Thursday, January 31, 2008

What's happening in Detroit?

Hurt, angry, disappointed, but Carlita Kilpatrick speaks up for her husband. Of course she does.

"Our family has endured the most painful and intrusive week of our lives," she said. "Our most intimate issues have been laid out for all to see, for all to comment on, for all to dissect and analyze."
Viewers were struck by her passionate defense, which also lauded the mayor's stewardship of the city.
The Rev. Jim Holley, senior pastor of the Historic Little Rock Missionary Baptist Church, said he was surprised by her comments.
"I'll be honest, she's some kind of woman," Holley said. "If she could believe in him, then I can believe in him, too."
Councilwoman Sheila Cockrel had a similar reaction.
Cockrel said that, as a woman, she knew how difficult it was for Carlita Kilpatrick to step in front of the camera and mount such a powerful defense.
"Carlita Kilpatrick is an extremely strong woman," the councilwoman said. "My respect of her tonight has grown exponentially."
Carlita Kilpatrick's appearance was reminiscent of one by another first lady, Hillary Clinton, during her husband's run for the presidency in 1992.

So, now please go away and stop investigating all this stuff... I mean, it's nothing new, right?

Mayor Young's girlfriend, a city official named Annivory Calvert, once dragged a police officer down the street with her car after he had suggested that the morning of the Detroit Grand Prix was not a good time to be triple-parked along East Jefferson. "You can't arrest me," she ultimately hollered, according to news reports at the time. "I have diplomatic immunity!" Years later, Mayor Kilpatrick's aide and girlfriend, Christine Beatty, was pulled over for speeding. The officers involved said she asked them, none too gently, "Do you know who the (bleep) I am?" Neither Calvert nor Beatty received a ticket.
Someone I know once boarded an airplane and saw the mayor and his bodyguards taking up the entire first-class section. They were going nightclubbing in New York. Security guards at Comerica Park can tell you how his bodyguards have screeched into the parking lot and brushed through the turnstiles, flashing their badges and growling, "We're with the mayor," who of course is nowhere to be seen.
There were promises of humility and accountability for Kilpatrick's second term. He'd learned his lesson, the mayor said. Then, instead of settling out of court, he and Beatty told what would appear to be blatant lies in a whistleblower lawsuit that cost the city $8.4 million.

See, it's not about sex ... it's about $8.4 million.

Our Friends, the Russians

NPR excerpts a new book on Sergei Tretyakov, a former Russian spy who defected to the evil US:

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States and Russia entered into what was supposed to be a new era of cooperation. The Cold War was behind us. We could become friends. Many in the U.S. believe today the old Spy-versus-Spy days are finished. The September 11 terrorist attacks shifted the American public's attention away from Russia toward international terrorism, especially Islamic fanaticism. Russia was suddenly, and is today viewed as, an ally, even a friend of the U.S.

In speaking out, I hope to expose how naive this is. During the Cold War, in the Soviet military doctrine there was the definition of the MAIN ENEMY, which was also used by intelligence as a basic guiding principle. It was the United States, followed by NATO and China. What is the official guiding line for the modern SVR today? The terms have changed. It is now called the MAIN TARGET. But it is exactly the same: the United States, followed by NATO and China. Nothing has changed. Russia is doing everything it can today to embarrass the U.S. Let me repeat this. Russia is doing everything it can today to undermine and embarrass the U.S. The SVR rezidenturas in the U.S. are not less, but in some aspects even more active today than during the Cold War. What should that tell you?

h/t:Protein Wisdom

Thursday, January 24, 2008

Step Down, Mayor

Of course, the philandering liar won't.

I especially enjoy the implications that are now underneath this statement from last summer:

n his testimony last summer, at one point Kilpatrick expressed anger about claims of an affair between him and Beatty.

"I think it was pretty demoralizing to her — you have to know her — but it's demoralizing to me as well," the mayor said. "My mother is a congresswoman. There have always been strong women around me. My aunt is a state legislator. I think it's absurd to assert that every woman that works with a man is a whore.

