Cake Eater Chronicles

And not only was this

And not only was this kid silly, he was stupid, too.

Good God. A class action

Good God. A class action suit against Merck over Vioxx was filed in federal court in Oklahoma City this afternoon.

Less than eight hours after Merck announced it was pulling the drug completely.

Damn. Those boys move quick.
There was already a case in the state court, and given today's news the
lawyers on the state court decided to file for Class Action status in
federal court. That's the way these things work. They were probably
getting ready for it, but today's news made it important that it was
filed ASAP, to get as much PR leverage as they could. Coming strictly
as a observer of the actual legal process: a more impressive turnaround
time has yet to be seen.
I think it has to be a universal rule that whenever a lawyer smells
blood in the water they find the ability to move quickly. The rest of
the time they procrastinate. I have more than ample evidence to back
this one up. But they just decided to act from on high: I feel for the
poor paralegal who had to whip that one up this morning. And for the
runner, who had to take it to the federal courthouse, and probably had
a local news crew following them the entire time. Been there, done that
and it's annoying as hell. And all for what? Well, the legal fees
reaped from being the first to file for class action status will buy
those boys and girls some yachts. Quick thinking if you have a firm to
support, but what does it mean in the long run? Will it actually solve
anything? Will Merck be forced to "learn its lesson." Will much needed
drugs be slowed up in the FDA approval process because Vioxx was one of
the first to be fast-tracked, hence a review of the entire process will
be put forth?
Crikeys.
Merck did the right thing and they're going to be crucified for it.
Hell, there's not any "going to be" about it. They already have been
crucified. It's taken less than a day to nail them up to the cross,
hammer in the nails, and slay their side. Not only on Wall Street,
either, as this lawsuit proves. They had to have known this, but
instead of covering it up and waiting for the lawsuits to come, buying
people off one at a time, they instead saw a risk to their customers
and pulled the drug, irregardless of the consequences. Yet, instead of
being rewarded for potentially saving lives, they're being forced to
take a bath in a vat of blood.
This whole thing proves one point: when it comes to corporate
governance, there is absolutely no financial incentive to do the right
thing. You pay for doing the right thing, and you can make money doing
the wrong thing, like hushing this whole thing up, keeping Vioxx on the
market and maybe having a few people die. The lawsuit aside, Merck's
stock dropped twenty-seven percent in value today because they did the right thing
That's really fucking sad. I think the stock should have gone up. I
think responsible corporate governance should be rewarded. After all,
isn't that what the shareholders claim they want? Or is that only when they're
the ones taking a bath that responsible corporate governance is
important? They can't have it both ways. The market, at the insistence
of their shareholders, shouldn't have dumped Merck. They should have
had faith and acted cautiously.

...on French rifles. Never fired

...on French rifles. Never fired and only dropped once.

A good deal, no?

I realize I'm behind here. Shoot me. I've been cleaning.

...but it's time to compare

...but it's time to compare and contrast.

{Oh, and by the way, ELECTION FREE ZONE RULE OFF}

Read this.

{...} The most celebrated images were from the wreckage of 9/11 when Bush spoke the only truly inspired off-the-cuff remarks of his presidency. The actual concrete details of his war-leadership - the fall of Kabul, the blitzkrieg to Baghdad, the aborted siege of Fallujah - were absent. So too the protracted negotiations at the U.N. or any images of Bush with foreign leaders, or the decision to advance the war by days to get Saddam (more bad intelligence) or even the speech that launched the Iraq war. What I think the Republicans have realized is that the war on terror is far more popular and winning an issue for Bush if it is stripped of its actual events, and setbacks and triumphs and difficulties. That's why the convention rhetoric approached propaganda - focusing not on what has happened, but on the virtues of a strong war-leader. The dynamics of both wars - of instant military success, followed by damaging and difficult follow-through - were deliberately obscured. This is good politics; but it strikes me as risky war-management. People need leaders who level with them about failures and difficulties in wartime - not gauzy North Korean-style biopics about the invincibility of the Great Leader. But then this war, vital as it is, has been exploited by the Bushies for political purposes since it began. How else to explain the "Mission Accomplished" photo-op or the bare-knuckled 2002 Congressional campaign? {...}In this, Bush is, of course, the opposite of Churchill, who brought in opposition leaders to play key roles in his war-cabinet. I know that's not the American tradition, but a little less politics might have gone a long way. And made the middle-ground voter a little more sympathetic to the narrative that the Republicans are now so effectively deploying.

Then read this.

But what the terrorists are also counting on is that Americans will not have the stomach for the long haul. They clearly know that the coming retaliation will not be the end but the beginning. And when the terrorists strike back again, they have let us know that the results could make the assault on the World Trade Center look puny. They are banking that Americans will then cave. They have seen a great country quarrel to the edge of constitutional crisis over a razor-close presidential election. They have seen it respond to real threats in the last few years with squeamish restraint or surgical strikes. They have seen that, as Israel has been pounded by the same murderous thugs, the United States has responded with equanimity. They have seen a great nation at the height of its power obsess for a whole summer over a missing intern and a randy Congressman. They have good reason to believe that this country is soft, that it has no appetite for the war that has now begun. They have gambled that in response to unprecedented terror, the Americans will abandon Israel to the barbarians who would annihilate every Jew on the planet, and trade away their freedom for a respite from terror in their own land. We cannot forsee the future. But we know the past. And that past tells us that these people who destroyed the heart of New York City have made a terrible mistake. This country is at its heart a peaceful one. It has done more to help the world than any other actor in world history. It saved the world from the two greatest evils of the last century in Nazism and Soviet Communism. It responded to its victories in the last war by pouring aid into Europe and Japan. In the Middle East, America alone has ensured that the last hope of the Jewish people is not extinguished and has given more aid to Egypt than to any other country. It risked its own people to save the Middle East from the pseudo-Hitler in Baghdad. America need not have done any of this. Its world hegemony has been less violent and less imperial than any other comparable power in history. In the depths of its soul, it wants its dream to itself, to be left alone, to prosper among others, and to welcome them to the freedom America has helped secure. But whenever Americans have been challenged, they have risen to the task. In some awful way, these evil thugs may have done us a favor. America may have woken up for ever. The rage that will follow from this grief and shock may be deeper and greater than anyone now can imagine. Think of what the United States ultimately did to the enemy that bombed Pearl Harbor. Now recall that American power in the world is all but unchallenged by any other state. Recall that America has never been wealthier, and is at the end of one of the biggest booms in its history. And now consider the extent of this wound - the greatest civilian casualties since the Civil War, an assault not just on Americans but on the meaning of America itself. When you take a step back, it is hard not to believe that we are now in the quiet moment before the whirlwind. Americans will recover their dead, and they will mourn them, and then they will get down to business. Their sadness will be mingled with an anger that will make the hatred of these evil fanatics seem mild.

{emphasis mine} I suppose the point would be is that Sullivan seems to have forgotten what he wrote the week after 9/11. And all the lessons therein. Notice in the first passage it's all about bringing "moderates" on board. And the only way, apparently, that Bush et.al. could do so was to admit they made mistakes in the running of the war. Well, ok. I suppose that could fly in a theoretical sense, but down here in the muck and mire that is a presidential campaign, if Bush took such an action he might as well have bared his chest and handed Kerry a sword and told him to have at the disembowling. What the hell is Sullivan thinking? You do not, under any circumstances, hand your opponent the means they need to win. That's not just politics. That's life. Yet the greater problem with Sullivan's attitude these days is that given the second passage, one would think that since he saw clearly in the days after 9/11 that it was going to be a long war, that people would need to realize this and support their government's efforts. That he'd understand that Bush, election aside, simply cannot admit there were any mistakes made---election or no election---because that would encourage the terrorists. Andrew's lost track of his priorities. I know why. Everyone who reads his site knows why. He was personally offended by the President's support of the FMA. Never mind that this was a political move by Bush, and that the proposed amendment was one Sullivan even admitted was destined to fail from the beginning, it was this act of betrayal that led Sullivan to start turning toward Kerry. Not because Kerry is the better alternative, or that he's proven with his outstanding four and a half months in Vietnam that he can win the war, but because he's anyone but Bush. In theory and in practice, the guy you disagree with can be voted out. That's the way democracy works. I fail to see, however, when presented with the two choices we have this year, how voting for Kerry is going to make all the problems disappear or make us safer. Furthermore, I would expect Sullivan to come to this conclusion as well. He's too smart for this garbage, particularly when he knew in the days after 9/11 how important it was for us to present a unified front. Dissent is all well and good, but when the Kerry campaign is attacking the President's ability to lead, is second guessing every move he makes in the War on Terror, and is constantly banging the AWOL drum, and the lefty media covers it incessantly, well, what message, exactly, do the terrorists get from that? I've long thought that this election year, while boring in the extreme for its lack of innovation, is probably the simplest election we've faced in years. This year the choice is clear. You either dance with the guy who brung you this far, or you look for a new partner, knowing full well that this guy might just get you killed in the meantime. If America fails to make the right choice come November 2nd, well, look for more terrorist attacks. It will happen. Not because we've been lucky this far in being spared, which I don't believe is the case, but because when an enemy smells a weakness they attack. In case we'd forgotten in the midst of all SwiftVets debacle, we do have enemies. And they want us dead. Sullivan seems to forget this in his betrayal. He's lost track of his priorites. He forgets that if we don't win this war on terrorism none of the rest of it matters. The economy won't matter because there won't be markets. The deficit won't matter because there won't be an American government to pay it off. The FMA won't matter because no one will be getting married in the first place. For all these other things to matter, we must win the war. And to do that, we must keep the guy in office who scares the ever living crap out of the people who want to kill us.

It's really quite simple.

And one would think Sullivan would realize this.

Got your attention, didn't I?

Got your attention, didn't I?

Heheheheh.

There's a good cause goin' on in the blogosphere and it's called the Bloggers Boobie-Thon, or the charity drive that gives you a little somethin' in return.
In essence, bloggers---male and female---send in pics of their
covered/uncovered boobs and people pay to see them, with the proceeds
going to the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation. So, basically you
get to view a little soft core pr0n without the guilt. Good deal, no?
Considering that I know most of you just stop
by here as a breather between pr0n sites, this should combine your
activities into a one stop shop rather well.
So, if you're a blogger, go and submit a pic to help raise money for a
VERY good cause and help to publicize it with a mention on your blog.
If you're a regular reader, well, get out your credit cards, kids, and
get ready for some hot blogger boobie action! And just for the record,
I will be submitting a picture. Just as soon as I go and purchase a new
bra. The husband's going to go batty with happiness when he reads this.
I just know it.
Sigh.

Thank God I don't have

Thank God I don't have to watch endless amounts of coverage on this
anymoreThank God the Kobe sideshow is over and done with Do I feel
sorry for the girl involved Yes But damn was this a major media
sideshow or what It's over It's over It's over It's overIt's overOnce
they throw Scott Peterson and Michael Jackson in jail I can have my
cable news back without it ever being sullied with their omnipresence
anymoreIt's overIt's overIt's overThank freakin' GodI hope she gets as
much money out of Kobe as he spent in the adultery section at Harry
Winston last summer if not moreIt's overIt's overIt's over Did I give
my thanks to God yetOk wellI think you get the gist.

Ok, let's try this again.

Ok, let's try this again. Wireless, while the best thing since sliced
bread, also sucks the battery power on the laptop like a frat boy sucks
on a keg tap. I had this post all done and wham! wee bastard acted, indeed, like a wee bastard and shut down on me.

I will try to be quick about this because I know you're all dying
to know what I thought about the debate.
Kerry was stronger than I expected him to be, and he almost came off as
sincere to me, which is somewhat worrying. I know that Kerry's been
everywhere on his Iraq position: but does the average
independent/undecided know this? I have no idea. They might, given all
the advertising, but if they don't, well, I can understand that they
might have found his performance impressive and very presidential,
which is exactly what they wanted. All Kerry had to do to lose this
debate was act like he has on the campaign trail. He didn't, however.
While he slipped his big toe into the wonk pool, he never jumped in
whole-hog, like Al Gore. Someone in Democrat City is learning the
lessons of the past. I don't know who it is, but whomever beat Kerry
into submission deserves a bottle of Jack Daniels, a hotel room and
some willing young campaign workers. They had a hard task: to keep him
from imploding and they managed to achieve it. Bush, while he seemed a
little peevish when Kerry was speaking, did what he needed to do: he
stayed on message and did his deal. That's all he needed to do. But
it's the "soft bigotry of low expectations" all over again, to my mind.
And this is strictly a gut feeling, but I got the feeling in 2000 that
Bush's advisors were sitting in the background, keeping their fingers
crossed, whispering, "Don't screw it up. Don't screw it up." I got the
same impression again tonight. All he needed to do was not
screw up. I wanted him to really go after Kerry. I think he could have
done more to hammer home his points. But he chose the safe route and
simply stayed on message. I think it was an effective means of debating
Kerry, but not a wildly successful one.
What's going to come out in the wash? Well, I don't think Kerry's going
to benefit tremendously from his performance. This is going to be
another non-bounce event for him. He might pull one or two polling
points, but nothing that will shoot him beyond the margin of error in
most polls. Neither is Bush going to pull away, but will stay steady
instead. He was impressive in his consistency, but I don't think it's
going to help him to make his lead into a dominating one.
So, in essence, it's a draw. Not the most original conclusion to be
drawing, given every pundit on TV seems to be saying the same damn
thing, but that's my conclusion. Others, however, disagree. Steve-o's calling it for Dubya.

Well... ...not really. Although he

Well...

...not
really. Although he took a good whack at the gin.
After hosting the in-laws and the G'parent-in-laws on Friday night, the
husband and I took Saturday off and spent Sunday preparing ourselves
for seldom sober's arrival
at the Cake Eater Pad. Which meant that I washed the spare set of
sheets and the towels. No arduous labor was involved. Thank God. He
arrived around six-thirty and we spent the rest of the night finishing
off the leftover mashed potatoes from Friday night and drinking, of
course. I had a great time. I know the husband did, as well, because he
and Rich got to speak geek. Turns out, they're both members of the
phylla geekus extraordinarius,
so they got on well. I think they even threw some super-secret geek
gang signs at each other when they thought I wasn't looking but I could
have just been drunk at the time and was seeing things.

Anyhoo, it was nice to finally meet another blogger, and Rich, the couch is yours whenever you want it.

{published on 9/8/04 even though I wrote it on the seventh. Grrr with the Blogger!}

You know, I don't mean

You know, I don't mean to criticize, but girls, it might behoove you to bring shotguns to a shotgun wedding.
Better chance of it actually happening that way, ya dig?

Ok, so it's still in

Ok, so it's still in progress and I'm sitting here, trying to push
Kerry into the background, but I have a few observations:
Bush is doing well. But for the love of God, there really are times
when I wish he was a better extemperaneous speaker. The "uh's" and
"um's" drive me battier than a English Granny with ninety-seven cats.
Kerry, while highly wonkish, isn't doing too bad. However, I don't
think his "tough" stance is going to bring anyone around, simply for
the reason he's jumped around too much on Iraq. There's too much
evidence to the contrary. Who's to say he's not going to change his
mind---again---next week. That and he reminds me of a schoolboy with
his earnest notetaking, like he's trying to win by being conscientious.
For more liveblogging, go to Llamabutchers. Steve-o's blogging it live via dial-up. Go and throw him a bone or two. Vodkapundit was going to do the same, but when I tried to visit, his server was down. He's back up and running. Go visit.

