Reasonably Ascertainable Reality

Thoughts and musings on current events and other random occurrences.

Location: South Jersey, United States

Thursday, May 26, 2005

Just the beginning if you ask me

Another wacky post from Z --- just kidding! This is why I read you.
I could possibly see if the Catholic school wanted him out, there is a reason, but this absolute load of bullcrap is just the beginning if you ask me.
Was there any doubt we are headed down this road?

An Indianapolis father is appealing a Marion County judge's unusual
order that prohibits him and his ex-wife from exposing their child to
"non-mainstream religious beliefs and rituals."
The parents practice Wicca, a contemporary pagan religion that emphasizes a balance in nature and reverence for the earth.

Wednesday, May 25, 2005

Holy catfish Batman!

Good God almighty! He's gonna be eating this for a while.

Revenge of the Sith

Yes, yes, I saw it on Monday. It was great. Much better than the first two, though still not approaching the quality of Episodes 4, 5 & 6. The political theory is getting way too much play. I can't say for sure I would have even thought about a Bush comparison when Padme says 'this is how liberty dies...' if it wasn't for all the damn articles about it.

I have a theory on George Lucas' crappy dialogue. It was always there and it was always cheesy. The only difference between then and now is that then, we had Harrison Ford, who can make even the cheesiest thing sound cool..and now, we don't. That simple.
Check out Ford's other movies...Indiana Jones? Cheesefest...and great!

This was the first of the three 'new' movies that I felt had the look of Star Wars. I really enjoyed it.

You have to come up with better reasoning than that...

C'mon Powerline, I expected more from you.

JOHN adds: It is sad that the Democrats have voted en masse against a judge
who by any rational standard should be non-controversial. Owen was re-elected to her position as a Justice of the Texas Supreme Court by an overwhelming
majority, and received the highest possible rating from the American Bar

And I'm supposed to care who gets elected in Texas? As if that means something? They just voted to outlaw gay foster parents and to outlaw 'overtly sexual' cheerleading (that they will know when they see it... no standards necessary). I mean, if you are going to get me to agree because of her re-election, you gotta pick a better state than wacky Texas. And additionally, see here the list of judicial nominees who had the highest possible rating from the ABA and were not only NOT given an up or down vote, but never were allowed out of committee.

My point is not to say 'Republicans did it too' (though they did) it is to say if you are going to try and say she isn't controversial, you better come up with better reasons than that! Enough with the 'unprecedented' is almost to the point of outright lies.

Where is that veto going to go?

A great post from Ragged Thots on the President's first veto. He is threatening to veto the transportation bill because it is approximately $12 or $14 million over what he said it should be (NOW he's worried about pocket change like that?) Meanwhile, he also threatening to veto the bipartisan stem cell bill that just passed the House of Representatives.

UPDATE: E-MAIL OF THE DAY (with apologies to Andrew Sullivan):

"Option A) A universally popular, entrepreneurial spirited, 21st Century new-economy job growing, Stock Market loving, U.S. House of Rep.-approved STEM CELL RESEARCH BILL

Option B) A limitedly popular, pork loaded, big government, 20th Century
old-economy jobs growing, Stock Market apathetic, U.S. House of Rep.-approved

What is a "compassionate conservative" to do? There can be only one "first" veto. Hmmmmmmmmm..."

The main stream media is the real villain...

I'm getting sooooo sick and tired of crap like this (hat tip Daily Kos):

It's official. Conservatives no longer have a monopoly on complaints
about a liberal media bias. In the wake of Newsweek's bungled report that U.S.
military interrogators "flushed a Koran down a toilet," here is Terry Moran,
ABC's White House reporter, in an interview with radio host and blogger Hugh
Hewitt: "There is, I agree with you, a deep anti-military bias in the media

Enough already! If you think reporting on torture and atrocities is anti-military and un-American you should be banished to the 8th level of hell. There is no hope for a cure for your level of partisanship and 'win at all costs' attitude. Don't worry, you won't be lonely long...Karl Rove will be down in a jiff.

Thank God some conservatives/Republicans still understand that without MORAL superiority, we have already lost the Middle East. Unless we can remove legitimate reasons for Muslims to suspect our intentions, it makes it all the more easy for them to view us as 'crusaders' or 'after their oil'...or God forbid, much worse. Follow the link and read the can of whoop ass John Cole opens up on Hugh Hewitt (emphasis mine).