So ... apparently every woman that works with a man is a whore, in your opinion, Mr. Mayor. Since you were, in reality, schtupping your chief of staff.

Recent comment is cool

Or I would have missed this:

Actually, as the only Republican student in the class, I can see where you are coming from. I live in Ann Arbor (which if you didn't know, is probably the liberal capital of the country... at least it seems that way.)

I really see what you mean by "robots". The news sources my friends talk about are pretty much bias-central, and there is a lot of racial hypocrisy like you mentioned about the Obama supporters.
I don't really have much to say, I was just looking up the news articles about our class and saw this blog. It's kind of refreshing to hear someone who DOESN'T agree with all the liberals i live with.

If you have any other questions about the class, feel free to email me.


By the way, just to give you a glimpse of this highschool i used to go to... There aren't any sports, because that's encouraging (god forbid!) competition.

Also, for MLK day we all stood outside in the freezing cold and held hands to sing "we shall overcome". Overcome who, i do not know. The school is 95% rich white kids..

Remember this story? It was about the Ann Arbor kids who were going to caucus in Iowa. Mostly for Democrats, and the issue that got my panties in a wad was that the class was being taught by a political appointee.

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

The battle cry that refused to go away

Must read regarding the recently released report by Center of Public Integrity and Foundation for Independence in Journalism. I would link the report, but it refuses to load - an indication that it is being read by every BDS-impared liberal on the web. Prepare to see it widely quoted.

But, I can sum it up for you ... Bush (and Condy and Dick) lied. Lots of times. Over and over. For war, and oil.

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

Once more into the breech, dear friends

I don't really know why I go to HuffPo. I signed up to comment a LONG time ago, so they send me their morning briefs (which I usually delete) and sometimes I just can't help myself.

Tom Gregory has a little piece whining about the US's "baby boomlet" and the dire consequences (GLOBAL WARMING) that are sure to come. Now, it's called a boomlet because it really isn't a boom. Nevertheless, Gregory is concerned, and he's laying the blame. Anti-abortionists and Catholics.

Reports broke the numbers down by race, pointing the finger at Hispanics, who reportedly account for one-quarter of that total. The issue is not the race, but the religion -- Catholicism. Followers are simply adhering to their archaic, illogical church doctrine.

Gregory has another target for his ire; the new FOX movie "Juno." My BIL says "Juno" is great, a must see. It's about a 16-year-old (Juno) who gets pregnant and decides to give it up for adoption. THAT IS JUST OVER THE TOP!

Juno stars Ellen Page as the 16-year-old title character who gets pregnant by her best friend. From the moment she gives herself a pregnancy test, there is never a sense of sexual responsibility, just non-stop quick-witted quips. Maybe she just doesn't understand how screwed up her life might be because of her misstep, and judging from their reaction, neither do her parents.

Juno tells her parents of her unwanted baby; she has decided not to get an abortion. Instead, she's planning to search for a suitable couple advertising to adopt. In one the film's most frustrating scenes, her parents never question Juno's lack of sexual responsibility. After Juno tells her dad the name of the boy who has fathered the child, he responds, "I didn't know he had it in him." That singular line reeks of the core problem in teenage pregnancy -- men of every age who think it adds to their machismo to father a child.

The story goes on to make pregnancy look easy, if not fun. The writer, director, and actors make it seem Juno is doing a good thing because she is giving a parentless couple a baby. Repercussions are nil. She attends school throughout, getting weird looks, with her pregnancy never compromising her carefree youth; the non-stop funny quips keep coming rapid-fire, making Juno sound like all the Marx brothers rolled into one. I can't imagine a 16 year-old-girl handling an unplanned pregnancy with so little angst.

So ... Juno is doing a bad thing giving a childless couple a baby? I suppose an abortion would have been much better. One less person to compromise our fragile planet. And, then, certainly Juno would have "earned" that reprecussion-less youth.

And, for the record, for many women pregnancy is both easy and fun. But that doesn't fit into the narrative .