UPDATE: Bush just said "moolah" instead of "mullah" and "nuklar"
in one sentence. Sheesh. Texas accent or no, it's just makes me cringe.
UPDATE II: Is it just me or did Kerry just flip-flop on Iraq...again?

UPDATE III: Nuclear proliferation is your greatest priority? Huh?

And he just invoked the Ghost of Kennedy.

Christ.

UPDATE IV: Imagined Laura Bush whisperings to Teresa Heinz Kerry: You do know you're not supposed to wear white after Labor Day, don't you? Darling, it's just not done. Reaaallly.

The husband and I packed

The husband and I packed a picnic lunch and then meandered over to Lake
Harriet this afternoon.
Not an unusual activity for us, you'll note if you're a regular reader,
but today's activities at the lake were unusual. A
local businessman decided the bandshell looked like crap, so he rounded
up businesses to donate time, money and supplies toward painting the
bandshell and the surrounding buildings. Today is re-dedication
day. Since it was sunny and eighty-five degrees, and they were having
loads of live music, we decided it would be a fun thing to do to get us
out of the house.
We were right and it was well-worth venturing out of the land of air
conditioning and wi-fi internet connections. While it was warm outside,
we managed to snag a good spot in the shade (and one that was
immediately jumped upon when we vacated)and enjoyed the nice, constant
breeze that was blowing off the lake. And thank goodness for that
breeze, too. People would have been dropping like flies from the
heatstroke otherwise. Since we were packing up the backpack with all
sorts of necessities, the husband threw in the digital camera and I got
the opportunity to act as (as the husband phrased it) "Kathy the Cake
Eater: Cub Reporter."
If today wasn't a nice day where you are, we'll share and you can take
vicarious pleasure in our wanderings. As always, if you truly think
bigger is better, click to enlarge.

The Bandshell From Our Vantage Point

They Even Chipped Out For A New Flag

Some fool thinks he's actually going to get something good out of the Strib's Op-Ex Section.

The Ice Cream Palace (aka The husband's favorite place at the lake)

A List O' Contributors

Kevin Bowe (tan shirt) and a few of the Okemah Prophets.

The bandshell from the lake side. I almost fell into the lake taking this photo.

The event rated a video wall! We've hit the big time, baby!

"What
the hell do you think you're doing?" sez the husband. We had a good
time but we left before Mick Sterling, The Minnesota Orchestra, The
Honeydogs and one of my personal favorites, Boogie Wonderland, started
up. It should be a fun night over at the lake, and if you live in the
Cities, I would highly recommend making the time to go over. It's gotta
be better than sitting around your house reading worthless blogs.

Funny.

Funny.

...or does Shep Smith need

...or does Shep Smith need to cut back on the botox injections?

Crikeys. Does this guy look like he's a regular customer at McNamara/Troy or what?

Lines, Shep. Lines! An anchorman is supposed to have lines. It's some sort of subjective measure as to how experienced
you are. You, however, have no freakin' lines. Ya' need some lines,
dude. I find myself watching your broadcast, looking for a sign of a
random forehead line. Waiting for some sort of expression on your face.
But the botox has you all froze up, eh?
Cut back. Pleaaaaseee?

Start here... then go here...

Start here...

then go here...

and here, and here, and then, for shits and giggles, go here
and give your best guess as to when Dan Rather will retire.
I hope Dan Rather retires. He's an idiot. And not just because he's a
crappy reporter, although that can't be too overplayed, but because of
another, personal observation. In 1993, the husband and I were students
at Iowa State when the 500 year flood came through Ames. Des Moines,
about thirty-five miles south, was hit much harder. Their idiotically
placed waterworks were flooded and, suddenly, there was no potable
water in a city of a quarter-million people. The husband's family was
living in Des Moines and we found ourselves making regular runs from
Ames to provide them with bottled water as there was none to be found
in Des Moines. The city was caught with its pants down, in other words.
On one trip down there, the husband and I decided to go and help
sandbag to get the waterworks back online. This wasn't too far from his
parents' house and we had to park at a local college and then cross a
bridge to get to where the sandbagging was going on. All of the
national anchors and their various satellite trucks were set up on this
bridge. First we passed Tom Brokaw, who was dressed in a denim shirt
and jeans and was chatting amiably with a local. Then we passed Peter
Jennings, dressed identically to Brokaw, who was on one of those huge
cellular phones that were common during that era, shouting into it,
trying to suss something out with people who were elsewhere. Then we
passed Dan Rather. Who was chatting with someone and who was wearing hip waders.

Even though he was nowhere near the water.

Even though he never went anywhere near the water.

The husband and I were closer to the water whilst sandbagging than Dan Rather ever was. He was wearing hip waders.
We were wearing t-shirts, shorts and tennis shoes. And we were
sandbagging on a hot, sunny Iowa summer's day. He must have been hotter
than hell, yet he never took the freakin' things off. When we left a
few hours later, he was still wearing them. Let's just say that he was
the running joke of the sandbag circle.

This is what happens when

This
is what happens when the English Department figures out what that neat
little feather icon under the "Start" button stands for.
Heh.
You know, Jeff Goldstein always reminds me of a deranged, mad
scientist, working in secret in his basement, laughing maniacally as he
adjusts the flames under his bubbling, steaming beakers. One can only
imagine what Jeff's like in real life. It's
probably a letdown. He probably just sits in front of the computer in
between changings and feedings, with Fox News running in the
background.

Dan Rather is still full

Dan Rather is still full of shit.

I just took these

I just took these photos. That's the sidewalk in front of the Cake
Eater Pad. The nice, conservative Lutheran church across the street
loans out their drive-through entrance to student groups from Southwest
High School for fundraising car washes. We have to endure this at least
once a week during nice weather. The kids scream and holler to get
people to stop.
They also, as you can see, use sex to bring drivers into their car
wash. Now, before you say, "Hey, Kathy, lighten up. It's just kids in swimsuits. It's no big deal."
Look at the photos again. I realize they're not the best shots, but
notice where their car wash signs are placed. Notice that the young
lady in the black and red ensemble has her straps pulled off her
shoulders. Then imagine what that would look like to the
drivers on the street.
Are you getting the picture yet?
Where are these kids parents? Where are the faculty advisors? Do they
not realize that, in essence, these kids are prostituting themselves to
bring in donations? The church pastor is more interested in being
"involved in the community" than he is worrying about what sort of
reputation these kids are bringing down onto his church. He's not going
to do anything about it. He's told me as much when I've complained
about the noise these buggers make. What's really scary is that not one
of these adults seems to be worried about what could possibly happen
when teenagers---who have little or no common sense to begin with---get
out there, shake their thing, and a sexual predator drives by. And then
stops. And then makes contact. Yep. It's a pedophile's wet dream right
outside my door, and it's one that no one apparently seems to be
worried about.

Sheesh. Vandalism of Bush campaign

Sheesh.

Vandalism of Bush campaign signs in the front yard of Bob James' London Road home escalated over the weekend to new levels of malice. A green swastika was spray-painted onto James' sidewalk. The words "Nazi" and "Liar" were painted over Bush-Cheney campaign signs and two of his vehicles were damaged. The signs had been vandalized before, but this time the language was uglier. In addition, the back window of an SUV was broken and the door of a pickup truck was dented, apparently with a chunk of asphalt, James said.

Lawn signs have gained a touchy reputation of late here in the People's Republic---at least here in the Twin Cities. If you would have asked me yesterday about other places in the state, I wouldn't have said there was an issue like that of the Cities. Apparently, I was wrong. There wasn't a problem in the 2000 election---until Bush "stole" the election. Then lawn signs became fair play for vandals. Then Wellstone died right before the election in 2002. People here kept his lawn signs up and decorated them with black cloth, as a sign of mourning. I thought this was relatively classy until it was February of 2003 and there was no indication that any of these people were planning on taking them down. My ex-hippie neighbor was one of these people. And she had more than a few Wellstone signs trashed. I know because I found them in my lawn, of course. Then came the signs that called for the liberation of Iraq. These reportedly weren't too popular, but suprisingly they were all over the place. Of course, however, there were the signs that called for "Support our Soldiers: Keep Them Out of Iraq," to counterprotest the liberation signs. Then some bright soul decided to put out lawn signs and bumperstickers in Wellstone green that declared, "He's Dead. Get Over It." That's when the shit hit the fan. I haven't seen any Bush/Cheney signs in Cake Eater Land as of yet. I've seen lots of "W '04" bumper stickers, but no signs. I have, however, seen plenty of Kerry/Edwards propaganda. I've been wondering if I should get a big Bush/Cheney sign for the yard---you know, just to see how long it takes before someone vandalizes it. We live on a busy street. There's plenty of traffic and more than a few walkers who pass by on a daily basis. It's not a matter of if if would happen, it's a matter of when. I don't know, however, if I want to deal with people who spray paint swastikas on the sidewalk and who vandalize cars as a means of showing their "dissent."

Robbo o' El Llamabutchers has

Robbo o' El Llamabutchers has decided to come over to the Dark Side.

We shall eagerly be awaiting the results of his experiment.

Heheheheheh.

{Gawd. I've been dying to post that all damn day long! Effin' Blogger.}

In case you didn't know

In case you didn't know there's a Big. Ass. Hurricane. pounding Florida right now.

The Pious Agnostic is live blogging the event. He hasn't posted in about an hour and I'm beginning to get worried. He might have just lost power, but, sheesh...who knows, eh?

Stay safe, Rob!

{crosses fingers, toes and throws

{crosses fingers, toes and throws in a hail mary for shits and giggles}

{Not safe for Mom} With

{Not safe for Mom}

With a little wocka-wocka-chicka action as a payoff.

Election night might actually be fun!

(h/t the ec)

This really isn't all that

This really isn't all that interesting, but I figured I'd share. You know, because I'm a giving person.

Anyway. Ahem.

I just figured out that the Scott Stanzel I knew vaguely in college is indeed the press secretary for the Bush-Cheney Campaign.
I've been hearing his name for months, but there was never any video or
a picture shown that could tell me if it was him or not. Being too lazy
to Google, I waited it out, and I finally saw him on Fox this
afternoon, and yep, it's him. Hmmph.
To explain: his older sister was in my sorority and we knew him through
her. We called him "Little Stanzel," and talked about how adorably
earnest he was. I think I was even on a VEISHEA committee
with him. Or something like that. I vaguely remember talking with him
about something VEISHEA related. It's been a long time. I can barely
remember, which is fine because I'm sure he doesn't remember me. Upon
reviewing this post, I've determined its so boring I cannot even be
bothered to come up with a decent self-defamtory punchline. Hmmph.
UPDATE: 09/01/2004 Just realized that if we still lived in Des Moines, I
would have seen this as my connection to greatness. Now, well... I
don't really care all that much. I mean, people, come on. If I couldn't
be bothered to Google to see if someone I knew once upon a time is the
mouthpiece for the Bush-Cheney campaign, well, that speaks volumes as
to how much I really don't care about the election nowadays.
Is this one of those dreaded signs of maturity? Naaaaaah. It's a sign
of boredom.

Clippy Is All-Knowing, isn't he?

Clippy Is All-Knowing, isn't he?

Shamelessly pilfered from Jay Reding

Well,this explains a great deal

Well,this explains a great deal of the incessant chatter from parents about their children, doesn't it?

Researchers at the Kinsey Institute began their study in 1999 by giving 200 married couples who were planning on starting families within the next four years Intelligence Quotient (IQ) tests. By 2003, all but 27 of these couples had conceived. Another IQ test was given to each set of parents successful in conceiving and birthing a baby six months after their child was born. These results were compared to the previous intelligence tests. In every single one of the 173 cases, both parents scored at least twelve points lower on the second IQ test, with the majority of parents losing twenty or more IQ points. Dr. Hosung Lee, director of the study, was not surprised with the findings. “The research proved that our hypothesis was correct. Having children does retard one’s brain activity, and since both parents lost intelligence, we must assume that this loss has a psychological rather than biological cause.”

I'll be interested to see when their IQ goes back up again.

UPDATE: Direct quote from my sister, Christi, regarding this study.

how about this for a hypothesis? when you become a parent, you have no room in your brain for really important things since you have to suddenly remember all there is to know about emergency first aid care and where the diaper rash ointment is and how to get the seatbelts in this *&!!@#@! car seat to work right! that's my theory and I'm sticking to it.

DAMN! Nothing quite like nipple

DAMN!
Nothing quite like nipple piercing first thing in the morning, eh?

Eugene Armstrong, one of two

Eugene Armstrong, one of two Americans and a Briton who were kidnapped last week in Iraq, has been beheaded and his body has been recovered.

Rusty at mypetjawa has
the relevant information and has a link to the video should you choose
to watch it for reasons other than you're a perverted fuck who gets
their jollies from watching beheading videos. I watched it. Tears are
pouring down my cheeks. I'm literally shaking with fury and disgust,
and not a little bit of fear. Oh, my God. Poor, poor man. Folks, if you
watch the video, you will know who your enemy is. Your enemy is not
George W. Bush. Your enemy is not Tony Blair. Your enemy is not even
the French. Your enemies are radical islamic terrorists who think
beheading someone is the best way to get what they want. Your enemies
are radical islamic terrorists who---ahem---WOULDN'T THINK TWICE ABOUT DOING THE SAME THING TO YOU SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU'RE A WESTERNER.
And that's not a bit of hyperbole I've thrown out there to enliven my
writing, or to make you pay attention. It's the awful truth of the
situation. It would be Al-Zarqawi's wet dream to come to America and
start doing this to each and every citizen of this country. And if
you're not clear about that, or you think it's Bush who should be
decapitated and that you'd pay good money to see that, you have your
priorities in the wrong place. No amount of understanding them and their "plight" is going to change the plain and simple fact that they want to kill you. Do you think they bother to understand us?
You don't think Zarqawi orgasmed himself ten-fold when his henchmen
brought in two Americans and a Briton? This is a man who stood, hooded,
behind a shaking and weeping Eugene Armstrong and calmly read a
manifesto for six minutes. He eagerly handed the piece of paper he'd
been reading from, salaamed and then whipped a knife from its scabbard
and went after poor, bound and blindfolded Eugene Armstrong for no other reason than that he was an American.

Think about that for a minute, would you? Eugene Armstrong deserves as much.

These men do not give quarter. They do not want to understand you. They do not want more diversity of belief and thought in the world. They want everyone in the world to be like them. To believe what they believe and they will stop at nothing
to get what they want. There is no chance to "make peace" with these
people. If you learned nothing on 9/11 perhaps you should learn this:
these people don't want a truce. They will never want a truce. They
want war. They've been taught to revel in death, that there is much
glory to be found in a previously ignominious life if they kill
infidels. And guess what, my western friend, you are their enemy. Learn
that. It might keep you alive one day. Oh, that poor, poor man. My
thoughts and prayers go out to Eugene's family.

One of the best parts

One of the best parts about my new wi-fi card is that I'm no longer
limited in the amount of bandwidth I am allowed to suck up. It's great.
I can now go here and watch all the trailers I want without being
forced to sit through endless hiccups. I can even watch the "large"
version and not have it crash! Fabulous! So, watching trailers is my
new favorite past-time. Love it. Today, I saw one for this film and it set me to wondering. (You can view it here)

If Miramax, this documentary's distributor, spent oodles of time and money promoting Fahrenheit 911, well then are they going to do the same thing for---ahem---a movie that gets it right?

I'm not holding my breath, either.

...of the Montana Supreme Court

...of the Montana Supreme Court for defending the privacy rights of puking underage drinkers!

Ah, don't you just love case law?

There is something seriously therapeutic

There is something seriously therapeutic about digging in the garden.

Even despite the fact it's nintey-degrees outside.

