recent Comments