As usual, the real fun appears in the comments. That's where teh crazy comes to roost:

I understand that for right to lifers no amount of suffering is adequate in defense of their peculiar ideology but the bias is so obvious and the pathetic need to control all women is so apparent that I don't know how you folks can look at yourself in the mirror.

And Paul, 15 ad 16 year olds should not be forced to carry to term children they do not want and cannot afford. I know this was standard when Bach was alive but, then, the Catholic church and all forms of fundamentalist Christianity has taught it's adherants to view women as an inferior beings with the social status of livestock for a good long while now.

I work towards the day when 'pro-life' men will be considered unmarriagble by the overwhelming majority of women (not to mention the 12 to 16 year olds who appear to have become the most desirable sex partners for way too may 'Christian' males.

Well, I did have a hard time looking myself in the mirror, but that was because it hadn't been installed yet. But, I got that sucker up last week, and now- NO PROBLEMS. Regardless, this commenter has built herself up a nice straw man she can beat up all-day-long. Much easier to do that than actually deal with what pro-lifers really believe.

I wonder how she works toward "the day when 'pro-life' men will be considered unmarriagable"? That will be soo cool - when absolutely all men are completely on-board with aborting the babies they didn't mean to knock you up with. What could possibly go wrong with that?

Monday, January 21, 2008

Quick Reviews

Well, with nothing on tv, there is plenty of time for movies and books. Since I'm sick of, and depressed by, politics (note lack of blogging) I thought I'd throw this up.

Books first.

"I am Legend" by Richard Matheson - which, as it turns out, is more of a novella. EXCELLENT read. I didn't realize that the paperback I bought was actually the novella, and short stories. I thought I had another half of the book to go. I was distressed at the end.

"The Time Travers Wife" by Audrey Niffenegger. Despite the fact that one of the characters is a time traveler, this isn't Science Fiction, but a love story. Good book.

Two Monster Movies:

The Host: South Korea, big monster. Of course, who is to blame for the monster? An American, of course.

Cloverfield: I loved it. I took SEVEN children to see it yesterday afternoon. It wasn't really "scary" - it was more like a thrill ride. Definitely worth a viewing, unless (of course) you are prone to motion sickness.

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

From Michigan Democrats, To Hillary with love


So ... what job do you think Hillary is going to give Jenny?

And, a sad note to all those who voted "uncommitted" at the primary today; word is those delegate (come on, everyone knows they're gonna be sat) can be all given to Hillary.

Edwards and Obama - how does it feel to be a SUCKER???

Friday, January 11, 2008

The Hammer on Obama

Obamamessiah seems to be sweeping the ranks of Democrats. Take Ezra Klein's piece from last week:

Obama's finest speeches do not excite. They do not inform. They don't even really inspir. They elevate. They enmesh you in a grander moment, as if history has stopped flowing passively by, and, just for an instant, contracted around you, made you aware of its presence, and your role in it. He is not the Word made flesh, but the triumph of word over flesh, over color, over despair. The other great leaders I've heard guide us towards a better politics, but Obama is, at his best, able to call us back to our highest selves, to the place where America exists as a glittering ideal, and where we, its honored inhabitants, seem capable of achieving it, and thus of sharing in its meaning and transcendence.
But, very rarely, it's experienced as a call to create something better, bigger, grander, and more just than the world we have. When that happens, as it did with Robert F. Kennedy, the inspired remember those moments for the rest of their lives.

Obama is "triumph of word over flesh"? What the hell does that mean? With all the changy-changeness Obama is going to bring us, and what with creating bigger, better grander somethings ... isn't anyone bothered by the lack of a substantive argument? I've heard Obamazombies talk and it's creepy. Here's one of my favs:

This new option is embedded in the image of Obama whose appeal is in the fact that he is not exactly white,not exactly black, not exactly Muslim, not exactly an extremist, not exactly a politician in his basic projection but a go-between that can be accepted by all the world and all the many factions in the USA, where over 100 languages are spoken.
AS the Los Angeles Times opined nearly 50 years ago: America is now so diverse in its population, the question now is: CAN ONE MAN BE PRESIDENT OF ALL THE PEOPLE.Obama’s image projects a shadow of hope that he just might be the man to do it better than any of the others, especially the Clinton’s.
Obama does not provoke the ideologies of any group. He is the image of the future of BROWN America.