Even despite the fact that I think I threw my back out splitting the monster hostas.

...what would I ask Wonkette?

...what would I ask Wonkette?

Oh, this is too damn good to pass up, so I'll provide a few.

1. Is there a perceived difference between paid bloggers and bloggers who don't receive money for their opinions? If so, whose opinions do you think carry more weight in the blogosphere?

2. Have you ever experienced blogger backlash, wherein you were piled upon for your opinions? Have you taken it, er, up your whoopsidaisy in terms of decreased traffic and linking for one particular item you wrote?

3. You were quite fascinated a few months ago with the size of, er, one of the presidential candidates', er, uhm, equipment. Did this bring in lasting readership? Or was it pretty much a quickie in terms of traffic increases?

I could go on.

{Insert Godlike Voice Here} As

{Insert Godlike Voice Here}

As it was commanded, so it shall be done. And it was done. And, thanks to pshop filters, it was done artfully.

Oh, excellent. Someone opened the

Oh, excellent. Someone opened the door for me!

Last night I was watching What Not To Wear (the American version, not the British version) as I was falling asleep. What the two brigthly-smiling, heavily unpleasant, bitchy fashion advisors do is publically humiliate a woman when introducing themselves, send her to their NY studio, make her bring all her clothes to the studio so they can throw away all the clothes while making (yet more!) humiliating snide comments. The 2 advisors then give her a debit card with $5,000 so she can shop in Manhattan for a wardobe of elegant flattering clothes. Last night's victim was a woman that just finished her PhD in psychology who would be working as a psychology professor (isn't she a little young for that, I wonder?) in Canada. They sent her out to shop in nice SoHo boutiques where the average price of a pair of slacks is $300. They insisted she wear high heels to work. They told her she shouldn't wear bulky sweaters. They admired her long legs and told her she should wear short skirts. Seems to me the advisors have been inhaling the heady fumes of the fashionista for too long.{...}

Amen!

I loathe the American version of What Not To Wear.
Stacy and Clinton are snots. There's really no way of getting around
it. And they're snotty snots to boot. Well, it's more Stacy, but
Clinton never contradicts her, so he's complicit in the snottiness.
They give off a "we can do no wrong, but you obviously have, so we're
going to show you!" attitude and it's not only condescending as hell,
but is just really, really annoying. Then when its all said and done,
they pat themselves on the back as much as they possibly can. It's "we
saved her/him from themselves! Aren't we great?"
Nope.
The problem here is that I've watched the UK version more times than I
can count, and it's so
much better. The overall premise is the same. Friends and loved ones
nominate someone for a fashion overhaul. The hosts show up and announce
that said overhaulee has been nominated for a makeover, but that they
have to show up with their entire wardrobe, agree to let the girls go
through it, they will pitch what doesn't work, and show the overhaulee
what would work. Off goes the overhaulee to shop with these
guidelines in mind. So, it's essentially the same show, only the
American version has different hosts and an extra half-hour to waste.
But once you compare and contrast the two shows you quickly realize the
American version doesn't hold a candle to the UK version. Why?
The hosts. Trinny and Susannah
host the UK version. Now, I will cop to being surprised by them. The
promos I watched showed these two English chicks handing out completely
reasonable advice whilst being somewhat snarky about it. Their tag line
was (and still is) "Your best friends won't tell you what not to wear. But we're not your best friends. And we will."
I think you can probably understand that with the seriously posh
English accents they sport, this comes off sounding a bit snotty.
What's surprising, though, is while they are a bit snarky, they also
have a good deal of tact once the hard part has passed. It's tough
love, British style. They act very much like a pair of British grannies
who wonder what's become of the girl they know and love because she's
dressing in a completely unflattering fashion. They honestly want to
see the person look great, and if that takes a bit of honesty, well, so
be it. But what's different is that they temper that honesty with
kindness and understanding, boosting the overhaulee up, gently showing
them the way, once the flaws are revealed. For them, more than half the
battle is getting their subjects to like the body they've got, working
around imperfections with sensible and flattering choices in clothes.
Once they've leaped that hurdle, well, it's all downhill. Furthermore, they're always right. I have yet to see one of their subjects look ridiculous at the end of it. They always look great.

Stacy and Clinton, however, don't give you the impression that they care at all. Oh, sure they say
they do, but it doesn't come through. It's all about fashion! What is
somewhat different with the American version is that they have little
"confessionals" in the subject's hotel room after a hard day of
shopping. And invariably, they always say something like "oh, my God, I
didn't realize how horrible I looked! God, I've got to change because I
just look like shit." This always leads me to believe that the subjects
don't believe the advice they've been given, but rather are succumbing
to peer pressure. And, of course, they US version never seems to
recommend reasonably priced items. They always send these people out to
shop at the priciest places available and that five grand they hand out
doesn't go a long ways in New York. Particularly when you're replacing
an entire wardrobe.
I was watching the American version not too long ago, and I wound up
feeling really sorry for the subject when the show was over. She was a
graphic designer in her early-thirties. She worked from her home and
was fond of big sweaters and jeans that she thought were comfortable,
if not the latest and greatest from The Gap. She'd just been chosen as
one of the fifty most eligible bachleorettes in Chicago, and as such,
her family and friends thought she should look the part. This poor girl
was just mortified that her family and friends had set her up for this.
And I mean mortified. She couldn't believe people thought she'd dressed
poorly. She took care of herself. In every "before" photo they showed
of her, she was completely made up, with full hair and makeup, and
she had her nails professionally done, which as any woman can tell you
is a wonderful thing, but is also a major pain in the ass to keep up
with. When you go down the road of the manicure, you learn quickly that
it's a trip you'll be taking weekly. They just don't last longer than
that. And it's a good hour (plus travel time) out of your schedule to
keep your hands looking pretty. Because that's essentially what
manicures are about: keeping your hands looking pretty. They are not so
much the professionally coated nails everyone thinks they're about. If
weekly manicures aren't a sign that someone cares about their
appearance, I don't know what is. Well, off she goes to New York for
the consult and Stacy and Clinton were just mean. Between them and the
subject they were literally fighting over what went in the garbage can.
The next day, of course, the subject rebelled when she went shopping.
At first she tried to stick to the rules, but she couldn't find
anything in her size at the trendy boutique they'd sent her to (she was
bigger than a size zero. go figure. most of us are.) and became
seriously frustrated and said the hell with it and went and bought
things she liked. That night she felt pretty good about herself and her
choices. The next day, however, she was intercepted by Stacy and
Clinton and they berated her for her choices. "God. What is this?
It's awful! Do you really want to be suck in 1989?. That night, sure
enough, in her hotel room, completely broken-down, she decided it was
easier to drink the kool-aid than put up a fight any longer. Once she
drank the kool-aid, she was fine and was pliable for the hair and
make-up changes, and on the whole, was happy with the overall result.
When she went home and showed herself off it was apparent that she
wasn't the same person: she'd joined the fashionista cult. Resistance,
it very much seemed, was futile. She spent hours on her hair and
makeup. Her clothes, while spiffy for New York, didn't fit in at all in
Chicago and she looked somewhat ridiculous. But she was oblivious: she
was fabulous now and that's all that mattered, yet I couldn't help but
wonder how long the changes would stick once the cameras were gone.
With Trinny and Susannah, you get the feeling they've shown their
subjects a whole new side of themselves and that the changes will
stick. With Clinton and Stacy, well, the subjects have been shamed into
changing their ways and may rebel once the cameras are gone.
Ultimately, it's the difference between persuasion and coercion, and
how one is much more effective than the other. Stacy and Clinton
coerce. Trinny and Susannah persuade. I know who I'd rather have tell
me I dress like a slob. And it's not Stacy and Clinton. It's more than
likely, I'd wind up bitchslapping that snotty little brunette. UPDATE: 09/01/2004 Fausta makes a good point in the comments section
about overhaulee selection. I would have to agree with her about how
the UK version generally chooses people who are a bit stronger. Yet,
strangely enough, they all wind up coming over to the Good Side of the
Force in the end. Hmmmmm. Could it be persuasion, rather than making someone feel bad about themselves?

I'm very happy to announce

I'm very happy to announce that Miss Apropos aka Emma aka Margi Lowry has recently decided to come back to blogging! Yay. I have re-added her to the blogroll.

I've also added some other tasty comestibles to said blogroll. Check 'em out when you get the chance.

What Some Might See When

What Some Might See When They Watch The Weather Channel. (click for supah-size)

...Roy Horn's living in looney

...Roy Horn's living in looney land.

Speaking to German broadcaster RTL, German-born Roy Horn said the tiger, called "Montecore," was trying to stop him from falling over on stage after he suffered a dizzy spell. "It was an accident. Montecore understood the signals and wanted to save me," the illusionist-animal trainer said, adding: "It was unfortunate that his teeth hit my carotid artery."

{my emphasis}

It was unfortunate
that a friggin' tiger's teeth happened to connect with his cartoid
artery. The tiger's really friendly, really. He was just trying to save Roy rather than to use him as an appetizer. Uh-huh. {insert nodding of head here}

Well, that sucks. Winter just

Well, that sucks.

Winter just got longer.

So, I'm having a few

So, I'm having a few dilemmas with this whole thing.
Shall I list them out?
Sure, we've got time to kill. Why the hell not?
Okeydokeysmoky.
1. As predicted, the husband, indeed, is thrilled. Which is making me
somewhat uncomfortable. Now, I shouldn't be uncomfortable with this. I
know. It's my husband. He's seen them before. It's just that he's so proud
that I would be doing this that I'm afraid his pride will cause him to
lose all sense of perspective and, subsequently, he will share the link
with all his gaming geek friends, pointing out exactly which set of
anonymous boobs are his wife's. {SHUDDER!} 2. Mr.H. had a good laugh
the other night about this whole thing. I assume he was mocking me. 3.
I have yet to suss out how I'm going to, erm, showcase my wares. And there will be showcasing.
This ain't gonna be some bare bones flea market, or a stand on the
street. This will be, instead, Neiman-Marcus. I just haven't a clue as
to how to achieve that ambitious goal. 4. The temptation to buy this t-shirt
for the showcasing is overwhelming. (Yes, kids. The thought that's
running through your mind is correct. Sigh.) And to use it in this
endeavor is even more tempting. Because it would be funny, particularly
given the message printed across said t-shirt. Let's face it, most
women in the blogosphere really dig Jeff's
brain. Yet, to use that particular t-shirt goes a little bit too far
toward crossing that internet stalker line we all try so hard to avoid
when it comes to Jeff. Then there's the question of favoritism. Rich gave me a "Blogs Across America" t-shirt when he visited. I don't think he'd appreciate it if I chose Goldstein over him.

On the whole, this might be more of a pain than I'd anticipated.

UPDATE: 09/01/2004 The temptation passed. This is a good thing.

UPDATE 2: Well, I'll be damned. Phoenix finally commented!

Courtesy of The Llamabutchers, changes

Courtesy of The Llamabutchers, changes are underway in London's public transport department:

LONDON, England (Reuters) -- Lumbering through the narrow streets of London, the capital's red double-decker buses are as much part of the cityscape as Big Ben and Buckingham Palace. But 50 years after their debut, the much-loved Routemaster buses, with their conductors, hop-on, hop-off platforms and pull-cord bells, are being removed from the streets, condemned as expensive antiques. These are the classics of the double-decker genre -- not the first, nor the latest, but by far the most popular among passengers. Yet by the end of 2005, the buses, most of which have travelled continents with the amount of miles they have racked up, will disappear from the city's streets {...}Created in 1947 to replace World War Two-era trolleybuses, the snub-nosed, light-bodied Routemasters were hailed as revolutionary in meeting the challenges of negotiating London's crowded, winding streets. Between 1956 and 1968, a total of 2,760 Routemasters were put into service, with expectations they would last no more than 17 years. Five decades later, about 300 are still on the road. Twice as many were in service last year, before the city began its campaign of forced retirement. "They've been fabulous, but this is the 21st century, and the city needs a 21st century transportation system," said Graham Goodwin, a spokesman for Transport for London (TfL), the agency in charge of the city's bus system. Goodwin said the Routemaster was being scrapped because of its 10 to 15 percent higher operational costs and lack of accessibility to disabled passengers. As a replacement, the city has commissioned a greater number of bigger, boxy double deckers with wheelchair access and, more notably, a fleet of so-called "bendy buses" - single-deck articulated buses that can carry up to 140 passengers. Neither model has been without its well-publicised problems. The bendy buses were temporarily banned earlier this year after four caught fire in a four-month period. And one newspaper described travel on the newer generation of double deckers with their bright fluorescent lights and grey-flecked interiors as having as much charm as sitting at the bottom of a swimming pool. More irritating to harried commuters is the length of time it takes to load passengers past the driver, who must check all fares, unlike Routemasters where conductors speed the process along.

Man, it's been a disappointing Thursday. First Miss Apropos. Now the double-decker buses.

Sigh.

London traffic is going to be even more of a nightmare than it already is.

Ergh.

I'll stick with the tube, thank you ever so very much.

A Rare 1961 IBM 72

A Rare 1961 IBM 72 Selectric. Great For Forging Documents!

This auction is for a vintage IBM Selectric 72 typewriter. This is one of the early Selectrics produced in the early 1960s, a Model 7X. Now you can create those forged documents right the very first time. We will ship at no charge for Buy It Now buyers. Yes, this is the one CBS should have used to forge there documents. So to give your forged documents that original look use the original equipment. All you need is some old typing paper to give your forged documents that unique original professional look!

What's even better is that the auction is only at $199 as of right now. Muy Cheapo.
I mean, come on. If CBS can afford to pay that blowhard Rather's
salary, not to mention what they're going to have to outlay on the
slander suit Bush will stick on them, this is a bargain at twice the
price. It seems like a small price to pay to---ahem---get it right.

(h/t Enlightened Cynic}

As I'm waiting for my

As I'm waiting for my sincerely ancient oven to get to temperature,
I'll give y'all the recipe for the Red Velvet Cake that I've made and
am waiting to bake. If you're from the northeast, I'm told the regional designation for this deeesert
is "Waldorf Cake." Same diff.
Ya ready? Okedokey, then. Here we go.
For the cake:
2 1/2 Cups sifted cake flour (and that's CAKE FLOUR, not ALL-PURPOSE)
2 teaspoons cocoa powder
1 teaspoon baking powder
1 teaspoon baking soda
1 teaspoon salt
1 1/2 cups sugar
1/2 cup (1 stick) unsalted butter, softened
2 large eggs
1 cup buttermilk
2 ounces red food coloring
1 teaspoon distilled white vinegar
1 teaspoon vanilla
Preheat the over to 350 degrees F. Grease and flour two (9-inch) cake
pans. In a medium bowl sift together flour, cocoa, baking soda, baking
powder, and salt; set aside. In a large bowl, cream together sugar and
butter. Beat in eggs one at a time. Alternately add flour mixture and
buttermilk. Beat in food coloring, vinegar, then add the vanilla.
Spread batter eveninly into the pans. Bake 20 to 30 minutes, or until a
wooden toothpick inserted into the center comes out clean. Turn out
onto a rack to cool.
TIPS FROM THE BABE O' BAKING: 1.Yes, you must sift the flour
and you MUST use CAKE flour. I'm repeating myself, but all-purpose just
doesn't work here. Trust me on this one. Chip out two and a quarter for
the box of Softasilk. You'll thank me. 2. Have I mentioned that you
need to sift the dry ingredients? It's an absolute must-do sort of
thing. It's a pain I know, but you'll thank me when your cake batter
doesn't turn out to be full of lumps. 3. You don't need 2 ounces of
food coloring. One small, separately-sold, bottle of food coloring will
turn your cake a nice reddish color.
4. I add vanilla like a drunken sailor drinks a bottle of
whisky---liberally and messily. I don't think you can have too much
vanilla---ever
5. If you're like me and you've been spoiled by cake mixes that produce
moist results, you'll want to add about 2 tablespoons of vegetable oil
to the batter when all is said and done. Disregard if you like dry
cake. Ok, now you're ready for the frosting, right?
You will need:
1 (8 oz.) package of cream cheese, softened
1/2 cup (1 stick) butter, softened
2 cups confectioners (powdered) sugar
1 teaspoon of vanilla
In a large bowl cream the cream cheese and butter. Beat in
confectioner's sugar until fluffy, then add vanilla. Use frosting to
fill and ice cake. Pretty tasty, on the whole.

