Thursday, February 28, 2008

A startling discovery, in which I discover the origin of the phrase "Mission Accomplished."

With all the modesty I can muster, I have to admit that this is a startling bit of investigative research on my part, and so, in a Drudge-esque moment of self-reflection and humility, I will now trumpet my discovery on my blog.

Whilst tripping through the internet I have accidentally stumbled upon the Washingtonian origin of the phrase "Mission Accomplished," a term that was until now forever linked to our half-wit President and his exotic day of make believe dress up on board the USS Abraham Lincoln. Here's a reminder, for those of you who possess the mental skill to have blocked that horrible memory from your mind forever:



However, as much prominence as that specific usage of the term has received, I found a previous, more shameful (yet, predictably, still very much related to Republican shenanigans) example of it. Check it out!



Recognize that? If the names don't give it away, the pretentious language, schoolmarmish panic over sex, and the obsessive detail paid to the bodily fluids of leading members of our government might. That's right! It was in the Starr Report! So, just as Barack Obama plagiarizes Devan Patrick every time he says 'Yes We Can," we can now state with confidence that George Bush was plagiarizing the Starr Report that fateful day aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln when he stood beneath the Mission Accomplished banner. Incredible!

Let's play 5 Degrees of Tim Russert

In the Democratic debate the other night, Tim Russert embarrassed himself, the state of Massachusetts, journalists, and fat people with oversized heads everywhere by posing a convulted question to Barack Obama that went something like this: a guy who knows a guy you know said something bad and now you need to denounce not only the statement but the man himself, or else we (that is, I, Tim Russert) will judge you unfit for the presidency.

Given that this is the new standard of journalism, I've decided to invent a new game, "5 Degrees of Tim Russert," in which you establish a link between a prominent politician and someone who either said or did something reprehensible, and then demand that the politician denounce that person. It goes something like this (count the degrees of separation in this argument):

Mitt Romney's (1) favorite book is "Battlefield Earth." (It is, he said so in an interview.) This book was written by L. Ron Hubbard (2), who started Scientology. Scientology is a religion particularly favored by Tom Cruise (3). Tom Cruise is an actor who was in the movie "Top Gun," which co-starred Val Kilmer (4). Val Kilmer is a "Promise Keeper," which is a men's movement started by former Colorado University head football coach Bill McCartney (5). Bill McCartney cheated on his wife. Given that Mitt Romney endorsed by John McCain, can we therefore conclude that John McCain wants everyone to cheat on their wives? WHEN WILL JOHN MCCAIN DENOUNCE BILL MCCARTNEY AND THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOOTBALL TEAM?

It's fun--try it yourself!

George W. Bush: just as proudly out-of-touch as his idiot dad

Years ago, in the halcyon days of the FIRST Bush presidency, we were blessed with the now-iconic image of Poppy being completely surprised by the remarkable technology of a supermarket scanner. Just as it is hilarious to laugh at your mom when she discovers this hot new music all the kids are listening to, "rap," or expresses her fear that the kids these days may be "taking the pot," it was pretty funny to discover that our president had no idea about an ordinary item that we proles use on a daily basis.

So imagine my surprise today when the idiot son of that president, George W. Bush, proudly took to the podium at the White House and admitted his ignorance about the economic conditions faced by consumers across the country. Take it away, CNN:

When asked what advice he would give to the average person facing the prospect of gas prices hitting $4 per gallon, Bush stopped the reporter and said, "What did you just say? You're predicting $4 a gallon gas?"

"That's interesting. I hadn't heard that," he said at the Thursday news conference.

Yes, indeed, predictions of $4 gas have been remarkably difficult to come by lately.

Gasoline price is heading to $4 gallon
Economist: $4 gas possible
Gasoline may hit $4/gallon
Expert predicts gas to hit $4 mark
Analysts see $4 gas by spring: report

Uh, that was from "the Google," Mr. President. Took me about 3 seconds to find. Yesterday the headline on my local paper (The Oregonian) blared, in huge type, "$4 GAS?" Sheesh. Yet again the nation is cursed by an idiotically out-of-touch member of the Bush family in office, ruining the economy and getting us into a war in Iraq.

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Presenting the ugliest pair of men's pants created since 1978

J.Crew, you are officially on notice. Now, I've been tempted to poke great fun at your catalogs and their incessant "look how fun it is to summer at the Cape!" motifs, or your insistence on using the singular "pant" all the time, or your continuing belief that Americans are desperate to own khakis emblazoned with small lobsters or sailboats or other relics of the aforementioned summering at the Cape. But, I have held my tongue out of, who knows, perhaps a deep-seated nostalgia for those days in college when I'd get a new article of clothing from J. Crew and would feel the momentary satisfaction of having my fashion sense rise from 10 years out of date to a mere 5 years out of date.

However, I happened to glance at your "pant" sale today, and can keep my silence no longer. You have forced me to stand, eyeball to eyeball, with the ugliest pair of men's pants I have ever seen outside the Deseret Industries thrift store in Salt Lake City where I used to purchase my Halloween costumes. And those were always ironic. So far as I can gather, not a stitch of irony went into the creation of these pants. Behold, America!



Classic fit Italian Paisley Cord Pant

Introducing a perfect cocktail pant, with a traditional paisley on cotton corduroy imported from one of Italy's finest print houses.


"Perfect cocktail pant"? The hell? Just what kind of crazy cocktail parties are you attending, J.Crew copywriter, where such an egregious violation of everything we hold dear as a nation is not only tolerated but encouraged? Good lord. And, it must be noted, this spectacular pair of pants will set you back a mere $99.99. Egads.

Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Too pretty to fly? Or, perhaps, just stupid?

There's a silly story in the news today about two women in Florida who claim they were kicked off a Southwest Airlines flight for "being too pretty." Those catty flight attendants, apparently, couldn't tolerate the mind-numbing hawtness of these two young lasses, and so had them escorted off the flight by four (!!) police officers. The women were at first refused water (perhaps to sooth their searing hotness?) by the flight attendants, an oversight that paled in comparison to the next outrage:

At one point, Williams had to use the plane's bathroom. She saw another passenger in it, and when he hadn't come out 15 minutes later, she knocked on the door.

When he came out, Williams says the man came over to her seat and yelled a profanity at her. Williams admits she yelled a profanity back at him but was puzzled when she says the flight crew only questioned her.
Ok, simple question: a guy on your flight has been in the bathroom--a small room roughly the size of the trunk of a compact car--for FIFTEEN MINUTES. Do you seriously want to use the bathroom right after him?

Honestly, from that point on, I couldn't trust the judgement of these two.

Thursday, February 21, 2008

ABCNews won't let some pesky political issue distract them from Matthew McConaughey's abs

Seriously, ABC? This is what you run on your big fancy political blog? Woah. Just goes to show what a late-night deadline, some rudimentary Photoshop skillz, and a Wedding Planner/Reign of Fire/Sahara marathon will do to the otherwise sensible art instincts of a blog editor.

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

A damn song I can't get out of my head--Felice Brothers, "Frankie's Gun"

Last weekend a friend and I caught a nifty performance by the Drive By Truckers here in Portland. Since I was pretty familiar with their stuff before the show I was nothing other than impressed by their stuff. However, the opening act, the "Felice Brothers," proved to be a true revelation. Holy hell, where did these guys come from? Not exactly sure how to characterize their music, but it's a kind of downhome gritty Americana kind of thing. Hell, they have a full-time washboard player in the band, and you can't beat that with a stick. The music isn't exactly the same, but the feeling I had watching them reminded me of how I felt when I first caught Whiskeytown, one of my all time favorites, back in 1997 when I caught them in Salt Lake City. Same energy, same fire, same sweet sweet songs. (Hopefully these guys won't flame out in spectacular fashion as did Whiskeytown.)

They have an album coming out in early March, but the below video is for what is sure to be their breakout hit, "Frankie's Gun."

"My car goes, Chicago
Every weekend to pick up some cargo
I think I know the bloody way by now Frankie;
Turn the goddam radio down, thank you.
Pull over, count the money
But don't count the thirty in the glove box, buddy--
That's for to buy Lucille some clothes."

Monday, February 18, 2008

A phrase that should strike fear into the heart of anyone with a brain

Overheard on the radio on the way to work this morning:

"From the creative visionary who brought you Christina Aguilera, Fergie, and the Pussycat Dolls."