Ummmm, mKay. Now, back to reality and reason ....

And, who better than Charles Krauthhammer in NRO:

It's not just that NBC admitted that “it's hard to stay objective covering this guy.” Or that Newsweek had a cover article so adoring that one wonders what is left for coverage of the Second Coming. Or that Obama’s media acolytes wax poetic that his soaring rhetoric and personal biography will abolish the ideological divide of the 1960s — as if the division between left and right, between free markets and the welfare state, between unilateralism and internationalism, between social libertarianism and moral traditionalism are residues of Sergeant Pepper and the March on Washington. The baby boomers in their endless solipsism now think they invented left and right — the post-Enlightenment contest of ideologies that dates back to the seating arrangements of the Estates-General in 1789.

The freest of all passes to Obama is the general neglect of the obvious central contradiction of his candidacy — the bipartisan uniter who would bring us together by transcending ideology is at every turn on every policy an unwavering, down-the-line, unreconstructed, uninteresting, liberal Democrat.

He doesn’t even offer a modest deviation from orthodoxy. When the Gang of 14, seven Republican and seven Democratic senators, agreed to restore order and a modicum of bipartisanship to the judicial selection process, Obama refused to join lest he anger the liberal base.

Special interests? Obama is a champion of the Davis-Bacon Act, an egregious gift to Big Labor that makes every federal public-works project more costly. He not only vows to defend it, but proposes extending it to artificially raise wages for any guest worker program.

Obama is running on some touchy-feely platform of "change" without explaining how he's gonna do it. Trick is, he's not. There is a reason there is "divisiveness" between the two political parties: BECAUSE THEY DON'T AGREE WITH EACH OTHER. Disagreement is good. It's healthy. It's Democracy. I know I'm not gonna give in and support socialist policies, and I would hope my elected officials won't either. If they do, I'll do what I can to vote them out of office. The nuts and bolts of Obama is that he is simply very, very liberal; has no real plan for "change", and is a politician like every other politician. If you want to vote for him because he's liberal - I'm fine with that. But don't vote because he's gonna change stuff.

Because, he's not.

Thursday, January 10, 2008

Yoga Interupptus

Ok, trying to do day four of P90X - yoga - and I was interrupted after 22 minutes and now I'm unable to return and do the remaining HOUR AND TEN MINUTES. Good lord, just kill me know. Honestly, I can't do it.

So ... what do you think? Should I try to finish tomorrow morning, and double up? Or move to the next workout and just try to complete more of the yoga next week? Tomorrow's workout is supposed to be legs and back. OR, I could just do yoga tomorrow and be behind.

LORD, is this a tough work out. I was so sore yesterday, I was dying. I feel better today, PTL. The abdominal workout is so hard, there are whole sets I'm unable to do.

Wednesday, January 09, 2008

Bad Day?

h/t: Kirby

Beware ...

When anyone prefaces ANYTHING with "I've been a lifelong Republican-" - whether on the radio, tv, newsprint, internet, or Amazon reviews - know that they are full of shit.

Now, I would never use those words, because I'm not a "lifelong" Republican. I was liberal up until my young twenties. But, mostly I would never say it because it's stupid. For the first 18 years, it is immaterial what your political persuasan was because you couldn't vote and you didn't know enough to have the vote mean anything.