Apparently, the only good things

Apparently, the only good things to come out of last summer's European heat wave are some seriously brilliant Bordeauxs.
If collecting wine is your idea of a good time, you should know that
the futures for the 2003 Bordeauxs haven't gone through the roof yet,
despite the fact they've gotten great reviews. While I still don't
understand how wine futures work, it appears the market is a bit
glutted at present and there are some great buys to be had. Or so the
article says. Go forth and buy a case of Margaux and respond to my
kindness by sending me a bottle, eh? I'll have a red wine hangover
after only a glass (the tannins in red wine don't agree with me) but
I'll offer up my suffering for all the poor souls in purgatory. And
then, maybe, they'll do something nice for you in return. Like let put
in a good word for your heathen ass with the Big Guy. It could happen.

Excellent commentary from a Mr.

Excellent commentary from a Mr. X.
A resident of the Upper West Side, he's a little fed up with
intolerance of his political views from people who would claim to be
the most tolerant of all.

You know me. If you don't, you've seen me...eating dinner
in a midtown restaurant or walking up Broadway on a Saturday morning or
sitting at the playground in the park as my child climbs the monkey
bars. I take the subway to work every morning like thousands of other
New Yorkers. I shop at Fairway and Zabar's. Maybe you've even been
sweating on the next treadmill at the gym. I look like a hundred other
guys around my age. I dress like them, too. And if you saw me, you
would never guess my secret.
I am not gay. That is certainly no reason to hide. I am not a person of
color. That prejudice should have been erased from our national
consciousness decades ago. I don't carry any disease microbes that I am
aware of. I don't even smoke.
But the information that I will now transmit has caused people to shout
at me, brought dinner parties to an abrupt end on less then polite
terms. It has even ended long friendships.
Here it is. I will just say it. I am a Republican.
It's not just that I am a Republican - it's more that I am a Republican
who lives on the Upper West Side of Manhattan. It's the life-style and
location I have chosen for myself that doesn't seem to fit the
political viewpoints I believe.

Go read the whole thing. I find Mr. X to be extremely brave. He does
what I wouldn't do---he keeps talking to who ld different political
views from him. If the subject of politics is raised when I attend a
party here, I either keep quiet, leave, or find a way to change the
subject. I know from past experience that here in the Twin
Cities---especially since 2000---that I'm a. in the minority and that
b. a lot of people will react viscerally to what they perceive as my
"stupidity" for being a conservative. In other words, just like Mr. X,
I've been shouted down because someone got upset by something the
husband or I have said. It's just not worth it. Is it hard to hold my
tongue? You bet your sweet bippy it is. Particularly when you want to
do nothing else than shut the person down. What I find to be the most
insulting, however, is the shocked condescension I receive from people
when they find out that I'm a conservative for the first time. Their
eyes go wide. Their jaws drop and the inference I draw during and after
the dramatics is that they're so shocked and dismayed that someone they thought was so intelligent could possibly be so stupid
simultaneously. From some of the reactions I've received in the past,
you would have thought they would have been more tolerant if I'd
announced that, instead of being a Republican, I was a crack whore.
That would be a better alternative for them. But I'm polite. I don't
discuss politics and I keep my mouth shut when the topic is raised.
There's no chance for an honest discussion of the topics, so I
generally don't bother. Itstill grates on the nerves though. Case in
point: there is a man in Mr. H's work life that we run into on a
regular basis whenever we go for coffee in Mr. H's neighborhood. Mr. H.
has his own issues with this particular gentleman because he generally
makes Mr. H.'s life a living nightmare with his sloppy work habits.
But, he's further up the food chain than Mr. H. so I'm nice to him,
even though, in the past, he's made political comments along the lines
of Bush=Hitler, and "thank God for the New York Times.
They're the only ones who are doing any honest reporting," that have
made it very hard to hold my tongue. But I do it for Mr. H. I know he
does it for me as well, so turnabout is fair play, but man do I ever
have a hard time. But yet this guy thinks I'm a liberal because I never
say anything. It's like living as a spy at times. Some people don't
know where my true allegiance lies, nor do they bother to ask, because
they're so busy assuming that if I'm a reasonable individual, I'm a
democrat. I can only imagine what he would think if I "came out." I'd
probably get an earful. So, I feel for Mr. X. I've walked more than a
mile in his shoes. I can understand about wanting to defend your
position. Yet there is a point where you just have to be quiet. It's
not worth the angst in the meantime. It's really not. There are other
things to talk about other than politics.

The Crack Young Staff at

The Crack Young Staff at The Hatemonger's Quarterly has recently shown their incredible good taste and has added The Cake Eater Chronicles to their blogroll.

Apparently, they recognize good stuff when they see it.

Which leads one to ask, "Why did they add you to their blogroll, Kathy? You don't have any good stuff."
True. Very True. But being one to take it where she can get it, I will
choose to look the other way regarding their egregious error, thank
them, and ask you to share the love and go and visit them. Really. Go. They're funny.

...Steve has decided to waste

...Steve has decided to waste his precious time fisking Michael Moore
again.
Go read.

When you're done, I'll start taking bets on the time, date and place Moore's gonads will come out of hiding.

Winner takes all.

Cake Eater Etiquette Lesson #1:

Cake Eater Etiquette Lesson #1:

When someone proffers an invitation it is considered good form for the recipient to reply to said invitation.

Even if you don't want to attend because you just got a shipment of DVD's from Amazon/would rather have fiery toothpicks shoved under your fingernails than associate with the other guests/can't because of previous social commitments.

It's simply good manners.

That is all.

And, no, for once I'm not going to elaborate on what prompted this post.

One of my sisters lives

One of my sisters lives near to Dan Rather's vacation home.

I wonder if I should send her over with a twelve-pack of charmin and instructions to tee-pee the hell out of the place.

You know, just for the fun of it.

Just got an email from

Just got an email from seldom sober. Apparently, he'd just received a Google Click Through for this.
And apparently it's all my fault. Tee hee! Why someone would choose to
pair "Jane Austen" and "Aunt Jemima" is beyond me. Yet, I'll take my
amusement wherever I can get it. I'm thinking about declaring a new
motto: The Cake Eater Chronicles: Confusing Even The Most Efficient of Search Engines Since 2003.

Catchy, no?

This goes a little above

This goes a little above and beyond, "take two aspirin and call me in the morning", doesn't it?

Yet another sign that some would like for America, again, to be a dry country.

must edit manuscript must edit

must edit manuscript
must edit manuscript
must edit manuscript
must call mom and dad and see if they drove to florida today,
hurricanes notwithstanding
must edit manuscript
must call sister and talk about her children
must figure out what to have for dinner in time to defrost needed meat
must edit manuscript
must edit manuscript
must paint toenails
must take nap as am sleepy from lunch
must edit manuscript
Question for the Day: Is it really bad to want a real life refugee
situation to clear itself up so I don't have to hack away at the
manuscript like a Colombian coke producer hacks his way through the
jungle to get to his coca factories? Yeah. I thought so too. Sigh. I
hate editing. I hate revision. Grrr. It sucks.

Bad news. Which, of course,

Bad news. Which, of course, was compounded by this*.

Sigh.

Now, I may read comics, but I'm no aficianado. Well, that's not right. I am an aficianado, but not as much as the husband is. He loves comics and he's really embraced a lot of web comics, such as PVP and Penny Arcade.
These comics are directed at him---a member of that insane gaming
community---and he digs them. While I get the occasional chuckle out of
Penny Arcade, generally it's above my head as I have not been
surgically connected to an X-Box/Playstation 2/Ninetendo/Whatever new
gaming console has come out and I have no idea about. I, on the other
hand, have a stack of Calvin and Hobbes and Bloom County
books. So, I'm somewhat of an aficianado. But not really of the
web-based-comic variety. Noting that Jantze was backing out because of
syndication hassles, the husband made a comment that Scott Kurtz of PVP
and Gabe and Tycho of Penny Arcade had all been at Comic Con earlier
this summer and had some unflattering things to say about Jantze, with
whom they'd participated in a panel about---wait for it---syndication. Well, the husband was wrong.

Partly.

Gabe and Tycho,
being the uber-cool dudes that they are, did have some unflattering
things to say about Jantze, because it appears, to me at least, that
since they reject the arguments for syndication outright they couldn't
be bothered to listen to an opposing point of view. Kurtz, however, had some really interesting things to say about syndication and laid out his plan for funny pages world domination,
and in the meantime wasn't a jerk to Jantze, but instead respected his
opinion while disagreeing with it.
Ultimately, what it comes down to is the bigger battle the internet has
brought to the forefront---the battle over rights and creative control.
It came as somewhat of a shock that cartoonists have as many rights
regarding the copyrights of their work as does Britney Spears, but it
shouldn't have. I don't know why I thought it would be different, but
it's not. And, much like those of us who would rather not choke down
Britney Spears's music with our morning coffee, this is yet another way
content is being dumbed down for the masses. The syndicates publish
those comics they want to publish, and while the situation is akin to
that of the recording industry, the syndicates are in the position of
really being screwed over sometime in the near future when papers
decide not to pay for the privelege of publishing funny pages any
longer. The paradigm is shifting. Kurtz is positioning himself well for
the shift. Whether Jantze will do the same is anyone's guess. One can
only hope that Jantze will realize that he's got a huge opportunity
right now with web-only syndication, his bribery-cum-pledge-drive
notwithstanding. *Good luck, Chris! Keeping the fingers and toes
crossed for you and your family that all turns out well.

On both Tuesday and yesterday

On both Tuesday and yesterday the Llamabutchers
linked a couple of posts of mine. And guess what? My traffic went
through the roof.
Now, I've been linked by the Llamas before. Many times, in fact.
They've been exceedingly good to me. But I've never had anything like
the surge of traffic I've experienced the past couple of days. I would
hereby like to get some more linkage by coining the phrase
"Llamalanche" to describe this interesting phenomenon. Providing no one
else has come up with this. I'm not bothering to Google, so if I'm not
the first, well, I'll take credit where credit is not due.
See kids, I can link whore with the best of them. If I choose to. Most of the time I'm just too freakin' lazy to bother.

While not as potent as the Vodkalanche I experienced earlier this summer, the Llamalanche was almost up there, in terms of traffic, with the weekend Instalanche
I received. And the Vodkalanche was skewed because Martini Boy linked
to me and didn't post for another two or three days. Not like I put too
much credence in either: traffic increased temporarily and then weasled
its way back down to normal levels, with a few people sticking around
for what appears was the hell of it. We'll see if the Llamalanche has
staying power, unlike the Instalanche and the Vodkalanche. I've been
observing their success levels since they moved over to MT, and it
seems as if the move off Blogspot has done wonders for their
reputation. Which, of course, appears to destroy what I thought (read hoped)
was an urban myth: that unless you're paying for a domain and
bandwidth, no one will take you seriously. Now, how you could take guys
like Steve and Rob seriously, I don't know, but hey, the proof's in the
stats, baby, and apparently they're a force unto, er, themselves.
Anyway, shoving the snarkiness aside for a brief moment, congrats for
all the success, guys. You deserve it. And I get credit for the phrase
"Llamalanche." Damnit.
UPDATE: 09/01/2004 I've got CREDIT! Hot damn!

UPDATE II: Damn.

I have to admit, I'm

I have to admit, I'm really enjoying these fox hunting ban protests.
Now, I honestly couldn't care less about fox hunting. While I respect
the traditional aspects of it, it's not likely something I'll ever do.
Because a. horses scare the crap out of me, hence I'll probably never
go riding and b. because I don't get my jollies by hunting. My friend,
M., who lives in rural England has gone on a few, but that's more
because she's a horse nut, rather than she gets a kick out of hunting
foxes. I get the distinct feeling that this whole deal is more about
objecting to whatever landed gentry is left in this day and age
galloping about the countryside on horses, rather than the abject
cruelty of killing foxes. The foxes seem to be a convenient cover for
banning behavior that only the wealthy can afford to partake in. But
that's neither here nor there. What I do find interesting, and more
than a bit amusing, is how the ban is being protested. Here you have
wealthy, rural, Englishmen and women---with a capital, bold-printed E---who
have something to protest. And by what means do they do it? Well,
they've followed the lead of all those nasty
globalization/meatismurder/
i'myoungandhavenothingbettertodowithmytimethanwhineabout
alltheinjusticeintheworldbesidesigetlaidalotbecausetheseprotestchicksareeasy
protestors. They've coopted the ways of the people who want to bring
them down. It's as if the Romans suddenly adopted the ways of the Huns
and scored a few victories as a result. The irony of it all is
particularly delicious.

A few weeks ago the

A few weeks ago the husband appropriated this CD and I have to tell you, damn, I just really like George Thorogood.

As my sister pointed out when she listened to a copy we'd burned for her: "You just can't go wrong with George Thorogood."

And she's right.

I'm generally loath to pick out a certain type of music and declare it to be my favorite. I like all
types of music. I'm an MTV kid: during my formative years I was exposed
to a lot of different music and I see no reason why I should have to
choose a certain genre to be my favorite!. That said, I really
do have a soft-spot for bluesy rock and roll, and George Thorogood fits
into this category quite nicely. Besides, how can you not like a guy who plays songs like One Bourbon, One Scotch, and One Beer, Move It On Over and Reelin' and Rockin'.
His music is fun. It's not overindulgent, whiny crap. George refuses to
take himself too seriously and that's a welcome relief. There are times
when you just want to be reminded of what rock and roll used to be
about, and George takes you to that place.

It's not suicide. It's blackberry

It's not suicide. It's blackberry picking!

It's Wednesday, so there must

It's Wednesday, so there must be a story or two about SILLY GERMANS!

Here's one.

What will they think of next?

The mind boggles.

I wish I had something

I wish I had something more interesting to report about last night's
dinner, but I don't.
Nothing untoward happened. Grandpa toed the line. He made one crack
about all the "slant eyes"---His words, not mine. Don't direct your
politically correct ramblings at me---at the hotel, but that was as far
as he came toward dipping his toes in the Rude Rubicon. He never
crossed over, nor did he even get his calves wet.
Hmmph. All that angst for nothing. The husband was more than relieved,
but added that it "could have easily gone the other way," hinting that
it was just as well that our fight over serving jelly with the bread
was ultimately decided in his favor. (And, it should be said that he
snuck the jelly out onto the table while I wasn't looking...so he won
by sneaky means.)
Dinner was nice. I have a boatload of mashed potatoes leftover, but
I'll just pass them off on seldom sober when he arrives tomorrow.

Note to self: MUST GO TO LIQUOR STORE TODAY!

(clickie for biggie) While

(clickie for biggie)

While I would rather it was Rather who would commit seppuku, the sentiment is apt.

(click on image for

(click on image for supah-size)

Amen!