Friday, February 15, 2008

Portland media watch: KGW issues biased, one-sided report on Columbia Gorge casino

Ah, the Columbia Gorge. The mythic strait through which sailed Lewis and Clark, and in so doing cemented Oregon's status as a frontier state touched by nature's grandeur. An unspoilt wilderness, hewn out of granite, forged by volcanoes and the steady anvil of rain and snow. Truly, one of our nation's scenic wonders. And...perhaps soon to a monstrous eyesore of a casino. Wait, wha? Yeah, well, you wouldn't know it to read this puff piece of a news story by the Associated Press and picked up by local the wunderkinds over at KGW news in Portland.

Titled, lamely, "Proposal for Casino in Gorge proceeds to next step," the article tells you everything you might want to know except, of course, why anyone would be opposed to this damn thing. Environmental groups? Yeah, they're a wee bit upset about it. Folks who fear the impact of traffic in Cascade Locks? Yeah, they're a bit upset about it as well. But not the chamber of commerce types over in Cascade Locks! No, it's all gravy, baby!

"We're very happy," Cascade Locks Executive Director Chuck Daughtry told KGW. "This means jobs and tourism" for Cascade Locks. "We recruited them... and we can't imagine a better partner."

The Warm Springs Tribes would stand to make an expected yearly profit of $77 million from the casino and benefits to Cascade Locks were predicted around $50 million over the next 25 years.
Hell, sounds awesome! Who could possibly oppose such a rad casino? Nobody but a bunch of damn hippies who hate gambling, and, uh, environmental damage, not to mention the intrusion of a massive casino in a scenic wonderland.

Guess what? I typed "Columbia Gorge Casino" into Google, and the first damn link was to the "Friends of the Gorge" a non-profit group based out of Hood River, with some information about why this thing sucks so bad. There's also a group of Cascade Locks residents opposed to the casino.

Really, not hard to find this stuff at all. Not hard to present both sides of the puzzle. Gah, our local media sucks.

Oh, and note the URL of the KGW article: it ends with "kgw_021508_environment_casino_impact.c5878d47.html." Got that? Environment casino impact. A concept important enough to put into the URL, but not into the article itself. INteresting, no?

Thursday, February 14, 2008

Portland real estate: plunging values, or realistic pricing at last?

As a resident of SE Portland, one of my pet hobbies is tracking the crazy real estate transactions that have gripped the 'hood in recent years. Houses that sold for $250,000 in June would sell for $325,000 the following February, only to sell for $389,000 in June. It was (or should have been) obvious to everyone that such dramatic increases were not sustainable, and that the resulting crash-and-boom would be a grimly painful reminder that every boom must have its bust. Until quite recently, however, I have not been confronted with dramatic evidence of the new reality in residential real estate. There have been quite a few stories claiming that Portland seems to be weathering the national storm quite well, and, until recently, anecdotal evidence (which for me consists of the things I see as I take my dog on walks through the neighborhood) seemed to bear this out.

However, I was recently struck by the dramatic decrease in value of one particular house on my route. The house, a large classic Portland home, probably 100 years old, is located in a nice part of SE Portland, close to many shops and restaurants, and surrounded by equally nice houses. Crime, while existent, mainly takes the form of petty theft, and streets and schools in the area are fairly good. The house has a current asking price of $499,000.



To the average person driving past while looking for real estate bargains, this may seem fairly routine. Nothing dramatic on the surface. However, what the dedicated dog-walking enthusiast in the neighborhood knows is that, until only recently, the house was on the market for $659,000.

Turning to PortlandMaps, and the detail it provides about the recent history for this house, we see something interesting.

Back in 1990, it sold for $87,000, not a small amount of money, as the neighborhood in those days was something of a drug-infested eyesore. It really kicked into high gear in 2002, however, selling for $339,000. In June of 2006 it sold again, this time for $570,000, a tidy increase of $230,000. Something, however, happened between June of 2006 and December of 2007. The house, after sitting for months on the market with an asking price of $659,000, sold towards the end of the year for $494,500, a decline of nearly $100,000 in 18 months, and $160,000 under the asking price. It now sits empty at the current asking price of $499,000.

What was it? What happened? Did something happen to the house itself? A fire, perhaps, or a plague of locusts? Flooding? No. The house, actually, underwent a substantial amount of rehab in that period. In fact, it is much nicer, and has more "street appeal" now than it did when it sold for $570,000. It has been painted, given new wood floors, a new kitchen, and basement work. It is actually a very decent house, albeit one with a small yard.

What explains the decline? Is there something unique to the personal history of the owners of this place (note that the current holder of the deed is a bank, not a person)--a divorce, unfortunate medical event, or something similar? Did personal tragedy strike, requiring a quick sale at basement prices? Or does the new owner of this property recognize that the market that once supported a price of $570,000 for this house can today do no better than $499,000.

Is this house a statistical outlier, or the proverbial canary in the coal mine?

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

Oh Christ! It's Senator Walnuts McZombie Scowlsalot!!

Seriously. Look at this comparison. Who looks like the President here? Mr. Courageous Poise on the left, or the crazy old guy in front of you in line at the grocery store who won't shut up about how the damn store should still honor his coupons from last year?

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Photo Comparison: Chris Berman vs. Antonin Scalia

One is a gaseous windbag whose grandstanding on our nation's most prominent stage has exposed him as the egomaniacal lunatic that he is, and whose pretentions to glory will surely doom the next two generations of our country's youth to careers of indentured servitude, and the other is Antonin Scalia.

Seriously, though, how did I go so long before noticing that these guys are practically twins?

Once again, the Chinese draw all their creative inspiration from "The Simpsons"

Memorable Simpsons quote:

Bart: I want to stay here with Mr. Burns.

Burns: I suggest you leave immediately.

Homer: Or what? You’ll release the dogs, or the bees, or the dogs with bees in their mouths and when they bark they shoot bees at you?

And from China, in preparation for the Olympics:




That's right! Horses, with lions riding on top of them! The pinnacle of insanity, and I'm alive to see it! Praise the lord! Next up, they'll train a small monkey to ride on top of the lion, and the monkey will be trained to throw hungry piranha at innocent passers by. Ah, the inscrutable Chinese.

Saturday, February 9, 2008

Cowardly, cravenly, cynically: Hillary calls for reporter to be fired

I won't go out of my way to pretend I'm a big Hillary Clinton fan. I happen to think she'll get her clock cleaned by John McCain in an eventual head-to-head matchup, and I also think she'd be absolute murder for "down ticket" races, i.e., having her on the national ticket would cause a lot of Democratic Senate and House candidates to lose their respective elections after being tied to her by their opponents.

That being said, her latest reaction to MSNBC's David Schuster, who said that Chelsea Clinton was being "pimped out" by the Clinton campaign, is an absurd overreaction, even for the combustible Clinton camp. After Schuster was suspended, the Clinton campaign sent the following statement to NBC:

Nothing justifies the kind of debasing language that David Shuster used and no temporary suspension or half-hearted apology is sufficient.
I would urge you to look at the pattern of behavior on your network that seems to repeatedly lead to this sort of degrading language.
In other words, Clinton wants NBC to fire Schuster for what he said. Weak. After sitting idly by and letting conservative pundit after conservative pundit say the very worst things about her, Clinton has decided that THIS is the comment to really lose sleep over. Why? Well, the reason is simple: David Schuster, all apologies to the guy, is a nobody. Hillary knows she can't take on Bill O'Reilly or Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity or Glen Beck or any of those guys, so instead she freaks out and demands that NBC fire David Schuster. It's cowardly. It's cowardly to look the other way when someone powerful makes a distasteful remark about you, but then demand the firing of someone lower down on the totem pole for something fairly innocuous. It reminds of a middle manager who will say nothing when he witnesses his boss doing something unethical, but who will then demand the immediate ouster of someone below him in the corporate pecking order.

It's also cynical: Hillary knows that she gets a lot of abuse from the press, so she has decided that this will be her line in the sand. She's threatening to boycott the NBC-hosted debate unless this reporter is fired because she wants to make a larger point to the media: don't try to push me around.

Finally, the whole thing is completely silly: Schuster, though his word "pimped" was perhaps poorly used, was making a valid point: the Clinton campaign is using Chelsea to get the "youth vote" (uh, yeah, good luck with that), all the while allowing her to hide behind the "sorry, I don't talk to reporters" shield she's been using for the past 10 years. (Rather lamely, she recently told a nine-year old girl she couldn't answer her question because "I don't talk to reporters, and unfortunately that includes you." LAME!) I'm sure they'd also refuse to answer any questions about her for the same reason: she's a kid! Schuster was simply saying, you can't have it both ways. Either make her a public part of the campaign, with all the rights and responsibilities that go along with that, or let her have her private life.