But, anyway, back to the phrase. When you hear it, know it is a lie. The person is pretending to be a Republican to give authenticity to the BS they're about to spout, which is most likely something along the lines of how they've switched parties because of ... well, let me just insert the instant liberal rant:

Blah blah right-wing Rumsfeld warmonger chickenhawk evil Bushies Wolwowitz and his neocon cabal for oiloiloiloiloiloil blah blah ignorant stupid bloodthirsty morons, the real axis of evil on a ranch in Crawford and blah blah blah no WMD he lied, Bushitler lied, people died died died tie-dyed peace peace peace down with the Zionists! peace peace Kyoto! they hate us they hate us they hate us and what can we do and root causes and root causes and blowback and Plame and Plame and Chalabi Plame Wilson blah blah blah unilateral multinational Halliburton Enronism crony capitalism and it’s all about oiloiloiloil blah blah blah, cowboyish disregard for allies, for the wishes of the world community who rise up against us, the terrorist threat is overblown and anyway, it’s all our fault because we gave Saddam his weapons to begin with, photo of Rummy and Hussein, but make no mistake, he no longer has those weapons because inspections worked, containment worked, and blah blah blah Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Sudan handle it, Roy, handle it handle it, Caspian pipeline oiloiloiloil blah blah blah show me the stockpiles, anthrax CIA plant Richard Clarke said so and we believe him because and unless unless unless Abu Ghraib Abu Ghraib Abu Ghraib, square-jawed cocksucking military jarhead torturing fucks, bring home our troops! We care about the troops! We support the troops and don’t you question our patriotism our love for this fucking filthy crass consumerist bullying country of redneck dolts and biblethumping bourgeois suburbanites with their SUVs and where are the CAFE standards fight the real terror, eco-terror, Israel, the US, imperialist colonialist racist homophobic hegemonic and blah blah blah blah blah because dissent is patriotism and fighting against your country is really fighting for your country and our dissent keeps the nation strong and we’re brave and heroic and up is down and black is white and oiloiloiloiloiloiloiloil blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.™

So, what set me off today? Well, last week I did a post about Jonah Goldberg's new book, and how people were already declaring it the worst pile of crap ever - even before it was released. Amazon-liberal-bots went on a "tag" spree giving it a bunch of silly slurs. So, today - the book was released yesterday - I decided to go and see how the reviews were coming out. And, what did I find but a one-star review by a life-long Republican! Imagine that?! Certainly the review must be honest, and the book must really suck, since the guy is obviously not biased against the author's political persuasion.

Historically innacurate, January 9, 2008
As a life-long Republican and Rush fan, I really wanted to enjoy this book. Unfortunately it is filled with errors and innacuracies. Goldberg like pundit Andrew Sulllivan tries to portray Democrats as immoral, degenerate, traitors. I prefer an intellectual debate with liberals of whom I disagree, not juvenile name-calling. I believe that the vicious tone of Goldberg's book does more harm to the GOP than help it.

Not overtly biased. He didn't use any slurs. Perhaps he really is a "life-long Republican." Perhaps I'm being unfair, and this guy is just a total honest reviewer! The book must just suck. I perused "Tom's" other reviews, and didn't see too much to red flag. He gave five stars to Glenn Greenwald's book - which was definitely curious. And he read, and positively reviewed, Rosie O'Donnell's book (5 stars!) which gave me the wherewithall to keep digging into this mystery.

Then, if found a cool little function where I could find out what "tags" Tom has attached to books. And, WHAT do I find?

banged out by howler monkeys
bird vomit
books written while high on cheeto dust,
doughy pantload
editor promised cake
hate is a good philosophy for idiots
homophobic insanity
how not to design a book cover
i can has job mom
lunatic ravings
makes ann coulter seem sane
poor catnip substitute
viagra for dittoheads
wingnut welfare

Perhaps some of these look ... familiar? Kinda strange how he would tag the book "Viagra for Dittoheads", because Tom is a Rush fan! Matter of fact, that tag is used for this book only, which means old Tom MADE IT UP. He's a lifelong Republican and a Rush fan, yet he tagged book for Amazon before it was released (he made up the tag) and then the day AFTER it was released he published his 1-star review.

Now, I'm not above slamming, and generally making fun of people with whom I disagree. But I would never hide my political orientation. It is a cowardly form of political disagreement, and is a sign that you are - in actuality- unable to debate in an intellectually honest manner.

Monday, January 07, 2008

Friday, January 04, 2008

Does Drew Barrymore know about this book?

h/t: Kirby

From what I can make out, Something Awful is responsible.

I could write more ...