See also: Michele

{tip off: enlightened cynic}

Dan Rather: "After extensive additional

Dan Rather:

"After extensive additional interviews, I no longer have the confidence in these documents that would allow us to continue vouching for them journalistically," the network's top news anchor, Dan Rather, said in a statement. "I find we have been misled on the key question of how our source for the documents came into possession of these papers."

What Dan really means:

I'm a partisan hack and I got called on it.

So what?

I was misled. There's someone else to blame. It ain't my fault. I'm still slicker than shit through a goose. This won't stick and I'll still have my job a the end of the day.

Neener, neener, neener.

It's sad that this has

It's sad that this has turned into a pissing contest between the Florida judiciary and the state legislature.

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. - The Florida Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a law that was rushed through the Legislature last fall to keep a severely brain-damaged woman hooked up to a feeding tube against her husband's wishes. The unanimous court said the law that kept Terri Schiavo alive violated the separation of powers between the judicial branch and the legislative and executive branches. Lower courts had ruled that Michael Schiavo could have the tube removed, but the Legislature passed the law to overrule the courts. Gov. Jeb Bush then used the law to order the tube reinserted. The court's decision came just weeks after oral arguments. It was not immediately known if the ruling would clear the way for the tube's final removal. An attorney for Terri Schiavo's parents, who want her kept alive, would not speculate. Michael Schiavo's attorneys did not immediately return calls seeking comment. "It is without question an invasion of the authority of the judicial branch for the Legislature to pass a law that allows the executive branch to interfere with the final judicial determination in a case," Chief Justice Barbara Pariente wrote for the court. "That is precisely what occurred here."

{my emphasis} That's just sad. Granted it was an emergency measure, and it shouldn't have held up under scrutiny, but it's really quite sad that Terri Schiavo, it now appears, has wound up on the wrong end of a pissing contest. If there was ever a case where a fresh judicial review was required simply as to the merits of the case, this is the one. Is that what happened? Nope. It was all about whether the legislative overstepped its bounds by giving the executive the power to do something to trump the judiciary. This woman's husband seeks to gain financially from her death. (On the timeline, check out the malpractice awards that he can't gain access to unless she's dead). It's apparent, to me at least, her "wish to die" wasn't invoked until after the malpractice cases were successful. This guy wants to remarry and has two children with his girlfriend. He wants to move on. Her parents are more than willing to take over her care, and if this guy was a reasonable individual you'd think he agree to that. He'd be free to do as he wished. But, no. He claims she wanted to die if something like this ever befell her and he's just honoring her wishes. I'm not buying it. And it's very, very sad. If nothing else, this is a good time to remind everyone to get your wishes put down in writing. It's a scary thing to think about. I know. Been there, done that with the husband. It's horrifying to be handed a raft of paperwork that demands you list out all the juicy legal information about who has power of attorney, if there's a living will, what are the stated wishes of the patient? And all sorts of other things, like hospice care if its deemed necessary, because you never thought you'd have to think about it until much, much later in life. And all of this is occurring while your spouse is under the knife for an operation the surgeon has taken delicate pains to inform you might not work out. It's even scarier if you don't have any paperwork to back up what you know to be the true wishes of your loved one. Fortunately, all worked out in the husband's case, but we all know not every case has a happy ending. What would you do in such a situation? No one wants to face their own mortality, but think of the favor you'll be doing your loved ones if you a. find out what's required in the state you reside in and b. do something about it.

Martha wants to get her

Martha wants to get her jail time over and done with.

NEW YORK - Martha Stewart (news - web sites) said Wednesday she has decided to surrender for prison as soon as possible, citing the need to "put this nightmare behind me and get on with my life." The millionaire businesswoman was sentenced in July to five months in prison and five months of house arrest after she was convicted of lying about a stock sale. The 63-year-old Stewart will do five months in a federal prison — likely getting out early next year — followed by five months of house arrest. A federal judge allowed her to stay out of prison while she pursued an appeal, but Stewart asked to serve her time anyway. She said she wanted to get the matter behind her and her company, Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia Inc. "I must reclaim my good life," she said. {...}Stewart, who had promised immediately after her conviction to battle to prove her innocence. had recently appeared resigned to swapping her expansive suburban home for a jail cell. After her July sentencing, Stewart said she would have no problem doing the time. "I could do it," she said in an interview with ABC. "I'm a really good camper. ... There are many, many good people who have gone to prison. Look at Nelson Mandela."

Um, Martha. You traded stock on insider information. You're going to spend five months in the pokey, with another five months of ankle bracelet treatment. Nelson Mandela spent almost thirty years in prison, breaking rocks on Robben Island as a victim of political repression.

Not exactly the same thing, is it? Hmmmm?

Nelson didn't belong in prison. You, on the other hand, do belong in prison.

Think about that before you go declaring yourself to be a "good person."

Oh, My. That Certainly Doesn't

Oh,
My. That Certainly Doesn't Look Good.
This is the pier at Destin, FL. Which is about ten miles and one
causeway from where my folks stay in Ft. Walton. I have to say, it's
impressive, because this is not an area that's known for massive
quantities of surf. It's pretty calm most of the time. Which makes this
all the more amazing because---ahem---the hurricane hasn't hit yet.
This is just a workup.
Keep all the folks down there in your thoughts and prayers. This is
going to be ugly.
And here's a little memo to my cousin if he happens to be reading: if
you haven't evacuated yet, GET THE HELL OUT OF DODGE!

...because you just might get

...because you just might get it.

I wonder how the people

I wonder how the people in Australia will feel about this one?

JAKARTA (Reuters) - A Bali bomber serving a life term for his role in the nightclub blasts that killed 202 people was treated by police to an outing at an up-market shopping mall in the Indonesian capital, police admitted Thursday. Ali Imron was spotted Wednesday sipping coffee at a Starbucks in the central Plaza Indonesia mall, where security has been tightened after a wave of bombings targeting Western interests in recent years. He was accompanied by Brigadier-General Gorris Mere, who is involved in the Bali investigations, and a number of armed guards, who quickly escorted Imron to a waiting car and drove away after being spotted by reporters. Police were initially unable to confirm Imron's outing, but Thursday morning, after reports appeared in newspapers, the national police spokesman said the excursion was part of an effort to investigate terror cases. "As long as it's for the investigation, anything can be done. About the location, it is merely technical. If the examiner or investigator thinks it is necessary then it would be allowed. No problem," said Inspector-General Paiman. Other police officials said Imron had been brought to Jakarta in connection with another case. Paiman declined to say how long Imron would remain in the capital. Imron was sentenced to life in jail last September for his role in the 2002 nightclub blasts. The majority of those killed were foreign tourists.

So, let's see if I've got this one straight. The police in Indonesia take a convicted Islamofascist bomber out to coffee at Starbucks in an effort to play nice. The guy apparently wanted a good cup of coffee. The authorities agreed and took him to a Starbucks, which happens to be located right in the middle of a mall that would have made an excellent target for the group of nutjobs this man associated with.

"They're just gathering information, Kathy. It's no big deal," you say.

Well, in reply, I would request that you ask yourself this question: How well would it fly here
if, say, Mohammed Atta had survived 9/11 and the police took him to a
Starbucks in Midtown Manhattan in an effort to get information out of
him? Pushing aside the quest for a decent cup of joe for a moment, keep
in mind that there are any number of tall buildings in Midtown that
Al-Qaeda is just itching to take down. Also keep in mind that we
wouldn't know if prison life had cut Atta off from Al-Qaeda. Sure it's
more than likely that he'd be in solitary, but do you really want to
take the chance? If you're law enforcement, do you really want to take
a known bomber to a place where they could gather information for
potential further attacks? Is it really worth it? If that scenario
doesn't set your alarm bells ringing, you just don't get it.

Man, Sullivan has got to

Man, Sullivan has got to get out of his defeatist slump.

My own angle: Churchill never failed to remind the Brits that they were up against it, and he was always candid about failure - because he knew that falsely-optimistic spin only weakened morale in the long term. He also made sure to include opposition leaders in his cabinet, made amends with his union foes, and did everything to keep the country united as it faced a war for survival. Bush has managed to divide this country in wartime (with help, of course, from the Michael-Moore-Terry-McAuliffe left).

Ugh. Bush is a lot more like Churchill than Andrew would care to realize. Bush has stuck to his guns, this much is obvious. The real difference between the two situations is not so much that Churchill "listened" to his critics, (which I take issue with, because it was pretty obvious that war was run the way Churchill wanted it run and to hell with all who thought differently) but that his message was delivered and covered in a fair way. Bush has had no such opportunity handed to him. The media of WWII and today's media are highly different creatures. Same species, different subspecies. I don't think even Churchill could get a fair shake from today's media. While, of course, you have to take into account that the media during WWII was highly censored, it's obvious Churchill didn't always get favorable mentions. That much is true. But he also wasn't up for election during wartime. Nor did he have to deal with a media who was oblivious to the real situation on the ground because they didn't bother to do the work, and aired loads of speculation in place of honest reporting. This is the situation that we are dealing with right now. Our media isn't censored, yet in some ways they're censoring themselves, because of their personal political biases and what they believe their "mission" to be. They refuse to get out of the Sunni Triangle and report what is successful in Iraq as much as they report what isn't, and as such, Bush can't get a fair shake. Think about Dunkirk for a moment. If all the Brit media had reported was "quagmire!quagmire!quagmire!shameofretreat!shameofretreat!" instead of tempering their concerns with reports of the average Joe boatowner who sailed over to Dunkirk to evacuate the soldiers, then Churchill would have found himself in much the same situation as Bush finds himself in nowadays. We don't know what's happening in Iraq inasmuch as today's media fails to temper the bad with the good. We don't have the whole story. Neither does the media think they need to give it to us. Which is of particular concern when our enemies use the media as masterfully as is possible in such a situation. Andrew may point to Lord Haw-Haw as an example of enemy media usage during WWII. I believe that to be a faulty analogy: most people knew Lord Haw-Haw was full of it and treated him as such. Today, however, when we get a communique from Al-Zarqawi, we get people and elected officials wondering about what we can do to appease the terrorists, why we deserve such treatment, Bush-Halliburton-no-blood-for-oil, etc. People buy the terrorists' line of reasoning and cry out for a stop to the barbarism, while simultaneously thinking that dissenting from their government's point of view isn't going to do any harm to the overall cause of defeating the terrorists. Then the media latches onto their views and portrays them as mainstream. The difference between now and then is a lack of clear understanding about the situation, what is helpful and what is harmful. The average Brit who lived during WWII knew exactly what they were up against, particularly because their leaders made sure they knew. They were also having to run to the neighborhood Tube station at night because they were being bombed. The situation was right in front of them and they could divine its meaning for themselves. They would have been idiotic to think otherwise. We have to rely on the media for the story. It's not right in front of us. Yet, knowing all of this, Sully claims Bush is dividing the country with his failure to admit his mistakes, which he claims is something that Churchill would never do. I don't think so. When has President Bush ever failed to let us know what we were up against? Or how much work would be involved taking these people down? He hasn't. He's following in Churchill's footsteps and hasn't deviated once inch in this respect. The difference is that Churchill was given a fair shake by a media, who while heavily censored, was at least on the same page as the government and helped Churchill to publicize his message. The media of our time isn't on the same page. Our media believes that they must criticize as much as possible, that this is what their job is, and to do anything else would mean that they're in cahoots with the government, and that they simply can't have. Where would their credibility be then? How could people trust them? Churchill was at least able to talk to his people; Bush hasn't had the same opportunity. This isn't a failure of leadership on Bush's part. He's doing the same things as Churchill. The media just isn't covering it. It's obvious in that when Bush does get the opportunity to speak directly to the people without the media's insertion of the white noise of speculation and criticism, well, people listen and agree. To this already unfair situation, we can add the election, which piles on the criticism. Dissent is thick, is what the media reports, and to hear Kerry tell it, well, there isn't really a War on Terrorism, there should be, however, a lecture on the effectiveness of jurisprudence and a return to the days when we prosecuted terrorists after they murdered innocents. His current line (and I say that knowing full well the minute this strategy doesn't flesh out in the polling data, he'll change his mind) is that, knowing what he knows now, he wouldn't have gone into Iraq. Well, great. Let's just throw the benefit of instant hindsight on every decision ever made and we'll really be getting somewhere. Sullivan believes Bush needs to admit that he's made mistakes in the War on Terror and in Iraq to make himself more credible; to make himself more like Churchill. He's been hammering home on this point for quite some time. Well, Churchill could probably have gotten away with that sort of thing; Bush can't. He'll be crucified if he does so, and as a result our enemies will have gained ground and a big reason for said gains would be the way the media would cover such an event. It would be momentous, 24/7 coverage until the election. Like it or not, the media is as potent a weapon in this war as a tank. Hence, it must be used skillfully to propagate gains. While I find this idea to be abhorrent, that the media shouldn't be used in such a way, this is the situation we find ourselves in. The difference between Bush's situation and Churchill's is that Churchill wouldn't likely find himself on the receiving end of the tank's gun. Bush is staring it down and has been for quite some time. Bush's "failure" to admit mistakes is not what is dividing the country. It's the media's failure to report fairly and honestly about the faults and successes that is dividing the country. We don't know what the whole story is in Iraq. We cannot make any reasonable judgments as to Bush's performance because the media has not reported it. We hear one thing from the soldiers on the ground when they're able to talk about it; we hear "quagmire!" from the media. Who's right? I don't know because I don't have all of the information available and no one is giving it to me. Hence I cannot make the decision to throw a president out of office based on his "poor performance" in Iraq.

I have things to do

I have things to do today. Meaning I have no time for you people.

In an effort to keep you busy, here's some reading for you.

Go read this interview with Bat Ye'Or about the future of Eurabia.

If the phrase Eurabia doesn't set your bells to ringin', well...go and read. (h/t Fausta)
Secondly, the Crack Young Staff at the Hatemonger's Quarterly has
carefully dissected Alec Baldwins' political ideology. You can find
their conclusions here.

That should keep you occupied while I get the ironing done.

Blowhard Extraordinaire James Wolcott now

Blowhard Extraordinaire James Wolcott now is writing a blog.

Yeesh.

Although, I do like Sekimori's site design.

The invasion of the in-laws

The invasion of the in-laws is underway. The father-in-law showed up
promptly at ten-thirty this morning. The pungent aroma of relief is
still wafting through the Cake Eater Apartment, even though he and the
husband have bugged out to go and have some lunch.
When he called yesterday afternoon to inform us of their second
arrival, he sounded exhausted. To explain, the father-in-law is not a
loud man. When he speaks, he uses moderated tones and gets his point
across clearly and quickly. If he's not speaking, something he does
quite frequently, well, you wonder why he's holding his tongue, because
there's clearly a reason for it. But yesterday, it was as if someone
had taken a stick to him and he'd just surrendered to the beating
because there was no use in fighting it anymore. He was practically
whispering on the phone, like he was sneaking away to make the call.
This morning, however, he's a new man. He's chipper. Spunky. Smiling.
Couldn't chatter enough.
You know, it's kind of nice being someone's safe haven.

...why I cancelled my subscription

...why I cancelled my subscription to the Star Tribune.
Here's a clue.

I show my face in public. I have been a reporter longer than most bloggers have been alive, which makes me, at 54, ready for the ash heap. But here's what really makes bloggers mad: I know stuff. I covered Minneapolis City Hall, back when Republicans controlled the City Council. I have reported from almost every county in the state, I have covered murders, floods, tornadoes, World Series and six governors. In other words, I didn't just blog this stuff up at midnight. And as for being a political stooge, unlike the bloggies, I don't give money to politicians, I don't put campaign signs on my lawn, I don't attend political events as anything other than a reporter, I don't drink with pols and I have an ear trained to detect baloney. Do bloggers have the credentials of real journalists? No. Bloggers are hobby hacks, the Internet version of the sad loners who used to listen to police radios in their bachelor apartments and think they were involved in the world. Bloggers don't know about anything that happened before they sat down to share their every thought with the moon. Like graffiti artists, they tag the public square -- without editors, correction policies or community standards. And so their tripe is often as vicious as it is vacuous.