Everyone repeat after me:

Reporting on abuses that have been committed by our troops, in our
name, is not anti-military. While I am not arrogant enough to attempt to divine
the motives of every journalist who reports on such abuses, Hugh appears to be
up to the challenge. I find his attack on the reporting of the outrageous abuses detailed at length by the NY Times
to be both disturbing and disingenuous.
Apparently in the myopic worldview of Mr. Hewitt, reading and
reporting the just-released documents the Army itself created is both
'anti-military' and 're-hashing' an old story. Let's not focus on the fact that
few, if any, have been punished for these transgressions. Let's not focus on credible reports that these incidents continue to occur. Instead, if Hewitt is to have his way, we should all focus on the 'anti-military' stance of the media.

Go get 'em Bill

Maher responds (hat tip Talking Points Memo):

Money quote (emphasis mine):

And by the way, these "comments" were part of a longer, scripted comedy
piece in the modest proposal tradition. I can see why administration supporters
would want to deflect attention away from the gist of the piece, which was this:
now that we can't meet our recruiting goals, maybe it's the people who
were so gung ho for this war to begin with who should step up and go fight it.
But of course it's always easier to distract people.

Tuesday, May 24, 2005

Things just keep getting nuttier and nuttier

When oh when are Republicans going to stand up to idiotic crap like this? In one of his trademark comedic rants, Bill Maher touched on the Army's recruitment goals and how they are falling short.

“More people joined the Michael Jackson fan club,” Maher said. “We’ve
done picked all the low-lying Lynndie England fruit, and now we need warm

Well, Republican Congressman Spencer Bachus from Alabama said that there is treas'nous talk:

I think it borders on treason,” Bachus said. “In treason, one
definition is to undermine the effort or national security of our

Crazily, he goes on to say:

"I don't want him prosecuted," Bachus said. "I want him off the
air.", Congressman Bachus, if you really thought it was treasonous wouldn't you want him prosecuted? If you just want him off the air, then I guess it would just be a case of you not agreeing with his politics and you hoping that enough pressure will force HBO to pull him off the air? Sounds alot like censorship to me.

Comparable outrage?

Is this worth comparable outrage (hat tip Daily Kos) ?
My thoughts are that it isn't exactly comparable but definitely worthy of criticism. But the right won't do that--you know that for sure.
What does trouble me is the lengths the army went to 'create' a story after already knowing the truth:

'He ordered his team to dismount and then maneuvered the Rangers up a
hill near the enemy's location,' the release said. 'As they crested the hill,
Tillman directed his team into firing positions and personally provided
suppressive fire. ... Tillman's voice was heard issuing commands to take the
fight to the enemy forces.'


"The Army's public release made no mention of friendly fire, even
though at
the time it was issued, investigators in Afghanistan had already
taken at least
14 sworn statements from Tillman's platoon members that made
clear the true
causes of his death.

I feel that Tillman's parents are absolutely right...opportunism at its worst:
"Tillman's mother and father said in interviews that they believe the
military and the government created a heroic tale about how their son died to
foster a patriotic response across the country," White reported

Monday, May 23, 2005

A deal is reached

Not sure how I feel about the deal yet, as I don't have the specifics. ThoughI feel that the Democrats looks a bit weak letting through some of the nominees that they have villified for the past couple of years--that being said, the battle might be lost, but the war (Supreme Court) is coming and the Democrats were able to save their right to filibuster.
Reaction is different across the blogosphere.

Powerline isn't happy: "What a hideous deal!" He notes that Democrats wouldn't have compromised if they'd had the votes. Would Republicans have compromised if they'd had the votes??? I don't think anyone will know for sure.

Environmental Republican thinks its the Dem's loss. I think more Democrats agree with him than Republicans.
Already conseratives are out for John McCains blood on this one. They always like to note that when someone leaves the Democratic party, how cannibalistic the Dem's are. The Republicans do the same thing, and he hasn't even left...he just 'sold out'.

More conservatives who are angry here.

My thoughts are that in a DEEPLY divided Senate (and country) some Senators were sane enough to work out a compromise....whatever the outcome, my hats off to them. That opinion will not change even if I read the compromise and am not happy.
If the big loser is Frist, then I will be happy.

Just when you thought evolution was the worst idea under attack...

We get this gem from 60 Minutes last night. Disclaimer: I did not watch this program. But I have read up some on the 'Silver Ring Thing' and their supply of tax-payer money.