Anyway, blah, summary: the Clinton campaign is weak, losing steam and momentum to Obama, and is choosing this fairly mild remark as its Thermopylae. In so doing it reveals itself to be cowardly and cynical. It is hard to imagine feeling any possible motivation to vote for such a candidate.

Thursday, February 7, 2008

Greed: if a player you like does it, it's called "competitive"

There was a pretty fascinating article in Sports Illustrated today about the backroom negotiations that landed Johan Santana a huge $137.5 million contract from the New York Mets. Apparently, with about 5 minutes to go before the deadline expired, Santana informed the Mets that he wanted $140M, not $135M, and that he was willing to walk away from the deal (and thus pitch one last season for the Twins) and risk his chances with free agency next year. Here's how Tom Verducci puts it in his intro:

Pitcher Johan Santana gave the Mets a preview of his competitiveness last Friday, five minutes before the initial deadline to their contract negotiations. With the two sides just $5 million apart, Santana personally informed Mets owner Fred Wilpon that he was walking away from $135 million, according to two sources familiar with the negotiations.
Now, here's the problem I have with that: the word "competitive." Why use that word? Imagine, for a moment, that we're not talking about a fairly non-controversial guy like Johan Santana, but are instead talking about Terrell Owens or Randy Moss. Would a sportswriter use a word like "competitive" to describe those antics? No, they'd use a word like "greed" or would launch into a spiel about how players these days just don't appreciate all they get from sports.

It goes directly to one of my pet peeves about sportswriters, the way that they take the exact same trait and filter it through their own sense about a player. Thus Bret Favre throws a really stupid interception, but because sportswriters and the media in general love the guy, he's just labeled as a tough competitor who sometimes takes risks because he just loves winning so damn much. Then another quarterback, say, Eli Manning (before he won the Super Bowl and taught a grateful nation how to love again), does the exact same thing, and they tsk tsk about how he just doesn't have it and wonder if he'll ever be free of those mental lapses.

I'm sure this tendency is common to all humanitiy, after all, we are more prone to overlook flaws (or at least justify them) in people we love, and prone to demonize the same traits in others. Nevertheless, it's a little annoying to have it illustrated so clearly.

Friday, February 1, 2008

Not to brag or anything, but Tina Fey TOTALLY reads my blog

How do I know Tina Fey reads my blog? Did she, like, write me an email? No. Did she send a bouquet of flowers, or ham, to me after collapsing with laughter after reading one of my posts? Uh, no. She did, however, mention the name of my blog in an interview she conducted in December! OMG! (Please allow me this fantasy, and forget for the moment that the name for this blog was actually stolen from a bit in 30 Rock.) Check it out!

Q) You mentioned in the September 23, 2007 New York Times that last year you sometimes trolled the Internet looking for references to “30 Rock.” What is the strangest reference you found?.

A) Oh, let’s see. That’s a good question. I would go and - I would Google phrases from the show and just to see if they were popping up anywhere. Mindgrapes. I got a few results for Mindgrapes. Pregnant cornbread I think will get you a couple hits on Google. I’m trying to think if there’s anything weirder than pregnant cornbread. That might be the weirdest one that I was able to find.

Check it! "That I was able to find." I've been telling people for a long time that this here website is the FIRST SITE LISTED if you do a Google search for "pregnant cornbread". That's right! Number 1! Which means she definitely saw this blog. Therefore, using the powers of logical reasoning I gained through years of study at one of our nation's most prestigious colleges in Minnesota, I can conclude that she not only reads the blog on a daily basis, but that she loves it and wants to hire me as one of the writers on 30 Rock. I shall have to carefully consider her offer.

Top 5 things I am sick of reading about the Super Bowl

1. [Insert zoo animal here] makes Super Bowl pick by scratching, clawing, peeing, or crapping at some random circle of items that is supposed to represent this year's opposing teams.

2. [Insert player] outrages opponents by believing that his team will win. Seriously, is this not the most overplayed story of all time? Does any player arrive at the Super Bowl believing that he'll lose? (Ok, except for everyone on the 1985 Patriots.)

3. List of ridiculous questions asked during this year's media day. Yes, the media is, by and large, stupid, and asks stupid questions when they know that if they ask a stupid question someone will write about it and print their name. Breaking news.

4. Anything having to do with Tom Brady, Tom Brady's foot, Tom Brady's hotness, Tom Brady's hot girlfriends, Tom Brady's hot ex-girlfriend who is also the mother of his child.

5. Anything about Bill Belichick that does not mention that he is a wife-stealing dirtbag.

OMG, is Ann Coulter going to vote for Hillary?

I know I'm kind of stealing this bit from Atrios, but I've got to do one of those "simple answers to simple questions" things. ABCNews is asking, in its typically breathless way, whether Coulter might actually swing the other way in the 2008 election:

In case you missed it, on Hannity & Colmes last night, controversial pundit Ann Coulter -- who supports Mitt Romney for president -- said she would back Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, over Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

"She's more conservative that he is," she said. "She will be stronger on the war on terrorism...I will campaign for her if it's McCain."

OMG, is this true? Will she vote for Hillary over McCain?

Answer: no, she will not. Any Republican who says they will vote for Hillary over McCain because McCain is "not conservative enough" is lying, and is also an idiot.

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Worst product ever: Cheeseburger in a can


Imagine that! The worst product ever, and it's not something crazy from Japan! No, this comes straight from our good friends in Germany, and is apparently intended to be used to sate your hunger whilst in the midst of a rigorous treks through the Alps or some such. Imagine if the von Trapp family singers had been blessed with a couple cases of these while escaping their evil Nazi overlords! (Via Spluch)

Thursday, January 24, 2008

Memo to Bill Clinton: dude, SHUT UP.

Look, Bill Clinton. You were pretty much a kick-ass President. I voted for you twice, I campaigned for you twice, and I wore myself hoarse defending you when you put certain things where you shouldn't have with that nice intern lady. But, look, you really are behaving like kind of a overbearing me-me-me jerk with all the "OMG don't elect teh Obama!11!!!1!1" stuff lately, and it is wearing thin, and it is kind of making me wish you'd just shut it and go away for a while. Kthxbye.

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

Prediction: the Super Bowl is going to suck

I used to approach my analysis of the AFC and NFC championship games by looking at both teams in each game, considering how they'd match up against the other, looking at moves their coaches had made all season long in preparing for similar games, and generally just wasted a lot of time reading the analysis of other, more seasoned football fans. In the last couple years, though, I've realized that guessing the teams in the Super Bowl is actually quite simple: the Super Bowl will feature the worst game possible between the four teams in the championship round. This year, I would have been delighted with: Chargers vs. Giants, Chargers vs. Packers, or Patriots vs. Packers. I knew, going in to the game, that I would NOT be happy with a Super Bowl between the Patriots and the Giants, so I suspected that both those teams would win. And, guess what, they did.

So, my prediction now is that the Super Bowl is really going to suck. Again. The Patriots are coached by an egomaniacal wife-stealing hosebag who doesn't care what anybody thinks as long as he wins. The Giants are coached by a Cheney-level control freak who hasn't seen a dynamic offensive scheme since he spent 10 minutes in 1993 watching his son play a game of NBA Jams. This does not bode well for an entertaining game. Add to that the fact that the prestige of the Super Bowl usually convinces teams with dynamic offenses (Colts, Steelers, etc.) to resort instead to a grind-it-out offensive strategy, and I'm afraid we're looking in the eyes of a 17-6 defensive struggle that nobody will remember in a few years. I will be overjoyed if I'm wrong, but these are the two worst possible coaches to have if you want a dynamic game (and, yes, I'm aware that they scored over 70 points the last time they played each other). I will be totally and utterly shocked if there are more touchdowns than field goals in this game, and the probable MVP is either the Patriots' kicker or Asante Samuel, who will get one or two interceptions and make a few tackles. That's all it will take to be named MVP of this one. Sigh.

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

From Portland, OR: should you really get a Medal of Heroism from the police because you killed a guy who attacked you?

That's the question I have to ask after reading this story from my hometown of Portland, OR:

A Civilian Medal of Heroism will be awarded Wednesday to Susan Kuhnhausen, the Portland nurse who strangled an intruder hired to kill her in 2006.

Kuhnhausen wrestled the hammer-wielding intruder to the ground and choked him to death.

Kuhnhausen's husband, Michael, pleaded guilty last year to conspiring to commit murder. He hired the man kill his wife.

Susan Kuhnhausen is one of 85 civilians and police officers who will be recognized for heroism, lifesaving skills, or distinguished service in the Portland Police Bureau's annual awards.