To be vicious and vacuous about it: Nick Coleman is an asshat.

I am so friggin' sick and tired of the Strib, their writers and their Holier Than Thou attitude. It never occurs to them that they're
the reason people have turned to blogs. Coleman obviously doesn't
realize it, so why should the rest of the people who work at the paper?
I mean, they couldn't be wrong could they? Heaven defend us!

Lileks, as usual, has put it down better than I have. Go read him.

UPDATE: See also Martini Boy

Yep. I tried to pick

Yep.

I tried to pick out an excerpt of this fantastic op-ed by Victor David Hanson, but it was all soooo
good that I couldn't pick. I would have wound up reproducing the whole
thing, so... ...get along little doggie and go read it. The whole
thing. It's required and there will be a quiz on it later.

Hmmmm. I find myself agreeing

Hmmmm.

I find myself agreeing with Bridget. Not that either of us have a chance of having a hurricane named after us any time in the near future,
but it would still be a perverse sort of fun if Shep Smith would talk
about Hurricane Kathy wreaking havoc on the eastern seaboard. That
said, it's kind of funny to see the names of all the friends and family
members that are on the list. Michael is up for 2006. That moniker covers the husband, Mr. H. and one of my brothers. Three for one! My cousin and his wife are both
on the list for next year---and they're right next to each other, too.
That'll keep everything Even Steven in their relationship. Chris,
while not my sister's name, is still what my mother calls her and is as
close as she's ever likely to come to having a hurricane named after
her. Christi, is just too rare a spelling for such a
circumstance to ever come to pass. Our friend Andrea will probably be
celebrating her graduation from Stanford Law School just as a force of
nature is named after her, which is rather appropriate as she is
a force of nature. My nephew Nicholas will have one named after him in
2009, which will undoubtedly please him to no end. But nowhere on this
list is Kathy/Kathleen. I'm saddened, but I will survive. Hopefully my
name will make the cut next time around.

The husband just burnt three

The husband just burnt three incense sticks and walked them through the
apartment, as if he were trying to keep the Ghost of Bruce Lee out. He
says it was to fend off the impending negativity that Grandpa will
bring with him.
The father-in-law and the husband have both gone to great lengths to
prepare me for the fact that Grandpa will probably complain up and down
the river while he's at dinner. Apparently, he's been more cantankerous
than usual throughout this entire trip. And being the good men that
they both are, father and son wanted to prepare me for the trouble that
might arise at dinner tonight. The husband gave me this anecdote to try
and explain the situation while we were at the grocery store this
morning.

See the new bakery case over there? Grandpa would love it.
Everything looks great. But then he'd see the prices on the stuff in
the bakery case and rather than just keeping his discontent to himself,
he would make it everyone's problem. And he'd be loud about it. And he
wouldn't let up.

Given the fact that these men, who only rarely overstate problems, have
both gone to pains to warn me, leads me to believe that Armageddon will
be arriving at the Cake Eater Apartment in six hours or so. I'm already
planning on ingesting copious amounts of booze. This might be a bad
idea, but I'm at a loss for anything better. Will update when it's all
said and done with. But any prayers you might be willing to offer up
for us would be greatly appreciated in the meanwhile.

GOODY GOODY GUMDROPS!

GOODY GOODY GUMDROPS!

I have a one word

I have a one word comment prepared for this story.

waaaaaaaah.

The week after next, the

The
week after next, the Cake Eater Parents take off for their annual trip
to Florida. They take a month-long lease on a condo in Ft. Walton Beach
every October. Despite this being a family-related destination, the
parentals mainly dig the green waters and white sand of the Emerald
Coast. It's a gorgeous place. October in Ft. Walton has the benefit of
being rid of all the pesky summer vacationers as it's technically
off-season whilst still being warm enough to enjoy the beach in a
summer-like fashion. Anyway, the parentals enjoy it and I really don't
want Ivan to spoil their only vacation!
The beach there is only just coming back from Opal, which hit Ft.
Walton squarely in 1995. I can only imagine what sort of wrack and ruin
Ivan would unleash on the coast and how it would spoil their vacation.
If you can find some time today, and it's not too much trouble, could
you all join me in a moment of begging the Fates to send that damn
storm elsewhere? Or for it to dissipate entirely. Or to even downgrade
to a tropical storm. A tropical depression would be even better. My mother and
father would thank you for your kind consideration. In the meantime,
we'll be holding our breaths. And if it all turns out to be naught due
to our joined begging, my mother will probably thank you with a nifty
gift comprised of some of the shells she collected from the beach due
to the storm.

Isn't this nice? Money quotes:

Isn't this nice?

Money quotes:

"A village council has ordered
an Indian woman pregnant with her second husband's child to return to
her first husband, released from a Pakistani jail five years after
being written off as a deserter or dead."
"After being tracked in a prison in Pakistan and returning to his
village near Delhi this month, Arif appealed to Islamic scholars to reclaim his wife, Guriya, local papers reported."

{my emphasis}

You'd think they were referring to a stereo or a TV. Some random piece of property.
Some sort of inanimate object these people are bickering over, where
the resolution of said property is decided by an impartial judge. This
would make sense with verbs like "reclaim" and "ordered" being used.
Instead it's a living, breathing, and very pregnant woman they're
chatting about. Nice.
/sarcasm

Click for the convenient jumbo-size

Click for the convenient jumbo-size

Courtesy of the husband, who

Courtesy of the husband, who sent this to me via email this morning.

How To Clean Your Toilet - The Fun Way 1. Put both lids of the toilet up and add 1/8 cup of pet shampoo to the water in the bowl. 2. Pick up the cat and soothe him while you carry him towards the bathroom. 3. In one smooth movement, put the cat in the toilet and close both lids. You may need to stand on the lid. 4. The cat will self agitate and make ample suds. Never mind the noises that come from the toilet, the cat is actually enjoying this. 5. Flush the toilet three or four times. This provides a "power-wash" and rinse". 6. Have someone open the front door of your home. Be sure that there are no people between the bathroom and the front door. 7. Stand behind the toilet as far as you can, and quickly lift both lids. 8. The cat will rocket out of the toilet, streak through the bathroom, and run outside where he will dry himself off. 9. Both the commode and the cat will be sparkling clean. Sincerely, The Dog

Heheheheh. The husband hates cats. And just so you don't think he's being unfair to felines everywhere, you should know the hatred is mutual. Every single one of the hair-licking beasts has a contract out on his life and tries to kill him with their damn dander every time he comes within five feet of one. He's muy allergic, in other words.

The church across the street

The church across the street is in the process of having their roof
repaired. It's one of those flat jobs, hence tar is involved. Loads of
hot, stinky tar are being slathered on the church's roof as I write
this. You know, to make sure it doesn't leak
when the snow starts flying and subsequently piles up. Of course, the
smell this hot tar creates is wafting across the street and in through
the windows of the Cake Eater apartment on what would otherwise be a
delightfully mellow Indian Summer breeze were it not for this smell.
Gag. Which leads to the question of the day: would it be really bad of
me to turn on the AC even though it's only seventy degrees outside?

This sounds like something out

This sounds like something out of Jack Ryan's CIA days.

Hmmmmmmm.

and we are living in

and we are living in a material world, and I am a material girl...but all I really want is world peace!

So, it's looking like some

So, it's looking like some of the money from the UN's Oil for Food scam might have found its way into Al-Qaeda's pockets.

{...}Now, buried in some of the United Nation's own confidential documents, clues can be seen that underscore the possibility of just such a Saddam-Al Qaeda link — clues leading to a locked door in this Swiss lakeside resort. Next to that door, a festive sign spells out in gold letters under a green flag that this is the office of MIGA, the Malaysian Swiss Gulf and African Chamber. Registered here 20 years ago as a society to promote business between the Gulf States and Asia, Europe and Africa, MIGA is a company that the United Nations and the U.S. government says has served as a hub of Al Qaeda finance: A terrorist chamber of commerce. {...}As is typical of terrorist financial webs, the details surrounding MIGA quickly become bewildering — part of the point being to camouflage the illicit flow of funds with legitimate business. Part of the problem in finding the truth is that cross-border transactions out of such financial havens as Switzerland are smothered in banking secrecy. But even with that secrecy — and shortly after the Sept.11, 2001, attacks on the United States — both MIGA and its chief founder and longtime president, Ahmed Idris Nasreddin, landed on the U.N. watchlist of entities and individuals belonging to, or affiliated with Al Qaeda. Nasreddin is a member of the terror-linked Muslim Brotherhood Nasreddin's longtime business partner, Egyptian-born Youssef Nada, also of the Muslim Brotherhood, likewise appears on the U.N.'s Al Qaeda watchlist, as do a slew of both Nasreddin's and Nada's enterprises. Former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill in August 2002 described Nada and Nasreddin as "supporters of terrorism" involved in "an extensive financial network providing support to Al Qaeda and other terrorist-related organizations." Far less attention has been paid to the small, select band of MIGA's other charter members. But one of them, Iraqi-born Ahmed Totonji, set up shop years ago just outside Washington, D.C., and is now among those named by U.S. federal authorities in an investigation into a cluster of companies and Islamic non-profits based in Herndon, Virginia, suspected of having funneled money to terrorist groups. MIGA had other founders as well. One of them, who does not appear on the U.N. terror list, is an Arab businessman now in his early 60s, Abdul Rahman Hayel Saeed. Described by an acquaintance as urbane, polite and fluent in English, Hayel Saeed was born into one of Yemen's most prominent business clans, owners of a family-held global conglomerate based in the Yemeni capital of Taiz and named for its founding patriarch: the Hayel Saeed Anam Group of Companies, or HSA. From Yemen, the HSA group boasts a far-flung business empire, including a Yemen-based Islamic bank, and a host of business subsidiaries, affiliates and regional trading offices in places ranging from the United Kingdom to Egypt, Morocco, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Russia and China. Abdul Rahman Hayel Saeed sits on the HSA board of directors, and ranks high in the management — he is currently running HSA's regional office in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. In MIGA, Hayel Saeed holds a prominent spot, as one of four co-founders who back in 1984 delegated power of attorney to the terrorist-linked Nasreddin, giving him authority to run the company. Swiss registry documents show that Hayel Saeed has never resigned from MIGA, nor revoked that power of attorney. Queried about this link to MIGA, neither Hayel Saeed nor the HSA Group's chairman of the board, Ali Mohamed Saeed, has made any response. {...}One of the big questions is whether any of the money skimmed from Oil-for-Food also slopped into terrorist-financing ventures such as MIGA. It's important to note that in tracking terrorist financing, the simplest starting points are the visible links, the potential connections through which money might most easily have flowed. Proving that funds actually coursed through those conduits is far more difficult. In the case of Hayel Saeed, MIGA and the HSA Group, there is no public information available about the precise flow of funds, and no proof that Saddam's money made its way to MIGA. But in looking for patterns that beg for further investigation — especially by authorities with access to detailed U.N. records and information on MIGA accounts — some items here stand out. Most simply, there is the question of why HSA was among those companies favored by Saddam for such a fat slice of business. It is increasingly clear that Saddam did not, on average, choose his contractors either at random, or because they were the most cost-efficient suppliers of relief for the people of Iraq. While some of the deals may have been entirely legitimate, many melded payments for humanitarian goods with illicit kickbacks and payoffs. In such cases, it was a lucrative privilege to be tapped as an Oil-for-Food contractor by Saddam's regime. The lingering question, for any individual case, becomes: Was there a quid pro quo?{...}

Go read the whole thing.
So, while not definitive in any way, shape or form, there are enough
red flags sticking out of this whole mess to set a bull on a rampage.
I'm not going to go a' speculating, but if this does indeed flesh
out...well, that would be remarkable. The whole "Bush lied about WMD"
excuse will go the way of the dodo rather quickly. Its irrelevancy will
be outed and the link between the War on Terror and Iraq will have been
firmly established. Fox will be showing this report in its extended
format on Breaking Point tomorrow night at 9pm EDT.

...as Michael Moore's being delusional

...as Michael Moore's being delusional again.

Fortunately, Steve-o el Llamabutcher , in the spirit of The Wonder Twins, has magically transformed himself into a gigantic dose of Prozac (Moore is rather, er, large, after all. A big dosage is called for.) and is fighting the delusions quite nicely.

A commenter here and at

A commenter here and at other blogs has decided to take the Great Leap Forward and start up her own. I know she'll be more successful with her Great Leap than Mao was with his. Go and visit Kitty at Traces of Time and spread the love.

I've also been remiss in not pointing you in the direction of Effortless Atrocities,
which is written by a character who goes by the name of Prufrock and
who has some very interesting insights. He/she is also a friend of
seldom sober (at least the blogroll seems to indicate as much) who I
think has to be the biggest blogging enabler I've met yet. Both blogs
are well worth your time, so point your mousie and click away.

I'm bummed. Emma at Miss

I'm bummed.

Emma at Miss Apropos has
decided to close up shop. Email has been exchanged and suffice it to
say she has her reasons---and they're good ones---so I won't harrass
her too much for choosing not to share her talents any longer. Ah well.
Such is life. However, since she's no longer around, I've removed her
link from my puny blogroll. It feels odd to have done this: she was one
of the first people who added me onto her blogroll, and whatever
limited success I have in blogging is partially due to her. Since I
choose not to be a link whore, when I get added onto a blogroll, it's
generally a big deal here in Cake Eater Land. I whoop and holler and
praise God that I'm not out in the ether anymore. But even more so, it
means someone has read me and likes my stuff enough to go through the
pains of adding to a blogroll, rather than that they are just
reciprocating for a link because it's good manners. Emma was the second
person to notice my stuff, through a comment I left at another
now-defunct-for-the-time-being blog, and without any promotion on my
part, wrote a very nice post about me and added me onto her blogroll.
So, it feels very odd that she's no longer in business. I, for one,
will miss her and wish her nothing but the best.

Of all the Silly German

Of all the Silly German stories I've linked over the past year, I have
to say, this one is pretty close to taking the cake.

He must have been really desperate.

The Art Institue of Chicago

The Art Institue of Chicago is currently holding a Seurat exhibition on The Making of La Grande Jatte. The husband sent me this link yesterday, noting that CBS' Sunday Morning program did a wonderful piece on it.

If you've never been to the Art Institute to see this painting in person, know that it's a huge
canvas. On the metric scale, it's 207.5 cm x 308 cm. In English
measurements that's 6'8" x 10'1", which makes the level of detail
involved all the more impressive. Pointillism is not the easiest of
painting styles---and it surely wouldn't have been easy for that
massive of a canvas. I've always thought that the size of the canvas
was one of the reasons why this painting was so admired and lauded: no
one other that Seurat would have had the guts to attempt such a thing.
But it's also beautiful and was groundbreaking in its day. It pushed
Impressionism further and Seurat is often credited as the first
Postimpressionist.
So, muy mucho culture and art history references aside, we come to the
pop culture aspects. (You knew it was coming, right? If you didn't,
know that I'm most disappointed with you. Sigh.) Most people my age
recognize this painting as the one that Cameron got lost in while Ferris and Sloane played tonsil hockey. If you'd like to have your own Cameron moment, go here, scroll down to the Enlargement of La Grande Jatte
function and futz around. You'll have fun. And if you can't make it to
Chicago, it's almost as good as pushing your face into the canvas.