A scary quote from the program:

“My own daughter, my 16-year-old daughter, tells me she’s going to be
sexually active. I would not tell her to use a condom,” says [Silver Ring Thing
founder Denny] Pattyn. “I don’t think it’ll protect her. It won’t protect her
heart. It won’t protect her emotional life. And it’s not going to protect her. I
don’t want her to get out there and think that she’s going to be protected using
a condom.”
But wouldn’t his daughter be more protected with a condom than
without? “Not long term,” says Pattyn.

As they say, read the whole post and do some research of your own on where your tax dollars are being spent. It seems to me that there have got to be more worthy and more HEALTH-CONSCIOUS domestic programs where we could be directing this money.

Friday, May 20, 2005

Under MY skin?

Oh there is no doubt that Environmental Republican got under my skin. All it takes to do that is when someone tries to 'shame' me. That sets me off more than anything else.

Update: Katinula responds and says she got under my skin. It appears the opposite is true as her response to me in the comments was nearly longer than my original post.

Then he follows with this gem:
The problem with what you say, Dave is that the Democrats and liberals are
farther to the left than Republicans are to the right.In fact, todays
Republicans are your fathers Democrats

This is classic conservative blinder-syndrome. The far right happens to pulling many power strings in the current administration and Congress. All you need to do is check over many conservative bloggers and see their outrage over the religious right and things like Terri Schiavo. True Republicans are sickened by that. Bill Frist saying that he can't say that AIDS isn't transmitted by sweat and tears??? C'mon now! And the democrats are not nearly liberal enough for me. Anyone who doesn't support gay MARRIAGE isn't liberal enough for me.

UPDATE: Its great to see a post generating so many comments and discussions! Thats more important than anything--generating discussion is THE most important thing.

Talk about Hollywood Elite

I'd start a new feature here at Reasonably Ascertainable Reality called 'Funniest Item of the Day' if I could be trusted to post one everyday...but alas, I cannot.
That being said, todays FUNNIEST ITEM OF THE DAY:

“I’m especially looking forward to meeting Karl Rove,” Carey added. “Smart men
like him are so sexy. I know that he’s against gay marriage, but I think I can
convince him that a little girl-on-girl action now and then isn’t so bad!”

Bush is meeting with Mary Carey...and so is Rove on June 14th. Its funny, because I don't care. It's even funnier because I think I have an idea of who will. Well, unless of course they let their partison interests keep them from giving the President and the Empor..sorry, Rove, a smackdown.

Thursday, May 19, 2005

Late Update

Apparently, someone is like Hitler. You can't plan stuff like this.


Cool New Blog

This is a cool new blog from Antarctica (hat tip Instapundit) to check out.
I plan on checking in on it weekly. I'm taking a class in school in which we will be covering Antarctica somewhat. That continent is perhaps the most important continent when it comes to the ecology and health of our oceans and our environment.
More updates to come.

Bonus Trivia: Who was the first person to map the gulf stream?

That would be Philadelphia's own Ben Franklin. Did his genius know any bounds?

Back to our regularly scheduled programming...

A great post on the legality of all things filibuster. Scroll down and read.
Money quote (emphasis mine):

Therefore, just as the Senate may delegate the impeachment power to a
committee under the Senate rules that may never send the matter to the full
Senate, so can the Senate do so in using its appointment powers. The notion that the Senate must vote on every nomination and cannot use it's internal rules to obstruct or prevent that occurance is without any historical support and against the greater weight of Senate precedent and constitutional interpretation by the United States Supreme Court.

This is a really good site with legal references. Good luck on that bar exam!

Well, I finally did it

Well, I finally got under the skin of a conservative. I should have known that it doesn't take much more than deviant sex to get there. Thank God it wasn't gay sex, or then maybe I would be recieving death threats.

I have to say this post of righteous indignation makes me laugh. Why? For several reasons actually.

First, the fact that Ann Coulter is ripe for satire. She prides herself on being controversial and anyone, right or left wing, who does that is ripe for satire. If it hasn't already been done, I'm expecting a Saturday Night Live skit about her any time now. She is a charicature personality.

Secondly, I love how conservatives will use any occasion, to turn the discussion towards abortion, because they think their arguement is infallible. But, sadly it isn't. They also love to take extreme left-wing ideaologues and put their words, like 'Bush is Hitler' into anyone's mouth to make it seem like liberals love to call Bush, Hitler. News flash, no one is Hitler. Not Bush and not radical 'activist judges' on the Supreme Court.