The committee says the 53-year-old displayed courage and heroic action.
No question, she displayed courage. But heroic action? She saved herself! This was pure instinct! A guy tried to kill her, so she defended herself and killed him. I'm not trying to take anything away from the "woah!" factor of the event, but I have to really wonder whether this belongs in the same category of somebody who rushes into a burning house to rescue some kids or something.

A hero, to me, is someone who puts their own safety aside in order to help/save someone else. There has to be a measure of self-sacrifice (or at least heroic disregard for one's own safety to advance the public good) at play in order to be called a "hero". Remember that dude in New York who jumped down onto the subway tracks to save a woman who was having a seizure, and just narrowly missed being run over by the subway? Ok, he's a hero. The woman in this story simply defended herself. Would a woman who shot an armed intruder be given the same award? I doubt it, but there's really no difference.

I know this is kind of a classic blog thing to do--make something non-controversial into a controversy, but I think it's a worthwhile question: what's so heroic about defending yourself? Isn't that just a natural reaction?

Friday, January 11, 2008

Brief foray into complicated world of post-structural concertgoing proves overwhelming for Hannah Montana fans

Breaking news! Apparently some young fans and their (highly impressionable, highly idiotic) parents are upset because of some underhanded shenanigans during a recent Hannah Montana concert. E! Online explains thusly:

Giving her fans the best of both worlds is apparently too much for Miley Cyrus to handle on her own.

The singer, who performs both as herself and her Disney Channel alterego on the sold-out tour, was accused in an OK! magazine report this week of using a body double during a brief portion of her show.
...
"Then they covered her with a black sheet and she went through a secret door. Within a second, a new 'Hannah' came out of a different door wearing oversized white glasses. The whole time this was happening Miley's vocals were still playing. The new imposter had her back turned while she danced, trying to hide that fact that she was not Miley Cyrus. At this instant I became very suspicious."

Had these fans read--and UNDERSTOOD--the thesis of Derrida's "Difference" prior to attending the show, they would have grasped the central point advanced by post-structuralist critics and being performed by Ms. Cyrus in a very sophisticated and nuanced bit of deconstructionist criticism: that the concert actually consists of THREE preformers: Miley Cyrus, the "real" singer, her "TV" "alter-ego" (one of the cool things about deconstruction is that literally everything can be scare-quoted), and a third person who represents a composite character that lingers in the neverworld between fact and fiction, between Mylie and Hannah, between the authored work and its author, between creator and created.

In other words, in order to understand the genesis of Hannah Montana, we must first understand the genesis of the actor creating the "sign" of Hannah, in this case Mylie Cyrus, who is herself the outcome of a very intricate set of circumstances involving her father, noted neo-Foucaultian Billy Ray Cyrus. The complex relationship between sign and signifier here devolves into a complex series of binary oppositions between Hannah and Mylie, leading to the point where the concert has no choice but to generate a "third" performer to serve as a proxy for the outcome of the conflict between symbol and symbologist. That the concertgoers were confused and/or outraged by this only shows the depths to which they have been subjugated by the traditional Western structuralist mindset.

Why do so many leading Republicans look like ugly animals?

Really, there's no complex though process behind this post, other than to point out that every time I see former senator Phil Gramm, economic advisor to John McCain, on TV, I think that he looks like a box turtle. Here's the evidence.


Also, I've been trying for some time to think of the animal I'm reminded of every time I see Rudy Giuliani, aka 9udy 11uliani, aka America's Mayor, and it finally hit me: naked mole rat!

Wednesday, January 9, 2008

Feel the Fredmentum!

This graphic pretty much shows what happened to Fred Thompson's presidential hopes in New Hampshire yesterday.


Yeah, that's right. Dude finished 1,500 votes behind "Total write-ins." Ouch.

Tuesday, January 8, 2008

Update: Emily Rocheleau is NOT the stupidest person in New Hampshire

I've been contacted by a person who knows Emily Rocheleau, who I accused yesterday of being the stupidest person in New Hampshire, to inform me that her comment to the NY Times, in which she admitted to being torn between Barack Obama and John McCain, was a vast oversimplification of her view of the presidential campaign. Apparently she works for a climate change organization, and thus is aware that of all the GOP candidates, only McCain has been courageous enough to even admit that climate change is a real problem, and that we should actually, you know, do something about it. So, her statement to the Times was intended to convey her respect for McCain's courageous (relative to the rest of his party) stance on global warming.

So, I retract my statement that she's the stupidest person in New Hampshire. She is, according to my emailer, friendly, smart, and a good person, and my emailer seemed credible, so I have no reason to doubt that statement.

With that said, I hereby announce that the stupidest person in New Hampshire is anyone voting for Fred Thompson.


Emily Rocheleau: Not Stupid. Actually pretty cool.

Another post in which I ramble about "miracles" and their meaning

During lunch today I did one of my favorite things: ran on the treadmill while watching the 4 TVs in my employer's gym while NOT wearing headphones so I could laugh at the close captioning. One of the TVs was showing the press conference of legendary Redskins coach Joe Gibbs announcing his resignation/retirement. Now, I like Joe Gibbs, and think he's a very decent guy, and respect his reasons (actual family reasons, not the fake family reasons that some politician who's just been caught in bed with a hooker comes up with) for retirement. However, one of the things that annoyed me was his discussion of how religion factored into his decision. Because the volume was not on and because I was running at the time, I wasn't able to transcribe his statements, but he said something along the lines of how he has to give thanks to God for looking down and allowing someone like him (a guy who took dance in college, for crying out loud!...wait, I did that too....) to become a coach, and how this means we have a benevolent creator or some such.

But wait. The Redskins suffered the tragedy of losing their best player this year when Sean Taylor was murdered in his house. This gets back to my frustration about how people call it a "miracle" when a plane crashes and 218 people die and they pull one guy alive out of the rubble, or when a building collapses and 98 people die but a four month old baby survives. In order to say that the survival of one is an act of God, don't you kind of have to accept that the deaths were an act of God, or that God was, like, too busy to pay attention? Can people really imagine a God who will look down and help one person, but not bother helping others? Is it really savvy for Gibbs to say that God played an active role in his success at the same time that one of his players was flat out murdered? Was God busy that day?

I'm not saying I don't understand what he's trying to say, but this is one of those moments when people tend to nod their head politely when someone thanks God for their success, rather than wondering about the logical implications of that statement.

Howard Schultz is a two-headed Monster: AP

Something about this AP photo/caption made me laugh:


"Right." Such a simple word, such a tricky situation. The guy in front's body is to the right, but the other guy's head is to the right. Which is it? What are the rules for this kind of thing?

Monday, January 7, 2008

Emily Rocheleau*, 22, is the stupidest person in New Hampshire

This is, generally, an up-tempo, "feel good" blog, like one of those infectious morning shows with Moose Mike, Rocket Jaw, and Krazy Kat on 100.3, Jammin' FM. But, from time to time, I have to take a break and point out somebody who has chosen, for whatever reason, to put his or her name in the national news and say something so utterly stupid that he or she deserves to be branded as a simpleton for the rest of his or her utterly bewildering life.

And, in this case, that someone is Emily Rocheleau, a 22 year old "independent" voter from New Hampshire. Now, plenty of blogs have devoted acres of print to pointing out the absurd infatuation our media and political world has with "independent" voters. Also known as "undecided voters," they are people who wait until the last possible moment, despite a veritable avalanche of news and information about the candidates, to make up his or her mind about who to support in a given election.

Since the eyes of the political world are now focused upon New Hampshire, where, legend tells us, all the men wear flannel shirts and all the women are seasoned political mavens who could spend hours lecturing you upon the intricacies of quorum calls and cloture resolutions, the press has once again rushed "independent voters" into the spotlight. Yesterday's NY Times featured a photo of Ms. Rocheleau, and said the following about her in the caption

Emily Rocheleau, 22, is trying to choose between Senators John McCain and Barack Obama.
Ok, look. It is January, 2008. The presidential candidates have been declared candidates for quite some time now. I simply don't know what to say about someone who is undecided to the point of not knowing whether she will choose between Obama and McCain. That is simply ridiculous. You could not hope to find two candidates whose views on actual issues are more different than Obama and McCain. You could not hope to find two men whose paths to the US Senate are more different. In what they believe, who they represent, and the life experiences they would bring to the Oval Office, you have two men who are very nearly diametrically opposed. So what, pray tell, explains someone who will vote for either one of them?

I'll tell you what explains it: the obsession our media has with trying to force candidates beyond the boring world of actual issues. Reporters and news anchors are, frankly, bored with hum drum things like health care and economic issues (outsourcing? BORING!), so they turn elections into a contest of personalities. And the result of this is that voters like Emily Rocheleau, 22, get trapped into thinking that either one of these guys would be a fine person to elect, as if the policies they will implement are somehow secondary to the kind of people they are.