But flea kinda gets the point regarding Huck:

It was the Republican establishment which encouraged these people to start voting. They are now reaping what they have sown. In this case, tens of millions of voters who have yet to figure out the President can do next to nothing about abortion, that a constitutional ban on abortion will never pass and that as many as five Supreme Court Justices will be nominated by the next Democrat in the White House.

Although, I don't necessarily agree that fundies weren't voting before; and voting conservative. Perhaps it coalesced them into a block, and now the block is turning against us. The question is WHY? I think the answer can be found in all the positive press Huck has been receiving. The only thing conservative about the man are his social views. Views which are HATED by the very press that is pumping him up.

It isn't hard to wonder why they would do such a thing. He will not win an open election. If he is the GOP candidate (shudder) we will lose the White House. I'm not one for threats, but I won't be voting for him.

Thursday, January 03, 2008

Liberal Fascism

Jonah Goldberg's new book is due out in a few days, and the left is already atwitter. Unable to attack the book in a serious matter, they participate in the absurd; spending time attaching stupid search tags to the book on Amazon. While there are a few that were obviously put there by conservatives, you can judge for yourself who has more time for teh stupid on the intertubes:

doughy pantload (86)
propaganda (79)
wingnut welfare (70)
editor promised cake (56)
i can has job mom (41)
conservative (31)
censored by liberals (28)
liberals bashing books not yet published (28)
must read (28)
politics (28)
censored by the left (26)
the truth (10)
books written while high on cheeto dust (9)
finally the truth (8)
true (8)
banged out by howler monkeys (7)
ten pounds of crap in a five pound book (6)
a fascist wannabe publishes his fantasie... (5)
if michelle malkin is over your head (5)
lunatic ravings (5)
waste of a good tree (5)
wingnut (5)
bird vomit (4)
how not to design a book cover (4)
makes ann coulter seem sane (4)
oxymoron (4)
pathetic revisionism (4)
poor catnip substitute (4)
relatives in high publishing places (4)
truth (4)
what a boat load of crap (4)
books by rubes (3)
doughy (3)
doughy pantloads premiere (3)
excretory (3)
hate is good philosophy for idiots (3)
leftists (3)
ludicrous is too kind a word (3)
moron (3)
mother-boy (3)
pantsload (3)
revisionist history (3)
sadly no (3)
teh stoopid (3)
vomit inducing (3)
wtf (3)
a dunce with an editor (2)
attend to luicannes bunions (2)
awesomest book evah11111111 (2)
blame the liberals first (2)
bored the stenographer to sleep (2)
brandeis invaded poland (2)
bullflop (2)
bullsh-t (2)
ca ca (2)
cheetohesque (2)
code pink invaded poland (2)
conspiracy theory (2)
delusional (2)
dialectic of cheetohlightenm ent (2)
doughbob loadpants (2)
failure (2)
fascism (2)
fiasco (2)
goldberg is laughing all the way to the ... (2)
hatemonger (2)
homophobic insanity (2)
i can has funyuns (2)
i laughed til i cried (2)
idiot (2)
ignorant liberals (2)
illiterate (2)
im more delusional than mom (2)
innaleckshul wannabe wannabe wannabe lol (2)
ishtar (2)
jfk killed six million jews (2)
kook (2)
lame (2)
liberal moonbats exposed (2)
missed deadlines (2)
mmm bacon (2)
pot kettle black (2)
professional simpleton (2)
revisionist (2)
rewriting history (2)
self-parodies (2)
social security is like treblinka (2)
spend your money on tragic legacy (2)
tag vandalism (2)
technically speaking fascism is an inher... (2)
teh funny (2)
unintelligent (2)
untrue (2)
vitriol (2)
worst book ever (2)
wow lol (2)
writers block (2)
absolutely accurate (1)
amazon vandalism (1)
american fascism (1)

And, that's just the first page.

I'm surprised they haven't already filled the site with "reviews" but perhaps Amazon decided to block reviews of the book before it was released. Expect, on 1/08 for the reviews to come FLYING in. For a preview of the reviews, you could simply read the Amazon forum.