I'm a little late on

I'm a little late on this one.
I didn't see it last week when it was published, but it's still
relevant. If it's been linked elsewhere, I apologize for my slovenly
habits. If you haven't seen it, well, it seems the average insurgent in
Baghdad has more than a few conflicts to resolve before he protests the
occupation by trying to kill soldiers.

{...}Abu Mujahed, worryingly for the analysts, fits into
none of these easy categories. For a start, he was pro-American before
the invasion. 'The only way to breathe under the old regime was to
watch American films and listen to their music,' he said. He had been a
Bon Jovi fan. 'It gave me a glimpse of a better life. When I heard that
the Americans were coming to liberate Iraq I was very happy. I felt
that I would be able to live well, travel and have freedom. I wanted to
do more sport, get new appliances and a new car and develop my life. I
thought the US would come here and our lives would be changed through
180 degrees.' He spoke of how his faith in the US was shaken when, via
a friend's illicitly imported satellite TV system, he saw 'barbaric,
savage' pictures of civilian casualties of the fighting and bombing.
The next blow came in the conflict's immediate aftermath, as looters
ran unchecked through Baghdad. 'When I saw the American soldiers
watching and doing nothing as people took everything, I began to
suspect the US was not here to help us but to destroy us,' he said.
{...}Their next try was more successful. The lead vehicle of an
American military convoy ran over an anti-tank mine the group had laid
in a road. 'We think we killed the driver,' he said. 'We found the mine
in a house that had been used by the military during the war. The
Americans were not expecting that sort of device.' Over the next months
the group varied the tactics. 'One day we try and snipe them, the next
we use an IED [Improvised Explosive Device], the next a mine. We never
get any orders from anybody. We are just told: "Today you should do
something," but it is up to us to decide what and when.' Black soldiers are a particular target. 'To have Negroes occupying
us is a particular humiliation,' Abu Mujahed said, echoing the profound
racism prevalent in much of the Middle East. 'Sometimes we aborted a
mission because there were no Negroes.' In contrast to many
militants, who have killed hundreds of Iraqis in the last year, Abu
Mujahed said his group was careful not to kill locals. 'We are now
planning to use bigger bombs in central Baghdad. But it is hard because
there are so many civilians.' Support for the militants is far from
universal. They are not attracting new recruits and finances are tight,
he admitted.
Tactics depend on resources. The price of rocket-propelled grenades has
gone up recently as supplies dried up during August's heavy fighting
between Americans and the Mahdi Army in Najaf. The missiles now cost
25,000 Iraqi dinars (around £10) in markets in Sadr City, the northern
Shia Muslim-dominated area of Baghdad - 10 times the immediate post-war
price. The group is restricted to one attack every few days. There are
also spies. He boasted of information from 'friends within the
coalition' and said that his group have executed two suspected
informers within Adhamiya. One was killed less than three weeks ago,
after being under surveillance for a month. 'He had a wife and child
but I did not feel bad. He was a fox. He was made to kneel and shot in
the head.' Other suspected spies have been threatened and fled Baghdad.

{my emphasis}
Go read the whole thing.
So, let's see. This group is rejecting the occupation because it didn't
deliver milk and honey on a platter within the first few days. Their
solution to the problem is to go out and kill soldiers, who this guy
fully realizes are only doing their jobs. Yet, it's a "particular
humiliation" to have black soldiers taking part in the occupation, so
if there aren't any black soldiers available to snipe at, they don't
bother. How they blow soldiers up depends upon how much money is being sent from abroad.

And yet, and let's be clear about this, he's only resisting the occupation. His group tries not
to kill innocent civilians. He thinks the other resistance groups are
crap. He thinks Allawi is an American lapdog. In essence, he's not
pleased with his current lot in life. No more, no less. Does he go out
and work hard to make his life better? Does he join the effort to make
Baghdad and the country more secure so the economy can flourish and the
food and money will start rolling in? Nope. He makes the situation
worse with his actions and completely ignores his own complicity in
creating the problem by saying that if everyone had a full belly, no
one would fight. Sheesh. Get a clue.

For a somewhat lucid recap

For a somewhat lucid recap of last evening, go here.

That is all.

Why won't Blogger post? I'm

Why won't Blogger post? I'm getting really freakin' tired of writing posts that Blogger won't, for whatever reason, publish.

Grrrrrrr.

We'll see if this one goes through.

...for many reasons. But the

...for many reasons. But the fact that he can sew buttons back onto his
shirt is really endearing him to me this morning.
I'm really not that good with a needle, thread and clothing that needs
to be mended. I can needlepoint from here to Paris and back again, but
for whatever reason, whenever a button needs to be sewn back on, well,
I'm hopeless. Particularly first thing in the morning.
Lacking. Coordination. Am. I.

Oh, tee hee. The French

Oh, tee hee.

The French and Brazilian presidents have called for new action to fight poverty in the developing world. At a New York meeting ahead of the UN General Assembly, they urged radical steps to raise the $50bn UN officials say is needed to tackle the problem. Money could come from new charges or taxes on such things as greenhouse gas emissions, arms sales, airline tickets and credit card purchases. More than a billion people live in absolute poverty (less than $1 a day). The meeting focused on a report by a UN commission which said that the global imbalances were morally unacceptable and politically unsustainable. Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and French President Jacques Chirac said world leaders should ensure that the world's unprecedented wealth became a vehicle for the integration - rather than the exclusion - of the most underprivileged. "We must harness globalisation, we must turn it into a positive force for all peoples of the world," Mr Lula told the meeting. Mr Chirac said they needed new approaches to the problem of poverty. "It is up to us to give globalisation a conscience," he said. "There is no future in globalisation that tolerates predatory behaviour and the hoarding of its profits by a minority. There is no future in globalisation that destroys the social and economic balances, crushes the weak and denies human rights."

Oh, yeah. Like that's gonna happen. This is the proverbial lead balloon. It's just not going to fly. If only Chirac would stop paying his cows $730 a year just to exist , or would realize he's paying a friggin' fortune on his grocery bills, (honestly, his wife is the worst keeper of a household budget...ever)perhaps
farmers in the developing world could not only survive, but thrive.
Hence there would be no need for a tax on all those nasty, rich
westerners to equalize the woes of globalization. Alas, however, Chirac
thinks differently.
Go figure.
I have a little diddy running through my head right now. It's the theme
to Speed Racer. I think you all know how it goes. Only, my version is slightly different.

Go. Go. Go, Go, Sarkozy!.

{Hat tip: Fausta. Who also has that wonderful, laugh-inducing picture of Blaque Jacques up on her blog.)

Yep. Once again, let me

Yep. Once again, let me make it clear that I am a sucker for these sorts of things. You know the drill.

Here's the deal: originally, these were in alphabetical order. The goal is to rearrange them in accordance with my preferences.

1. Bush I, Reagan, Bush II, Clinton

2. Jerry, Elaine, Kramer, George {I hate Seinfeld. Honestly couldn't care less)

3. Diet Coke, Coke, Diet Pepsi, Pepsi

4. Paul, John, George, Ringo (Because Ringo is the redheaded stepchild of The Beatles)

5. Mike Nesmith, Mickey Dolenz, Davy Jones, Peter Tork (Nesmith invented MTV! Seriously.)
6. Fonzie, Richie, Ralph, Potsy 7. NKJV, NASB, NIV, NRSV (I had to
think about this one for a moment. I didn't know what these were. Then
I remembered that NIV was a version of the Bible. A Protestant
version of the Bible. All of these Bibles are Protestant Bibles. For my
fellow non-Protestants: NKJV=New King James Version; NIV=New
International Version; NASB=New American Standard Bible; NRSV=New
Revised Standard Version Bible. Personally, I don't use any of these
heretical* bibles. I use The Catholic Study Bible: New American Bible.
Which was approved by Cardinal Bernadin, who unfortunately is no longer
with us. A Catholic Bible must be approved by a bishop/cardinal/funky
hat wearing dude. This one was, and on the whole, I've found it to be a
good Bible. Although, I'm sensing the beginning of a theme with
this question.)
8. Sophia, Blanche, Rose, Dorothy (Betty White, while annoying, was
more amusing than Bea Arthur. Ugh.) 9. Superman II, Superman, Superman
III, Superman IV: The Quest for Peace 10. Rocky, Rocky II, Rocky III,
Rocky IV, Rocky V {I have no idea. Have never seen any of them. Don't
really want to, either.) 11. Luke, Matthew, Mark, John (The Theme
returns. Yep. It's official. This list was devised by a Protestant. In
my humble opinion, John was a drug user. How else to explain
Revelations?)
12. Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Ecclesiastes (The Theme. Again. Honestly,
who reads the Bible this way---besides heretics?*---like you're
supposed to be able to pick out which ones are your favorites? Bleh.
Take the overall message and go from there, ye hereticks!*) 13. Exodus,
Genesis, Deuteronomy, Leviticus, Numbers (The Theme. AGAIN. Which are
your favorites within the Pentateuch? This
is supposed to be good fun? Sr. Justina, my OT teacher, would be
laughing her ass off at these questions. That said, Exodus is always
fun to read. Great drama.)
14. Wonder Woman, Batman, Aquaman, Superman
15. Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, Ariel, Snow White (While I could do
without Cinderella, I like the mice in the Disney version. Bippity, Boppity, Boo
indeed.)
16. Chandler, Rachel, Monica, Phoebe, Joey, Ross 17. Linus, Charlie
Brown, Lucy, Peppermint Patty 18. Football, Basketball, Baseball,
Soccer (I'm going to qualify and say this is conditional on what level
we're talking about. I'm talking about amateur/college level. If this
were pro, well, it would be in a different order.) 19. McDonald’s,
Burger King, Jack in the Box, Hardees (Honestly, neither of the latter
are anywhere near where I live. No Jack. No Hardees. They're either
down south or in rural areas. I haven't eaten at a Hardees since 1993,
when I lived in Ames, Iowa)
20. Pluto, Mickey Mouse, Goofy, Donald Duck.
*The "heretic" business is a joke. Take it that way,
please, and don't fill my inbox with a bunch of emails about how I'm
going to hell because I'm Catholic and if only I could open my eyes
to the reality of the situation, I'd realize my mistake and switch in a
second, because I sound like I'm a really good, intelligent person, my
religious beliefs notwithstanding, that you can't possibly understand
how I continue to be duped by the Church and that I really should think
about saving my soul... I really could do without it today, ok? It was a joke.

"Fausta, meet Robert." My work

"Fausta, meet Robert."

My work here is done.

Kerry's economic plan. (registration required)

Kerry's economic plan. (registration required)

Read it and weep.

I saw the commercial for

I saw the commercial for the new DVD boxed set of the Star Wars Trilogy
the other night and was amazed at how Lucas is lying to sell these
things. At no point in time during this commercial was it mentioned
that these were the "Special Editions" that were shown in the late
1990's, rather than the originals. There was lots of blather about
"digial remastering," but anyone who knows anything about the trilogy
and digitization (which, amazingly enough, includes me)knows this
happened with the special editions. Of course, these are the same
special editions where Lucas chose to make the trilogy "family
friendly" rather than to keep the original versions. He wanted to make
changes. These are, reportedly, the films that he wanted the first time
out, yet couldn't get because of technological problems. These changes
include Greedo shooting first and Jabba appearing as a friendly
slug-like creature. Hayden Christensen is also now in Return of the Jedi. Yep. They replaced Sebastian Shaw in
the celebration scene at the end with Hayden. And it's a convenient
situation for Lucas, too, because Shaw died earlier this year and can't
object. But if you weren't married to a Star Wars Geek like myself and
you didn't know any of this, well, you'd be screwed, wouldn't you? So,
I wonder, how many hapless shoppers are going to slap down their credit
cards for this thing, thinking they're going to get the
originals---finally!---on DVD? And how many are going to be as angry as
a pack of wet cats when they learn otherwise?
And pursuing this line of thought further---is it possible to sue Lucas for false advertising?

Just a thought. Someone has to stop this man before it's too late. Might as well be some greedy litigator.

UPDATE: 09/01/2004 For a full accounting of Lucas' treachery, go here, nod your head and say, "GODDAMN THE MAN TO HELL!"

{h/t The Llamas)

Well, that's what happens when

Well, that's what happens when you take seventy-five percent of a worker's salary in taxes.

"Misdirected benevolence," indeed.

Never forgotten.

Never forgotten.

From the Opinion Journal: However

From the Opinion Journal:

However the flap over CBS and those National Guard "memos" turns out, the past few weeks mark a milestone in U.S. media and politics. Along with the Swift Boat Veterans' ads, the widespread challenge to Dan Rather's reporting--to his credibility--means that the liberal media establishment has ceased to set the U.S. political agenda. This is potentially a big cultural moment. For decades liberal media elites were able to define current debates by all kicking in the same direction, like the Rockettes. Now and then they can still pull this off, as when they all repeated the same Pentagon-promoted-torture line during the Abu Ghraib uproar. But the last month has widened cracks in that media monopoly that have been developing for some time.

Han's words to Luke are ringing in my ears: "GREAT, KID! DON'T GET COCKY!"
Now, I don't mean to underplay the role the blogosphere played in
Rathergate, or to demean those blogger's efforts. They brought down the
biggest of the big dogs---and, at the very least, they will be able to
mount Rather's pelt on their hunting lodge walls in short order. But to
have the Wall Street Journal
declare that "the liberal media establishment has ceased to set the
U.S. political agenda," while a very satisfying sentiment, is also
pushing it. Such a statement ignores the betrayal the liberal media
will feel at Rather's take-down, even though they played a part in it.
It also ignores the simple fact that there is no such thing as a vacuum
and the media could potentially entrench themselves even further,
refusing to see that change is upon them. I really don't want to be a
wet blanket here, because the blogosphere really did scoop the mainstream media on this story. The good work done cannot be ignored or downplayed. But, and there's always a but,
if we really want the blogosphere to continue to be taken seriously, we
have to keep on keepin' on. We need to stop tooting our own horns. Not
to underestimate the blogosphere's power, but let's face it: the score
in this game is 357-1. Just because we managed to finally score a point
does not mean we're going to win the game. Capisce? All of this adds to
the neverending debate we seem to be having within the blogosphere
about our own importance. Sure it's great when Insty
or one of the other big dogs goes on about how great, important,
newsworthy, etc. the blogosphere is, but unless you're a big dog
blogger, the honest truth is you don't make much of a dent. Some of us
barely make a door ding. Yet, some of the biggest names who host the
most widely read and quoted blogs are also mainstream media-types who,
to my mind, have decided to grace us with their web presence
to---ahem---sell their swag, rather than to "be part of the
revolution." I will fully admit this is a cynical point of view to
hold. While the content can be good, even great---because some of these
writers finally have the option to vent opinions they could never
present on the Op-Ed pages---still it's the motives behind the content
that interest me. Did Michelle Malkin really need to start blogging? She's a latecomer to the blogosphere. I've
been blogging longer than she has, which doesn't mean much, I know, but
I find it interesting that she started up a blog a few months before she released a book.
So, I have to wonder, did she really want to be an active part of "the
revolution"? Or was this an interesting PR tool that enables her to
sell more books about how the Japanese Internment in WWII was an OK
thing to do? Or is it a bit of both? What would her sales be like had
she not started blogging?