(*I mention her name because she attached herself to that statement in the article. I'm sure there are thousands of others who share her disappointing perspective, however.)

Wednesday, January 2, 2008

My blog is not dead, and neither am I

It's been about twelve years (give or take 11.9 years) since my last blog post, but I hope to be back on my blogging feet in the days ahead, and back to my regular posting. Whew, holiday travel and related festivities are exhausting.

Tuesday, December 18, 2007

Gordon Smith is a big flip-flopper, and everyone knows it

The news today is that Oregon senator Gordon "weathervane" Smith has decided to throw caution and political sensibilities to the wind and defend departing GOP senator Trent Lott's inane comments about Strom Thurmond. You remember that moment from a few year's back, when Lott said that had the rest of the country followed Mississippi's lead in voting for Thurmond for president in 1948, "we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years." (Those problems, presumably, having something to do with uppity members of certain races getting uppity and thinking they deserved certain rights under our Constitution.)

Today, however, Gordon Smith got up on the Senate floor and said the following about his good buddy Trent's racist comments:

"I watched over international news as his words were misconstrued, words which we had heard him utter many times in his big warm-heartedness trying to make one of our colleagues, Strom Thurmond, feel good at 100 years old. We knew what he meant. But the wolfpack of the press circled around him, sensed blood in the water, and the exigencies of politics caused a great injustice..."
The only problem here is that Gordo's got himself a teeny tiny memory, forgetting that his initial response back in 2002 was not so generous:
"However they were intended, Senator Lott's words were offensive and I was deeply dismayed to hear of them," Smith said in a brief statement. "His statement goes against everything I and the people of Oregon believe in."
Oh yeah, and then three days later, when Lott stepped down as majority leader, Smith said he was glad that he had resigned. Sigh. It's become quite the pattern for Smith. Say one thing one day, get a bucket of praise from The Oregonian and other naiive media outlets, and then turn around and say/do the opposite. Let's see if someone in the local media actually has the guts to call him on it this time.

Friday, December 14, 2007

In bold strategy, Clemens attempts to distract attention from steroid report with new absurd hairstyle

It's a risky gambit, but if anyone has the chops to distract the public from an incrimination steroid report by featuring an absurd yes-I'm-a-45-year-old-man-with-a-receeding-hairline-but-I-can-
still-get-frosted-tips hairstyle, it's Roger Clemens.

Thursday, December 13, 2007

Reaction to the Mitchell Report

This is the room of people who were surprised to hear that Roger Clemens has been taking buttloads of steroids.

Tuesday, December 11, 2007

Stupid online polls, KGW (Portland, OR) edition

There's been some unsettling talk in recent days that Oregon might be heading for something of a recession--leading economic indicators (payrolls, etc.) are down, and a group of economists from the University of Oregon apparently think there is a substantial risk to the state's economy. So, naturally, into the breach storms one of my least favorite dispensers of the local news, KGW.com, who asks its viewers to answer this highly relevant poll question:


Now, here's what I don't get: why the specificity? Why the "yes, my job would probably be at risk"? Isn't it possible to be worried about the economy even if one's job isn't at risk? I mean, I *think* my job could probably survive a not-too-nasty recession, but I still don't really relish the thought of having one. That is to say, my job would survive, but other things--the jobs of my friends, restaurants in my neighborhoods, the budget for local schools--could take a substantial hit. Why not simply write "yes, I'm concerned about the impact of a recession"?

Actually, the reason is pretty simple: the "no" answer--"I feel secure"--is much more general, and it could very well be that they wrote the poll in such a way as to generate a happy news story--more people are optimistic than pessimistic. The current results have the "no's" in the lead by about 10 points, so I could be on to something.

The disturbing implication, of course, is that they understand that people are unable to think about national politics in a way that does not intimately involve them. According to this view, the only reason you'd be concerned about a recession is if your job was threatened.

Or, it could be that I'm simply overanalyzing something that an intern wrote in about two minutes. ¡Viva blogging!

Japanese baseball player to provide millions of American teenagers* with stupid joke for the next decade

Sports Illustrated reports today that a famous Japanese baseball player plans to follow the lead of guys like Ichiro and Matsui and play ball in the United States. Where Ichiro and Matsui lack that "ha ha, you have a funny name!11!!!!" quality, however, this guy has it in spades:

NAGOYA, Japan (AP) -- Japanese outfielder Kosuke Fukudome told the Chunichi Dragons he will not return next season, saying he wants to make a move to the major leagues.
Fukudome? Oh, good lord.

*"teenager," it should be noted, is a category that also includes every Sportscenter anchor.

Monday, December 10, 2007

Idiot of the Week: Mike Huckabee Edition

It's easy to pick on poor Mike Huckabee: sure, he used to be fat and still walks like a fat guy, and he thinks he's pretty nifty for having a toupee'd fool like Chuck Norris as his biggest celebrity endorsement, and he's got one of the most redneck last names in American political history. However, just when you feel like maybe the guy's a little bit more than a wisecracking redneck southern governor with zero foreign policy experience and a domestic policy team made up of three high school interns and his illegal-weapon packing son, he goes and says something stupid. Witness this luncacy:

Republican presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee refused to retract a statement he made in 1992 calling for the isolation of AIDS patients.

Responding to an Associated Press questionnaire, Huckabee said steps should be taken to "isolate the carriers of this plague" during his failed run for a U.S. Senate seat from Arkansas 15 years ago.

He said he probably would not make the same statement today because of what is known about how HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, is transmitted.

"I had simply made the point -- and I still believe this today -- that in the late '80s and early '90s, when we didn't know as much as we do now about AIDS, we were acting more out of political correctness than we were about the normal public health protocols that we would have acted," Huckabee told Fox News on Sunday.
First of all, OF COURSE he said this to Fox News. Second of all, he acts as though the only rational course of action in the 1980s was to segregate people with AIDS. I remember way back when (certainly earlier than 1992, when Huckabee said this) that people were saying that you could not get AIDS from casual, incidental contact with someone who had AIDS. His comment may not have been radical in 1983, but by 1992 there was substantial evidence to the contrary.

What this shows, of course, is that the George W. Bush-inspired Republican Party has inherited its master's inability/refusal to admit a mistake. What Huckabee should say in this instance is: "Look, I made a mistake--I was wrong, and I admit it." Instead, he chooses the coward's way out, and tries to blame his ultra-conservative (and mistaken) views on the prevailing public sentiment at the time.

Finally, this shows the danger in ignoring science, as the Republican party tries to do time and time again. Whether it is the Bush administration ignoring science on global warming, or conservative Christians ignoring science on AIDS (to say nothing about the failure of "abstinence-only education," Huckabee's absurd comments show what can happen when you ignore the actual research on an issue in favor of pandering to the worst elements in the voting public.

Friday, December 7, 2007

Really? Socks?

Sigh. You know you're getting older when you actually contemplate ASKING FOR socks for Christmas rather than running from the room in horror upon unwrapping a package of them. Yikes. What has happened to me? Whatever happened to that kid who was so thrilled to get Laser Tag and assorted wacky toys of the 80s? He grew up, I guess, and became a lame sock lover.

Wednesday, December 5, 2007

KGW news produces least helpful story in internet history

Ok, a questions: if you were issuing a news story talking about the release of a sketch of a guy who is alleged to have attacked a local college student, what is the ONE piece of information you'd want to include with the story? Exactly--a copy of the sketch. One additional question: take a guess at what single piece of information was NOT included in KGW.com's story about the attacker? Exactly--a copy of the sketch. Sheesh.

I know the whole gradually-moving-stories-to-the-internet thing is tricky and complicated, but is it too much to ask local news stations to provide graphics in stories like this one? KGW is notoriously bad in this respect (KATU has the sketch, for example); I think they must have some sort of automated system that just puts copy on the website without bothering to ensure that all the relevant information is included.

Monday, December 3, 2007

Barack Obama the latest to recognize India's growing power

This video doesn't approach the navel-gazing intensity of a Mike Gravel campaign spot, but it does illustrate the crossover potential of Barack Obama going Bollywood. Set to a stirring techno beat and featuring multi-colored elephants, cleverly edited footage of Obama speaking Hindi, and clips of the big man himself getting funky, this is sure to lock up the crucial Indian-American vote that is so important in early primary states like Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.

Thursday, November 29, 2007

This is why Australia is much, much cooler than the U.S.

We here at Pregnant Cornbread would like to offer our congratulations to the new environment minister for the Australian government, Peter Garrett, lead singer of seminal 80s rock band Midnight Oil. Seriously, how cool is that? We've got crap celebrities in politics, and the Aussies have got freaking Peter Garrett.