Thirdly, they think that I should be ashamed for what I link to and that apparently I have no line for which I'm not willing to cross. C'mon, lighten up. Its a dirty joke. A long one, but a joke. He notes in my comments section that he wouldn't think it was funny if it was Barbara Streisand or Katrina Vanden Heuval. Well, good for you, because I think it would be funny. But I think they should change the protagonist to an uncouth redneck for Babs--that would be right up her alley.

You see, when conservatives are outraged for some moral indignation that they think we should all be ashamed for, they can barely control themselves. I mean, a couple of years of blow-job talk on the evening news and $6 million dollars to investigate those blow-jobs--- no they aren't ashmed of that.

I counted 4 references in that post to things that have absolutely nothing to do with my post. But ya know, don't let that get in your way. As I said before, they like to trot out Senator Byrd being a former member of the KKK like Strom Thurmond didn't have a child with his black house servant while married. A child he refused to publicly recognize. We all know he would still be a senior member of the Senate if he wasn't dead. Give it a rest already. Personally, I think people who were for segregation were either lying then (Southerners) or lying now (racist bastards). Either way, I can do nothing about other states Senators when I don't live there. Sorry Scott. But I guess I'll see you trying to do something about Tom Delay soon for all his ethics problems?

You see, conservatives are so concerned with the popularity contest of ideas, that they don't take the time to think to themselves what is actually right and wrong. I wouldn't care if I was the last liberal on the planet. I would die thinking I'm right. It doesn't matter to me that conservatism is more popular these days, it makes me stronger. Compassion for people is not wrong and that is where the heart of my liberalism is; compassion even for those that don't deserve it.

To rail about getting my 'talking points' Daily Kos and the NYT is just once again showing that 'inconvenient facts are to be ignored or revised', as he so eloquently put it. You see, if you check the issues that I discuss, the ones that are important to me, I link to anyone. I haven't done a statistical analysis, but I would say at least 1/2 of my links are to him, Andrew Sullivan (Republican) and Talking Points Memo (hardly a bastion of left wing craziness and widely recognized as one of the foremost blogs on the question of social security). But you know, don't let that get in your way. One of my new favorite blogs that I linked to yesterday is Ragged Thots. A self-described 'Catholic West-Indian black republican'.

But once again, don't let that get in your way. Don't let that get in the way of commenting on my post by saying I removed a comment that I didn't, and then going on and on about getting linked to by bigger sites. Congratulations, I really mean that. But it was a little unseemly. I would never remove a comment, and especially not one from Z, who's opinion and wacky posts I care about. Maybe to you they are fringe, but to me they are putting a spotlight on things that aren't in the main stream. His opinion is a good view into the mind of a 50-something former military man who has travelled this great country. If you don't value that, then something IS wrong.

Finally, I'd just like to say that while that post could be construed as offensive to just about anyone, it WAS and IS funny to me and I'm not ashamed in the least to have linked to it. Maybe you should save the righteous indignation for something that actually matters, instead of a satirical 'blog' about a right-wing pundit. C'mon, its not even as bad as the Larry Flynt cartoons about Jerry Falwell. Are you ashamed that you ever looked at a Penthouse?

PS--I'm pissed, this response pushed back my boring, long awaited post on the real villain--THE MEDIA!!! ahahahahahahahh (evil laugh!)

Wednesday, May 18, 2005

Wherefore art thou Christie Whitman?

Your Republicans are foresaking you!
In a heavily liberal state, Christie Whitman was a Republican who won. Oh, and then subsequently got picked, double crossed and humiliated by the 'conservative' Bush Administration.
Is there any doubt at all for Governor Corzine?

Lots of good stuff to check out...

Minus much commentary from me--even better!!

Talking Points Memo has a funny story on the New Hampshire phone jamming scandal from last year. Actually, it might not be that funny considering the current state of affairs in this country. I love how Josh puts it:

Ye olde right to a trial by your party members.

Ragged Thots has a great post about the U2 concert last night at the Meadowlands. U2 was my first concert must have been a great one last night.

Daily Kos has a very good explanation of what exactly it will take to change the Senate rules for the filibuster. I feel as though I might finally have a good understanding of it. By the way, its more than one rule they have to change.

Finally, I'm working on a longer post about the media, but its not ready yet, so stay tuned.