While it's interesting that none of the big dog bloggers had anything to do with outing of Dan Rather, they're the loudest bangers of the blogosphere drum nowadays. Which leads me to ask, where's the line? Do we really believe that a blogger like Sullivan
holds more power in the blogosphere because he's a mainstream
commentator and his presence lends us credibility? Or is the other way
around and the blogosphere is being used in a way we'd never thought
possible? In other words, where will most of us, as pure, non-media
types, stand when it's all said and done? Will the blogosphere become
the opposition to the mainstream media, as some of us would like to
believe it to be, or will we be co-opted into it? When seldom sober was
here last week and was describing his travails in Denver, he mentioned this conversation he'd had with zombyboy:

zombyboy, of Resurrection Song got a bee in his bonnet about how fringe bloggers are. We conducted a bar-wide survey and found out that about ten percent of people know what 'blogs' are which, while not a large amount, is far greater than, say, the amount of the US vote that Nader's gonna get. Anyway. zombyboy was convinced that we needed accountability, and editors and oversite to become mainstream and respected journalists. Ignoring the obvious argument that we don't represent ourselves as mainstream journalists, he received a tirade of abuse from the other bloggers there. I think that wierd, blurry-faced guy said something like "Fuck Big Media! Our readers are our editors and our fucking accountability!" I was fully against zombyboy's position too, though I couldn't find the eloquence to express myself that blurry-face did.

As it happens, zombyboy further clarified his arguments in this post:

{...}I've said it before and I'll say it again, for blogs to be meaningful they need to be more responsible and more professional. As much as I enjoy blogging, as much value as I do find in it, I still think the negatives make it hard for me to take the impact that blogs have on events too seriously. That isn't to say that blogs won't grow into a more important role, but if you think we're there already just walk down the street and start asking people how much they care what Instapundit thinks about any specific issue. Then ask them about Dan Rather. Dan, even in his embattled state and even with the obvious and real questions about his credibility, will still have more recognition and more people who consider him to be a trustworthy source. I'm not saying that I believe blogs are completely without influence or that they are worthless; I think there is a great potential for blogs to have a positive influence on public debate over all kinds of policies. I simply believe they aren't there yet, that some people overstate their importance, and that for blogs to become truly influential there has to be some kind of accountability in something other than the latest troll comment on the site.

I agree with both
of them. I think the blogosphere is a revolution in itself, that the
simple fact we cover what the mainstream media refuses to touch with a
ten-foot-pole is impressive. The information wants to be free and we're
playing a crucial role in the liberation. But I also think that that
the blogosphere is a niche. We're simply set up to be that way.
Whenever you get a million-plus people starting up webpages to
spout-off on any topic under the sun, you'll have that. I also agree
that blogs aren't "there" yet, if "there" will ever be a place we can
define quantitatively. We have a ways to go before our opinions hold
the same weight in the real world as, for instance, a guy like Safire.
You can go on about whether or not Safire should be paid attention to,
but the crux of the matter is that attention is paid to him. Why? He
has a prominent space on the New York Times Op-Ed page, and we all know that you don't get published on the Op-Ed page of the NYT
unless you have something valuable to contribute to the debate. The
blogosphere has rejected the argument that we should pay attention to
Safire simply because of the space he holds on the Op-Ed page. What
matters to us is the content. There are no sacred cows in the
blogosphere, and that in itself is a huge shift.
But as zombyboy so aptly declared, "we're not there yet." We're making
strides, but the blogosphere has a long way to go before it's seen as a
trustworthy, consistent alternative to the mainstream media. The
media---including The Wall Street Journal---may
be trumpeting the blogosphere's role in Rathergate, and while this has
gone a long way toward establishing our street cred, the media will
also hit back as soon as the dust has settled. I'm forseeing a return
to "business as usual" and Rathergate will be seen more in the
mainstream media as an anomaly, much like Drudge breaking the Monica
Lewinksy scandal, rather than as the way things are going to be in the
future. The blogosphere may have taken one step forward, but soon we'll
be forced to take two steps back. This is why I don't think bloggers
can get cocky right now. That bloggers have to push forward and break
the next
story. And the one after that. They have to keep their noses to the
grindstone so the media will come to respect the opinions of bloggers
as worthy competition, rather than seeing us, at the very least, a as
bunch of "people on the fringe" whose opinions don't mean anything in
reality, or at most, an interesting and new way to market their books.
The blogosphere is taking part in shaping the debate. We've made it up
onto the podium at a debate tournament. But if we are to be successful
in the debate we need to keep in mind that our debating skills need
sharpening and we might want to think about who we let on the team to
speak for our side.

Now, there's some enterprising young

Now, there's some enterprising young capitalists for you.

Should I really give a

Should I really give a rat's ass about what Spicoli has to say about politics?

And he was quick to take a jab at the current U.S. administration when asked about parallels with the turbulent era portrayed in the film. "I think that administrations have to look at how they oppress their own people and people in other countries and understand that if they take people's hopes and dreams away, bad things can happen." Commenting on people with similar frustrations today, he said: "I guess the problem is that, statistically, there's a lot more of them today and we can be grateful to President (George W.) Bush for that."

Nope. I don't think I should.

Yeah, Sean. Your life must be really frustrating. Being paid millions of dollars to do exactly what you love to do must really bite. I don't see anyone oppressing you Sean, or are you fighting THE MAN!
for all the little people without whose support you'd be nowhere?
Whatever. You may think you seem all noble and Gregory Peck-ish
whenever you open your big fat mouth but in reality, you look like an
idiot. Do yourself---and me---a favor, eh? Shut the hell up and stop
wasting my time!

Courtesy o' the Llamas: the

Courtesy o' the Llamas:
the one hundred most frequently challenged books 1990-2000.
The boldly highlighted selections are books I've actually read. Of
course, I can't but help to comment on a few of these selections. This
entire list disgusts me. Scary Stories (Series) by Alvin Schwartz
Daddy’s Roommate by Michael Willhoite
I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou
The Chocolate War by Robert Cormier
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain Why would anyone want to ban this book? Because the "N" word is featured prominently. Talk about revisionist history

Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck I hate Steinbeck, but what's so offensive about this book? Don't get it.

Harry Potter (Series) by J.K. Rowling

Forever by Judy Blume Now, I don't even remember what this one was about. I had to go and look it up.
Ah, now I remember. I fail to see how a novel about one of the most
important choices a young woman faces in her lifetime---who to lose her
virginity to---is something that should be banned. Probably the whole chastity-belt-until-marriage crowd is behind this one.

Bridge to Terabithia by Katherine Paterson

Alice (Series) by Phyllis Reynolds Naylor

Heather Has Two Mommies by Leslea Newman

My Brother Sam is Dead by James Lincoln Collier and Christopher Collier

The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger Why?

The Giver by Lois Lowry

It’s Perfectly Normal by Robie Harris

Goosebumps (Series) by R.L. Stine

A Day No Pigs Would Dieby Robert Newton Peck

The Color Purple by Alice Walker

Sex by Madonna As if you could "read" such a book. There isn't
much to read. Mr. H., being the rabid Madonna fan that he is, has a
copy and I've perused it. I know there was some copy in it, but for the
life of me, I don't think anyone, let alone myself, read it. It's kind
of hard to take your eyes away from the pictures of Madonna standing
buck naked in the middle of a Beverly Hills street, hitching. I'm
pretty sure that's precisely what she wanted, too, so why ban the thing? Just don't bother reading it, as it's yet another self-serving PR stunt.

Earth’s Children (Series) by Jean M. Auel

The Great Gilly Hopkins by Katherine Paterson

A Wrinkle in Time by Madeleine L’Engle WTF?

Go Ask Alice by Anonymous

Fallen Angels by Walter Dean Myers

In the Night Kitchen by Maurice Sendak

The Stupids (Series) by Harry Allard

The Witches by Roald Dahl

The New Joy of Gay Sex by Charles Silverstein

Anastasia Krupnik (Series) by Lois Lowry

The Goats by Brock Cole

Kaffir Boy by Mark Mathabane

Blubber by Judy Blume Why would this book be banned? Because it's so honest
about the way girls work? I think not. I think this should be required
reading. It's about bullying, plain and simple, and the message is that
everyone, including the victim, is complicit in letting it go on.
Killing Mr. Griffin by Lois Duncan
Halloween ABC by Eve Merriam
We All Fall Down by Robert Cormier
Final Exit by Derek Humphry
The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood It's never going to happen, people. It's fiction. Get over it.

Julie of the Wolves by Jean Craighead George

The Bluest Eye by Toni Morrison

What’s Happening to my Body? Book for Girls: A Growing-Up Guide for Parents & Daughters by Lynda Madaras

To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee

Beloved by Toni Morrison

The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton Again, why?

The Pigman by Paul Zindel

Bumps in the Night by Harry Allard

Deenie by Judy Blume Scoliosis isn't a topic kids---particularly
young girls---should read about? As a girl who was once sent off to the
orthopedist because the school nurse thought she had scoliosis, thank
goodness I'd already read this book. It made the situation much less
scary than it would have been if I hadn't known what scoliosis was. It
was still scary, but at least I had a bit of knowledge about what was
going on. It turned out that one of my shoulder blades is placed higher
than the other. It's completely normal, but it lead the very nice, but
brand spankin' new nurse to think my spine was curving, and sent her
into a panic. Flowers for Algernon by Daniel Keyes Again...why?

Annie on my Mind by Nancy Garden

The Boy Who Lost His Face by Louis Sachar

Cross Your Fingers, Spit in Your Hat by Alvin Schwartz

A Light in the Attic by Shel Silverstein Why? Because it's rumored that Shel was on drugs when he wrote all those wonderful poems? Fer cryin' out loud!

Brave New World by Aldous Huxley

Sleeping Beauty Trilogy by A.N. Roquelaure (Anne Rice)

Asking About Sex and Growing Up by Joanna Cole

Cujo by Stephen King

James and the Giant Peach by Roald Dahl This one makes me mad! I loved this book.

The Anarchist Cookbook by William Powell

Boys and Sex by Wardell Pomeroy

Ordinary People by Judith Guest

American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis

What’s Happening to my Body? Book for Boys: A Growing-Up Guide for Parents & Sons by Lynda Madaras

Are You There, God? It’s Me, Margaret by Judy Blume It's about
a new girl in the neighborhood praying (she has some issues with
religion as well) she isn't the last of her new friends to get her
period. It was outdated when I read it (it talked about belts,
people---and I'm not talking about belts that match your Manolos), but
nonetheless was a good primer. I didn't get the whole "I can't be
last!" mentality. None of the girls I hung out with---myself
included---wanted our periods. We were all dreading it, so that part
didn't ring true to us. Crazy Lady by Jane Conly
Athletic Shorts by Chris Crutcher
Fade by Robert Cormier
Guess What? by Mem Fox
The House of Spirits by Isabel Allende. Sigh.

The Face on the Milk Carton by Caroline Cooney

Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut

Lord of the Flies by William Golding Again, why? Because a pack of little boys are shipwrecked and they revert to tribal instincts?

Native Son by Richard Wright

Women on Top: How Real Life Has Changed Women’s Fantasies by Nancy Friday

Curses, Hexes and Spells by Daniel Cohen

Jack by A.M. Homes

Bless Me, Ultima by Rudolfo A. Anaya

Where Did I Come From? by Peter Mayle

Carrie by Stephen King

Tiger Eyes by Judy Blume insensible, violent death is something kids never come in contact with?

On My Honor by Marion Dane Bauer

Arizona Kid by Ron Koertge

Family Secrets by Norma Klein

Mommy Laid An Egg by Babette Cole

The Dead Zone by Stephen King

The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain See what I said about Huck Finn. Grrr.

Song of Solomon by Toni Morrison

Always Running by Luis Rodriguez

Private Parts by Howard Stern

Where’s Waldo? by Martin Hanford

Summer of My German Soldier by Bette Greene

Little Black Sambo by Helen Bannerman

Pillars of the Earth by Ken Follett Why? What's so controversial
about this book?
Running Loose by Chris Crutcher
Sex Education by Jenny Davis
The Drowning of Stephen Jones by Bette Greene
Girls and Sex by Wardell Pomeroy
How to Eat Fried Worms by Thomas Rockwell
View from the Cherry Tree by Willo Davis Roberts
The Headless Cupid by Zilpha Keatley Snyder
The Terrorist by Caroline Cooney
Jump Ship to Freedom by James Lincoln Collier and Christopher Collier
It shouldn't be so damn amazing to me that so many of these books have
sexuality as a theme. Yet it is. It's obvious that there are many
people out there who would really like young people---young women in
particular---to remain in the dark about what's going on with their
bodies when they hit puberty. Which is just wrong. What are people so
damn afraid of? That young girls might actually have a clue when it comes to maturing?

While there were many Judy Blume novels on the list, I noticed that all of them dealt with the problems young girls face. This
wasn't on there. This novel, I must admit, was my first introduction to
the curious male phenomena known as "nocturnal emissions." Why wasn't
it on the list? Hmmm? It should be if knowing anything about sexuality
is a bad thing. Or is it like I suspect and it's because it's about a
young boy coming of age? Oh, yes. They have to know what's going on because they have to instruct their wives on their wedding night... Good Gravy, people! Can't you see that your blatant sexist attitudes are showing?

I've got a little lecture for those who would ban books:

GET. OVER. IT. If it's in a public library, well, the chances
that it would be considered porn are slim. If you don't like it, well,
ahem, don't read it. Furthermore, if you don't want your kids reading
it, well, ahem again, make sure you know what they're checking out of
the biblioteca. Don't jump on the morality bandwagon and work to ban a
damn book because something offends you. Simply realize it's not for
you or yours, but that it might be for someone else. Stop limiting
others' choices because you get your knickers in a twist more easily
than other people. Grrrrr. Book banning makes me angry.

Yet another one. Courtesy of

Yet another one. Courtesy of Phoenix at Villains Vanquished.

1. Name 3 personal hygiene items you would not want to be on a desert isle without.

Sunscreen (it's a desert isle, right? Hot and sunny. Need at least a 15SPF or we'll have "Kathy Crustacean" to deal with. Nope. Baaaaaad.) Playtex Tampons---and no, Tampax will not do. Lubriderm.

2. Name your biggest character flaw.

Not good with criticism. I'm getting better, but I'm still apt to take things too personally.

3. Name your worst addiction.

Smoky treats. Ugh. Should quit as they're disgusting. It's too damn bad that I just flat out love tobacco.

4. Name one person in history you'd like to have been an intimate friend of.

Machiavelli

5. What do you want your headstone to say?
I'm not a big one for statements on headstones, so I don't want it to
say anything other than my name and my birth and death dates. 6. What person of your acquaintance would you like to be more like?

My friends who have lives. That would be a good thing to have.

7. What song is your theme song, the one that would play at the intro if your life was a sitcom or drama?

Like I know.

8. If your life were a sitcom or drama, would it be a sitcom or drama, and who would play the two main leads?
A drama with humor. I would think Mary-Louise Parker would be a good
choice for moi, because reportedly we sound a lot alike---particularly
when we swear. Hmmmm. As for the husband, well, it would have to be
Russell Crowe, because he looks like the husband.
Seriously. In the past, people have stopped the husband, thinking he
was Crowe and have asked for his autograph. While the facial
characteristics aren't precisely the same, they have the same color
eyes, same color hair, same face shape, etc. And they're built exactly
the same---like a brick shithouse. Although, Russell would have to drop
about forty pounds to play him nowadays. 9. What would the sitcom or drama be called?

Precisely Measured Dosages of Insanity

10. If you could change one thing about your physical appearance without plastic surgery, what would it be?

Instantly? Well, I'd wish for just one more goddamn inch of height so I could reach the top shelves in my kitchen cupboards. Not too much to ask for, really.