On a personal note, this is really thrilling news: I practically worshipped Midnight Oil when I was younger man, and they were in fact the first rock concert I attended (if you don't count the "Mama's and the Papa's" reunion show I saw at the San Diego Wild Animal Park when I was 6). When I was in high school I wrote a fan letter to the band, and their manager wrote me back a TWO PAGE letter, responding to points in my letter, talking about the group, etc. Crazy. So, anyway, this is just completely nifty news, and my hat is off to Peter Garrett, member of Parliament since 2004, and now minister for the environment.

Cool.

Tuesday, November 27, 2007

Breaking News: Mitt Romney would not appoint a Mormon to the Cabinet if elected President

It's news of a somewhat unsurprising variety that Willard "Mitt" Romney, former Governor of Taxachusetts and a guy who appointed a judge who subsequently released a prisoner who subsequently murdered some people (what, seriously, is this like a requirement of governors of Massachusetts?), has come out and apparently admitted that he would not appoint a Muslim to the cabinet if he was elected President. Now, as usual, Mitt ducks the real reason for this ("I'm a Republican, what do you think?" would be the correct answer) and instead comes up with the laughably sloppy explanation “based on the numbers of American Muslims [as a percentage] in our population.”

So, Mitt is on record as believing that a group's members should only be allowed to hold a cabinet-level position if they amount to a given percentage of the US population?

Interestingly enough, there are apparently between 6 and 7 million Muslims in the United States. (Admittedly, this is a difficult number to quantify.) According to Mitt Romney, this is not a sufficient percentage to give someone any authority within the executive branch. By the same token, however, there are 5.5 million Mormons in the United States.

Thus, by his own words, we can conclude that Mitt Romney would not appoint a Mormon to the cabinet. Sheesh, what a bigot.

Oprah's favorite fridge: Are you kidding me with this stuff?

Let's see: in America, we've got a problem with obesity. People eat too much food, watch too much TV, and get too little exercise. With that in mind, the geniuses at the LG Corporation have come up with the item guaranteed to get people off their couches, and into the...kitchen. Yes, you got it--it's a fridge with a built-in TV/DVD! Yay! Honestly, I don't even know what to say about this. Have we truly fallen this far as a culture (note: anytime anyone begins a sentence like that, the answer is always going to be "yes") that we have to literally have a TV in front of us at all times? Are we incapable of thinking for ourselves during that crucial 2 minute segment of our day when we get up from the TV during a commercial to go into the kitchen to get something out of the fridge?

Even more depressing is that National Arbiter of Good Taste and Sensibility Oprah Winfrey has named this fridge one of her "Favorite Things" for 2007, so it's guaranteed to get a big boost in sales for the holiday season. At a mere $3,800, why not buy two? You could even put one in your living room, so that your couch-to-fridge time is lessened. If you can put it a few steps from the couch, it might even be possible to NEVER be away from the TV. At such bargain basement prices, you could also locate one in your bedroom. With the superb picture of the built-in DVD, late-night snacks have never been so entertaining!



America: Worst. Superpower. Ever.

My least favorite bit of journalistic laziness

I have a sense that the technology of the day gives rise to certain instances of public laziness, and I cannot help but feel as though I have a sacred duty to correct this. Or, more accurately, to write things describing how much hatred I feel in my heart for their usage. When I was growing up in the 1980s, it was routine for people--usually my peers, at occasions like high school graduations--to begin their speeches with the cliched saying, "Webster's defines ______ as..." That ______ was usually something like "success" or "graduation" or whatever. It was annoying, trite, and everything else.

However, now that we've entered a day and age in which we can comfortably leave things like dictionaries and encyclopedias behind on the dust-covered bookshelves of bygone era, we have to confront glaring new instances of cliches working themselves like boring beetles into the prose of journalists.

My least favorite example of this is when writers cite the number of Google hits a give phrase returns as an example of the cache that term holds in the public consciousness. Even though I usually enjoy his writing, Slate.com's Tim Noah is today's exemplar of this annoying tendency. In an article on the credulity of CNN's Larrry King, he writes,

Then again, this is the same Larry King who regularly plays host on Larry King Live to psychics, mediums, and UFO enthusiasts; who peppered his former USA Today column with insights like "The revamped Beverly Hills Hotel is just beautiful" and "Aren't those Save the Children ties the prettiest around?"; and who, when his name is paired on Google with the word credulous, yields 73,800 hits.
Ok, a few things. First of all, that's factually wrong. I googled "Larry King credulous," and came back with 10,700 hits.

Second of all--and, yes, I know I'm taking what is essentially a throw away comment by Noah and writing way too much about it...but isn't that the entire point of blogging?--that's not how Google searches work. All searching for a combination of words does (unless you put the entire phrase in quotation marks, which is not what Noah did) is find any page on which all those words occurs. If I write something like the following sentence, "Larry King's show on CNN is one of the best I've ever seen, and nobody, from my lovely wife to my credulous, moronic neighbor, believes otherwise," it will show up (perhaps as soon as this afternoon) in a Google search for "Larry King credulous."

Here's an example of how much utility you can really get from using Google as a sounding board for the cultural zeitgeist. If I google my name and the phrase "dating Mandy Moore," I wind up with 69,300 hits. ("Dating Beyoncé Knowles" yields only 16,300 hits--sorry, Beyoncé!) Holy cow! If I google my name and the phrase "impregnated Salma Hayek," I get 10,800 hits. Yow! If I google my name and "hit 714 home runs," I get over 250,000 hits. And, since I clearly am not dating Mandy Moore, have not impregnated Salma Hayek, and am not Babe Ruth, there are clearly limits to this business of calculating our culture's fevered intensity for information (although clearly many people are interested in the identity of people who have impregnated Salma Hayek) by arriving at the number of Google hits for whatever particular phrase floats your boat.

Next up, a fascinating rant in which I express my disgust for people who write/say "jive" when they mean "jibe." Fun!

Monday, November 19, 2007

Fred Thompson is stealing his act from Bartles & Jaymes

Big time Hollywood Fred Thompson, former Laziest Senator of All Time (R-TN) and current candidate for president from the Party-That-Hates-Actors-Until-They-Run-As-Republicans party, has released a new down-home, folksy advertisement for the tee vee in which he aw shucks his way into the hearts of anti-immigrant voters across the country. Or New Hampshire, whatever. Watching it, though, I couldn't help but be reminded of some other folksy, down home characters from the TV who wanted to do nothing more than offer up some refreshment: the pitchmen from those classic Bartles & Jaymes winecooler ads in the 80s. So, for the benefit of humanity, here's Fred's ad, followed by the dearly departed Bartles & Jaymes guys.





It's exactly the same! The same speech patterns, the same mannerisms, even the same "thanks for your support" ending, more or less. The only difference, of course, is that one commercial is attempting to sell us a shoddily produced, sickly sweet product that only appeals to the young and ignorant, and the other is advertising a wine cooler.

Friday, November 16, 2007

Turnabout is fair play, aka, A-Rod gets his

Is there any justice more poetic than Alex Rodriguez, who acted like a total jerk by upstaging the final game of the World Series to announce he was bolting from his contract with the Yankees, getting knocked off the top of the sports pages on the day he announces his new contract with the Yankees by the story of Barry Bonds' indictment?

Will George W. Bush commute Barry Bonds' sentence if he's found guilty?

Yesterday, the guy with the biggest head this side of Tim Russert, Barry Bonds, was indicted by a federal grand jury of five counts of perjury and obstruction of justice, coincidentally, the same charges faced by Dick Cheney's erstwhile chief of staff, Scooter Libby. However, after Libby's conviction, Bush commuted his sentence. Here's how CNN described it at the time

President Bush on Monday spared I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby from prison, commuting the former White House aide's 30-month prison term.

A conviction remains on Scooter Libby's record, and he must still pay a $250,000 fine.

The prison time was imposed after a federal court convicted Libby of perjury, obstruction of justice and lying to investigators in the probe of the leak of the name of a CIA operative.

...

In a written statement commuting the prison sentence, issued hours after Monday's ruling, Bush called the sentence "excessive," and suggested that Libby will pay a big enough price for his conviction.
Ok, fair enough. Libby was found guilty on four counts, and was sentenced to a 30 month prison term. So that sets the bar at what Bush considers to be unfair and excessive for perjury and obstruction of justice.