Tuesday, May 17, 2005

Now this is funny!

Warning, this is not for the faint of heart. Everything and anything that could be considered offensive is contained in the 'blog'.
But...enjoy is you must (as I did).

I know...I know...

I'm posting a lot on this Newsweek issue. Mostly, because the issue (torture) is something that I've posted on quite a bit and is something that, as I see it, is so important to the 'war on terror' that it has, single-handedly, the ability to turn the tide against the US.
So now I'm just posting some musings from others as well.
Keith Olberman calls for Scott McClellan's resignation:

Or would somebody rather play politics with this? The way Craig
Crawford reconstructed it, this one went similarly to the way the Killian Memos
story evolved at the White House. The news organization turns to the
administration for a denial. The administration says nothing. The news
organization runs the story. The administration jumps on the necks of the news
organization with both feet - or has its proxies do it for them.
That’s beyond shameful. It’s treasonous.


Ultimately, though, the administration may have effected its biggest
mistake over this saga, in making the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs look like a
liar or naïf, just to draw a little blood out of Newsweek’s hide. Either way -
and also for that tasteless, soul-less conclusion that deaths in Afghanistan
should be lain at the magazine’s doorstep - Scott McClellan should

What Olberman is speaking of concerning Richard Meyers (JCofS) is his statement saying that it wasn't the Newsweek story that was responsible for the rioting (emphasis mine):
Q: Do either one of you have anything about the demonstrations in
Afghanistan, which were apparently sparked by reports that there was a lack
respect by some interrogators at Guantanamo for the Koran. Do
either one
of you have anything to say about

GEN. MYERS: It's the -- it's a judgment of our commander in Afghanistan,
General Eikenberry, that
in fact the violence that we saw in
Jalalabad was not necessarily the result of the allegations about disrespect for
the Koran
-- and I'll get to that in just a minute -- but more tied up
in the political process and the reconciliation process that President Karzai
and his Cabinet is
conducting in Afghanistan. So that's -- that was
his judgment today in an
after- action of that violence. He didn't --
he thought it was not at all
tied to the article in the

Its becoming more and more plausible that this Newsweek snafu is being used to deflect attention away from a bigger issue.

Pakistan reacts

Pakistan reacted to Newsweek's retraction saying that it, and it apology are not enough.

"They should understand the sentiments of Muslims and think 101 times before
publishing news which hurt feelings of Muslims."

Um, Pakistan, we don't think 101 times about hurting the feelings of our own people. Try not to hold us to a higher standard for Muslims around the world.
But more telling is this (emphasis mine):
Qazi Hussain Ahmed, head of a hardline six-party Islamic alliance in
Pakistan, said Newsweek's retraction was unlikely to cool tempers in the Muslim
"Whatever (Newsweek) magazine has done now is under pressure (from the
U.S. government)," he said. "It has not denied what it has reported and many
people freed from Guantanamo Bay have narrated the same thing."

He referred
to a report in the Tuesday edition of the Pakistani daily The News that quoted
Hafiz Ehsan Saeed, a former detainee at Guantanamo Bay, as saying that the Koran
was routinely desecrated at the U.S. prison.
Saeed was released from
Guantanamo Bay in September but has since been held in a Pakistani jail in
Rawalpindi, a garrison town close to Islamabad. His reported remarks could not
be independently verified.

Thats what makes me laugh when the White House says our 'reputation' has been damaged around the world. Um, White House, that happened a long time ago.

Monday, May 16, 2005

Up there! Its a bird....its a plane....its

the mainstream media (MSM) proving again its liberal bias!
Yes, bloggers unite! Yet again we can add fuel to the fire of 'liberal bias' in the media.
Look over here! Look over there! Whats that you say? Look what is actually happening around us? No, don't do that. Look at our next villain--Newsweek!

Without doubt, Newsweek, for lack of a better term, f&*ked up this story royally. I won't criticize on anonymous sources, because I know stories break on them all the time. It just smacks of sloppy reporting and for a journal like Newsweek, that is unacceptable. See my earlier post about what the hell is going on with the media in this country.

But what Andrew Sullivan (lately we've been very much on the same wavelength) points out, I whole-heartedly agree with. Bloggers are going nuts villifying Newsweek. It will undoubtedly be their topic of choice until heads roll and pink slips are garnered over at their offices. But to actually report on the underlying story--the torture sanctioned by this administration--now that would be a no-no.