Now let's turn our attention to Barry Bonds. Here's how Michael McCann of Sports Illustrated describes the charges against Bonds.
However a conviction would be described, Bonds would face up to 5 years in prison and a $250,000 fine for each of three perjury charges, and 10 years and a $250,000 fine for an obstruction of justice charge. He would be facing serious time.
Ok, so we've got Libby sentenced to 30 months for perjury and obstruction of justice, and Bonds facing a potential 35 years in prison for the same charges. Leaving aside for the moment the greater question of whether a guy who took steroids should get a longer prison sentence than a guy who conspired to leak the identity of a covert CIA operative and then cover it up, I think it's a fair question: if Bonds is found guilty and sentenced to more than 30 months in prison, would George Bush support commuting his sentence?

Thursday, November 15, 2007

Out of touch liberal president increases federal regulations and ignores flyover country

Oh, excuse me. That's what the headline would be if a Democratic president had proposed the REGULATIONS that President Bush proposed this morning in an effort to improve congestion at our nation's airports. Take it away, ABC News:

Hoping to alleviate a chaotic holiday travel season, the White House announced Thursday that the military would open air space for commercial airlines over the five day holiday period.

"The U.S. military is going to make more air space available for civilian airliners this holiday season by opening up a Thanksgiving express lane," said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino.

Additionally, Perino said compensation to passengers bumped from overbooked flights would double the previous compensation, currently $400 or $800, depending on the extent of the inconvenience.
Well, let's talk about this "Thanksgiving express lane!" I live in Portland, OR, and love the idea of improved air space between me and my wife's family in San Diego, or between me and my brother in New York. Certainly these regulations extend to those of us out West, right, Mr. President?!?
These openings concern mainly the East Coast Navy airspace off the Virginia Capes and Jacksonville, Fla., and will occur only during Thanksgiving weekend, from Wednesday, Nov. 21 to the morning of Monday, Nov. 26.
Oh. Of course, if it was a Democrat proposing this, you can bet that he or she would be excoriated for ignoring the needs and wishes of the good folks in "flyover" country, and would be heavily criticized for focusing only on the East Coast (pssst: where all the liberals live).

But since it is a Republican president, the article does not mention that these policies are new REGULATIONS (a word the President himself used in his talk this morning), instead labeling the policies as "assistance" (which they no doubt are, which is kind of the whole point about regulations) for travelers.

Wednesday, November 14, 2007

FEMA "rap for kids" really goes off the rails

Hey, kids--you know what's hip? RAP MUSIC! That's right! It's the thing that those crazy, wacky teenagers are doing, what with the crazy pants and the big boomboxes and the hipping and the hopping. And do you know what else is really cool? Rapping about public policy! Thankfully, the "hep cats" down at the Federal Emergency Management Authority, aka FEMA, aka FEMA 2000, aka Femaster Jay, aka Lucious Lightfoot FEMAboobimo, have put out a pretty dope rap to explain to the kids just what it is that makes managing emergencies such a gas. Check out these "phat" lyrics:

Disaster . . . it can happen anywhere,
But we've got a few tips, so you can be prepared
For floods, tornadoes, or even a 'quake,
You've got to be ready - so your heart don't break.
Disaster prep is your responsibility
And mitigation is important to our agency.


Wait, wha? Miti-what? Is it me, or does that last line veer from "lame, trite rhymes about emergencies" to "weird wonky stuff that nobody really cares about?" And, man, it goes off the rails FAST. I can almost picture the board meeting, wherein some "square" upper management guy was like "ahem, well, the rap music my kids listen to talks only about "hos" and "bitches" and "getting in some buster's grill." Shouldn't we have something in here about our important work with mitigation, especially as it relates to certain public-private ventures we have established with various community stakeholders?"

Finally, here's the "wack" graphics they use for the page. Far out, daddy-o! Because nothing--and I mean nothing--says "cool" as much as putting a "z" at the end of a word that normally has an "s" at the end of it. That's crazy!

Tuesday, November 13, 2007

Hey, Latvia--SUCK IT!!!!

That's right, bitches. So this big impressive healthcare study came out, comparing how various countries are doing at making sure that babies born don't go on to die soon thereafter, and guess what? We smoked your asses! That's right! Boo ya! Y'all thought you were sick stuff, but you just got thrown down by the good old US of A. LOL, Loserz!!! That'll teach you suckers--next time you try to roll, keep it down in your own league. Yeah, you heard me--stick to Lithuania and Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan and some of the other 'stans. Ummm hmmm. Tell Prime Minister Aigars Kalvitis to quit trying to run with the big dogs like George W! Maybe he should try to compete with someone like First Deputy Prime Minister Vladimir Semashko of Belarus--that's more his style.

Wait, what's that? You don't believe me? Ok, fine, check this for yourself, fools. Here's the list right here.

Group A
- Japan 1.8 deaths per 1,000 live births
Group B
- Czech Rep 2 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Finland 2 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Iceland 2 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Norway 2 deaths per 1,000 live births
Group C
- Austria 3 deaths per 1,000 live births
- France 3 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Germany 3 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Israel 3 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Italy 3 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Luxembourg 3 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Portugal 3 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Slovenia 3 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Spain 3 deaths per 1,000 live births
Group D
- Australia 4 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Belgium 4 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Canada 4 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Denmark 4 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Estonia 4 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Greece 4 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Ireland 4 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Lithuania 4 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Netherlands 4 deaths per 1,000 live births
- New Zealand 4 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Switzerland 4 deaths per 1,000 live births
- United Kingdom 4 deaths per 1,000 live births
Group E
- Hungary 5 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Malta 5 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Poland 5 deaths per 1,000 live births
- Slovakia 5 deaths per 1,000 live births
- USA - 5 deaths per 1,000 live births
Group F
- Latvia 6 deaths per 1,000 live births


Yeah, that's right. Check the scoreboard, baby. You got schooled. You even got your own Group--Group F, for Failure. Meanwhile we're rolling up in Group E, for Exceptional. That's right. Us, Hungary, Malta, Poland (don't forget about them), and Slofreakinvakia. Game on.

Thursday, November 8, 2007

Britney's brilliant lawyer tactic #547: Piss off the guy hearing your case

I won't bore you with the trials and tribulations of Ms. Britney Spears nee Alexander nee Federline, but the latest story about how she's allegedly "ducking drug tests" has one of the most brilliant legal tactics I've ever encountered. The basic idea of the story is this: Britney was ordered by the court to submit to random drug tests. She has been called 14 times, and had only gone to the lab to take the test 8 of those times. Federline's lawyer sees much skullduggery here, whereas Britney's lawyer says that the girl just missed the calls because she was asleep or in the midst of a Cheetoh-induced stupor. But here's where the story gets kind of awesome:

Spears has been called to the laboratory 14 times, but has failed to respond to eight of those calls, Federline attorney Mark Vincent Kaplan told Superior Court Commissioner Scott Gordon Thursday morning.
...
Spears lawyer Anne Kiley argued the previous court order was unconstitutional and Spears didn't respond to the lab phone calls within an hour, as ordered by the court, because she was sleeping. Kiley asked that Spears be given six hours to respond to the laboratory phone requests.
...
Gordon said time wasn't the problem, noting Spears has lost telephone numbers and changed her telephone numbers. The commissioner then noted he has to wake up at 7:30 a.m. each morning.

Kiley interrupted: "You're not a pop star with a No. 1 album."

Oh, snap! OH NO SHE DI'INT!!!! Seriously, is this a smart tactic? I didn't go to law school, so I'm not familiar with the ins and outs and assorted intricacies of our legal system, but is it really a clever move to (a) interrupt the judge (or "court commissioner," whatever) and point out the fact that he's not a pop star with a Number 1 album? (And, technically, neither is Britney.)

It must be said, however, that this "with all due respect, sir, you're not a..." tactic is one that will not work for Federline's lawyer, unless the "seriously, though, Mr. Court Commissioner, you're not an unemployed, highly fertile, and frequently stoned backup dancer" move seems like a good one.

Wednesday, November 7, 2007

"So, Dave, why don't you allow comments on your blog?"

Ok, this is a fairly common question, one that shows up in my email with some degree of regularity. And, for the most part, my answer is something like "well, if I did that, then the ___% of my day that I devote to blogging (some reading, some writing) would increase by a factor of 5 as I spent volumes of time sitting around responding to various comments about something I've said."

I'd have to answer charges from crazy Mitt Romney supporters (is there any other kind?) that I've insulted the Moroni Man himself; I'd have to respond to 9udy 11uliani fans that he's actually more than 9/11 and MARRYING HIS COUSIN AND STAYING MARRIED TO HER FOR 14 YEARS EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE COUSINS AND ISN'T THAT FREAKY; and I'd have to answer to the occasional Angelina Jolie or Tom Brady fan who wandered in here from God knows where and is now hot and bothered over me calling their chosen idol a selfish piece of narcissistic idiocy.

But, thanks to a recent post I did on swingers in Portland, I have a whole new reason. A few weeks back I did a short--and at the time I thought unimportant--post about the name change of a local skeezoid swing joint, one I drive past every day on the way to work. The name of the place is now "Angel's Sensuous Social Club," a name that I think--as I pointed out in my post--is pretty nasty. "Sensuous," for starters, is near the top of the "if you hear a guy use the word ______, run away" list that I will give to my daughter when she turns 16. But here's the thing--I have been deluged (not literally, figuratively) by people coming to this blog looking for the name of that swing club. There have been hundreds of them. From everywhere. Russia, India, Iran (yep), Gresham, Poulsbo, Manitoba, Dusseldorf, Vancouver (WA and BC), and points between. You name it, they want to know about the happenings at this swing club.

But--and I can't stress this enough--I have NO idea what goes on in there. I don't want to know. I won't listen if someone wants to tell me. So I fear that if I had comments up, the comments for that particular post would be full of nasty swingers talking to other nasty swingers about the nasty things they like to do whilst swinging. (It's not that I'm necessarily opposed to nasty things, just that...well, I've seen a few swingers in my day. Ugh. Say no more.)

So, short answer to the above question is: because I don't want my blog to be full of the comments of swingers telling each other which robes and lotions they'll be wearing to their next "party," and where their van conversion got that sweet shag carpeting, and god knows what else. So, no comments for the foreseeable future.

Tuesday, November 6, 2007

FBI catches wind of devious "Falafel bomb" plot

ABC New's "The Blogger" website clues us into some genius maneuvers at the FBI for profiling terrorists: they're checking out the sale of falafel in California so that they can, uh, well, somehow or another, detect the presence of Iranian terrorists.

Hoping to catch Iranian terrorists in the United States, the FBI analyzed California grocery sales records to find patterns in the sales of Middle Eastern items, according to Congressional Quarterly's Jeff Stein.

The veteran national security writer reported that in 2005 and 2006, FBI agents "sifted through customer data collected by San Francisco-area grocery stores," with the idea that "a spike in, say, falafel sales, combined with other data, would lead to Iranian secret agents."
It's hard to know what to even say about this. I only hope that they aren't clued in to a second terrorist front, one far, far more sinister than the Iranians. And, the FBI will be devastated to hear that thanks to unusual dining habits, this group will be far more difficult to track. We know very little about them, but here's a photo of their reputed top agent.

Birth of a false meme: Hillary Clinton and driver's licenses

Much has been raised about Tim Russert's absurdly stupid "moderating" of the Democratic debate on October 30. Russert's standard tactic is to ask somebody a question and then, as if he was the Great Creskin himself, reveal that--gasp!--they said something slightly different about that subject 10 years ago! OMG!! His only interest is in the "gotcha" question, and it rapidly grows tiring, particularly when we have 10 debates before the first primary. But, as mentioned, his main focus in the past debate was to get Hillary Clinton to stumble over her words on a variety of issues--Social Security, the Charles Rangel tax plan, and of course New York Governor Eliot Spitzer's thoughts about extending driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. Here's exactly what Russert asked Hillary Clinton:

Senator Clinton, Governor of New York Eliot Spitzer has proposed giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. He told the Nashua, New Hampshire, Editorial Board it makes a lot of sense. Why does it make a lot of sense to give an illegal immigrant a driver's license?
Note the actual question: "Why does it make a lot of sense to give an illegal immigrant a driver's license?" He was asking her to explain Governor Spitzer's thinking, and she did that. However, that is--no surprise--not how the national press is reporting on the debate. CNN's "Political Tracker," for example, reports the following:
At the end of a televised Democratic presidential debate last week, Hillary Rodham Clinton hedged on whether she supported a plan by her home state governor, New York's Eliot Spitzer, to issue licenses to illegal immigrants.
Of course, she was not actually asked "whether she supported" the plan, she was just asked for reasons why it might make sense.

My suggestion is this: continue to watch the news on this issue. Whether or not you support Hillary Clinton, you will notice that virtually every media outlet will claim that she was asked if she support Spitzer's plan. She was not--go back and read Russert's question. He asked why it would make sense to issue licenses to illegal immigrants. Now, as a friend of mine pointed out, Hillary's only fault here was not realizing the game that Russert was playing: he asked her why the plan made sense, but when he was actually asking was "do you support the plan?" The rest of the media was in on his game, but unfortunately, Clinton was not.

For reference, here are only a few of the many media sources who have already started reporting that Hillary was asked "if she supported" Spitzer's plan:

Opinion Journal
"Sen. Hillary Clinton was asked during a debate this week if she supported New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer's plan to give driver's licenses to illegal immigrants."

New York Daily News
"Both polls were done while Clinton was getting hammered over her less-than-clear answers in last week's Democratic debate, including on whether she supports Gov. Spitzer's driver's license plan and what she'd do to shore up Social Security."

Monday, November 5, 2007

Conservative Idiot of the Day: Rich Lowry of the National Review

The race for "biggest idiot in the conservative blogosphere" is something akin to the race between the Miami Dolphins and the New York Jets to see who can lose the most games this year: it's a race, but not something you want to see. There are so many worthy candidates for the honor that it becomes a chore to say all the names, much less go to the effort of actually visiting their blogs to witness the horror firsthand. Nevertheless, a special favorite of mine is National Review's "The Corner," which is home to a rotating cast of luminaries like Kathryn Jean "K-Lo" Lopez, Jonah Goldberg, John "J-Pod" Podhoretz, Byron "Superhair" York, and John "Crazy Racist Englishman who only talks about English things and how he's a racist" Derbyshire. In our race to find the thickest of these particular fools, however, we can't overlook the sheer genius of Rich Lowry, whose offering today shows that no matter how hard he tries, he just can't. quite. understand. the nuances of international policy. Everything, and I mean everything has to be shoehorned into his "it's teh evil Islam!!!!11!!!1!!" view of things. Witness his ramblings on Pervez Musharraf's dictatorial outrages in Pakistan:

The Pakistan situation is another sign that what we face is a global insurgency with many different fronts from Karachi to London. I'm not a big fan of the "world war" terminology because that cues people to think in terms of conventional powers arrayed against one another in a hot or cold war (although such conflicts obviously can have guerrilla wars within them). What we have now is pretty much entirely guerilla wars. Musharraf is fighting one that is probably going to get worse before it gets better.
Well, ok, that's complete rubbish. I know it's tempting to take Musharraf's word for it, and believe that his blatant seizure of power is something he's doing to strike back at those evil Al Qaeda guys (the same ones his own intelligence service, the ISI, has been rather blatant about helping). However, do take his word for it overlooks one key facts: everyone he's arrested since his imposition of martial law this weekend has been either a judge, a reporter, a lawyer, or some member of his political opposition.

I know it's tempting to view everything through the Rumsfeldian lens of "OMG we're surrounded by teh terror!" but in this case you run the risk of looking like an idiot, as Lowry does, when you confuse a petty dictatorial power grab for an earnest effort to combat terrorism.

The painful realization that you are growing old...

I realized something this morning, and it goes like this: you don't realize that you've spent the past year or so going to be bed at around 10 pm every night until your younger brother comes to town and you go to bars and do NOT go to bed until 2.30 am. Yow. Used to be I could bounce back from that in a day or so, but now...not so much. What the hell, age.

Friday, November 2, 2007

Classic Springsteen clip for a lazy Friday

Today's a relatively quiet day in Portland, so rather than bore readers with the minutiae of my personal life (I got a new wall in my bedroom! Yay!), I figured I'd post this classic clip of Bruce Springsteen surprising a bunch of passers-by in Copenhagen with a spontaneous performance of "The River." Bruce is my favorite singer ever, and "The River" is my favorite song of his, so it's a natural choice. Apparently the story here is that the guy in the yellow who's playing along with Bruce is a street performer in Copenhagen who plays Springsteen songs. Bruce, in town for a concert, saw him, and decided to join in for a duet. The dude manages to get some pretty good harmonies in on the chorus, so good on him.

Honestly, can you beat lyrics like

"But I remember us riding in her brother's car,
Her body tan and wet down at the reservoir,
At night on those banks I'd lie awake
And pull her close just to feel each breath she'd take.
Now those memories come back to haunt me,
They haunt me like a curse
Is a dream a lie if it don't come true?
Or is it something worse..."

Answer: no, you cannot. The man is a genius.

(Also, note, the audio at first is full of excited Danes saying things in Danish, but rapidly improves as they chill out.)