But I think it's telling that some bloggers have devoted much, much more
energy to covering the Newsweek error than they ever have to covering any sliver of the widespread evidence of detainee abuse that made the Newsweek piece
credible in the first place. A simple question: after U.S. interrogators have
tortured over two dozen detainees to death, after they have wrapped one in an
Israeli flag, after they have smeared naked detainees with fake menstrual blood,
after they have told one detainee to "Fuck Allah," after they have ordered
detainees to pray to Allah in order to kick them from behind in the head, is it
completely beyond credibility that they would also have desecrated the

All the righteous indignation of some bloggers is so hollow. They refuse to turn their well-trained 'bullshit detector' on anything having to do with the administration. The monumental take-downs of organizations and media outlets (who at times, deserve their wrath) is to be awed at, but to refuse to use it to point out anything else than what furthers their conservative agenda, is sad.


"Now we are forced to do something that societies often do when people can't
control their desires. We have to pass laws to stop their desires."

A quote from 1984? Nope! From a repressive regime in the Middle East or Africa? Nope. Thats the distinguished gentlemen from PA Rick Santorum, speaking of the filibuster (and probably mostly everything other issue he has an opinion on).
His defeat should be a top priority for Pennsylvania and I hope it happens. He's an arrogant, self-important, judgemental jack-ass.

Whats wrong with the Media?

Yet another story about sloppy work from the media. This one, with disastrous consequences. What happened to the media? We have award winning journalists faking stories and interviews; we have so-called reporters failing to ask even the most obvious question to a guest in order to avoid challenging them or rebutting their claims with facts; we have former internet escorts with White House press-passes at the White House when there is no press activity...and now this.
I think the problem is apathy. Apathy on the part of the everyday citizen. It is us who made the news 'entertainment' and celebrities out of news anchors. It is us who turn on the t.v. to watch grown men and women argue with each other for an hour and call that 'news'. At one time, the news was just a person, telling us the facts about what happened. Now we have channels and newspapers seen as liberal or conservative, when really--barring op/ed pages--we should only be reading news facts.
But see, Americans don't care to learn facts. They need to be dazzled. They need to hear the amazing and the awful and the horrendous so that they tune into our channel and not yours!
What a sad state of affairs. I guess this is reason number 1,001 why I get my news off the interenet.
I'll end by just including a quote from Andrew Sullivan which I think sums up the issue quite reasonably (emphasis mine):

But at some point, we will have to confront the severe damage this
administration has done to American prestige and credibility in a critical
global battle of ideas because of its interrogation policies. These are
self-inflicted wounds. Even if this incident turns out to be false, our previous
policies have made it perfectly plausible.
That is the shame - and the terrible
gift from this administration to Osama bin Laden.

Friday, May 13, 2005

Aren't they attractive

Everyone lately is 'wowing' about how good Nicole Richie looks and how 'hot' Lindsey Lohan is. I mean, take a look at this -- Wow! They really are HOT! I mean, look what starving yourself can do for your image.
I read this thing the other day (sorry I can't remember where for the hat tip) that was all about how women shave this and wax that to get rid of 'embarrassing' body hair. The culmination of the article was that the current definition of what is 'attractive' isn't at all about women, its about little girls. I've had my theories, as many who know me have heard, about the fascination that men have with the 'brazilian' wax. If you don't know what this is, look it up. Basically, my theory was that its a bit disturbing because the only people who don't have what the 'brazilian' harshly takes away from you, are children.
But the comments in this article seemed to be so true. The rage of skinny, while no where near where it was in the 90's, is still ongoing. Women must remove this hair and wax that hair, have no body fat, small hips, etc. The list could go on. But the point is, that is not a woman. She is meant to have those things. And for all you men out there who say "I don't subscribe to that 'skinny woman' phenomenon". I say, yes you do. Just do a quick interent search and try and find out some measurements on one or two famous women who you think are 'hot'! Most of them are below 125 pounds and below 5'7". In case you can't visualize that, it is very skinny. In high school I weight 120 pounds and am 5'7". I have been described as looking 'too skinny'.
Men, start appreciating women for who we are and WHY we are different. And no, I'm not blaming men or society for Lindsey or Nicole, they are idiots.

Thursday, May 12, 2005

As the NFL Turns

So much going on the NFL that us football fans are having a hard time waiting for the season, especially those Eagles fans (not me!).
But, as T.O. is still crying about his contact--the Eagles say they will NOT renegotiate--a hero is found in New England.
Mark my words, Tom Brady will go down as one of those rare players who is so good at football, and so good at being a good person, that he inspires people to become Patriots fans even though they don't live in New England. The last time I can conceieve of something like that happening was with Dan Marino. My brother grew up during Marino's hey day and the undefeated season and to this day, despite living in suburban Philadelphia, is a Dolphins fan.
Brady will be the same.

"To be the highest-paid, or anything like that, is not going to make me
feel any better,'' he told me. "That's not what makes me happy. In this game,
the more one player gets, the more he takes away from what others can get. Is it
going to make me feel any better to make an extra million, which, after taxes,
is about $500,000? That million might be more important to the team.''

I'm not a Patriots fan, but I am whole heartedly a Brady fan. How can you not be? Not only is a mind-alteringly gorgeous, but a great football player, a good person, and a team player. I say this in spite of the fact that he has possible intentions to go into politics and it seems quite possible he might be a Republican (he was at the State of the Union address as a guest of Bush).
Oh T.O., this is what you so obviously do not get.

Tuesday, May 10, 2005

More fodder?

Arianna Huffington's new blog is up and running. I agree with Environmental Republican that this site will give the righties more and more fodder for their bile infused rhetoric--but mostly because they don't like it when rich people aren't Republicans.
It always confuses me when Republicans get so upset when someone from Hollywood expresses an opinion, and also confuses me when some liberal takes that opinion for more than its worth. They are free to express their opinions just like the rest of us, they just have a bigger stage. If offered a bigger stage, I can't say that I wouldn't relish the opportunity to give my opinion--I think that is true of most bloggers, otherwise, why would we be blogging?
To me, its just another opinion that I either agree or disagree with. I wouldn't say I take it as seriously as someone with the education and experience to back up their opinion, but hey, there are times (most) when someone with the experience makes me disagree with them.
Having said all that, Larry David is one of the funniest men in show business and I'll read anything he has to say, mostly because it is usually f'ing hysterical!

On the Bolton nomination:

Let's face it, the people who are screaming the loudest at Bolton have
never been a boss and have no idea what it’s like to deal with nitwits as dumb
as themselves all day long. Why, even this morning my moronic assistant handed
me a cup of coffee with way too much milk in it.

I was incensed. "You stupid ignoramus," I screamed, doing all I could to restrain myself from tossing the luke-warm liquid in her face. “There's too much freaking (I didn’t say freaking) milk in here! What the freak is wrong with you?!” “I’m sorry, sir,” she stammered. Like sorry’s going to fix everything. I’m not interested in sorry.
Sorry doesn’t cut it with me. “Look, you idiot,” I continued, “I wouldn’t mind
so much if you gave me too little milk. Little can be fixed. We can add to

“Shall I get you another cup?” “No, I’ll suck on my thumb. Yes, get me
another cup, you douche bag! And chew on this -- it’s going to cost you a
dollar!” This, of course, brought on the requisite tears. At which point I'd had
enough and began chasing her down the hall where she took refuge in the
bathroom. Boo-hoo. Poor thing!

Meanwhile, I’m the one who had to go into the kitchen and make my own coffee! And guess what? I missed a very important phone call from this masseuse whom I’d been trying to get an appointment with forever!! (Sorry about all the exclamation points, but you can see how worked up
I get over this Bolton business!)

There is one thing, though, I’ll guarantee: that will be the last time she puts in too much milk.

Thursday, May 05, 2005

God and Gay bashing

ABC, you bunch of hypocrites!
Check this out (hat tip Daily Kos):

ABC, on why it won't take advertising from the United Church of Christ:

"The network doesn't take advertising from religious groups. It's a
long-standing policy," said Susan Sewell, an ABC spokeswoman, in a Religion News Service story on Wednesday.
But they aired an ad by James Dobson's Focus on the Family. And for the
unitiated, this is their mission statement:

To cooperate with the Holy Spirit in disseminating the Gospel of Jesus
Christ to as many people as possible, and, specifically, to accomplish that objective by helping to preserve traditional values and the institution of the family.

ABC, NBC, and CBS refused to air this ad from the UCC. NBC and
CBS claimed it was "too controversial" because it says "Jesus didn't
turn people away".

ABC said it had a blanket prohibition of all ads from religious organizations. Unless, it seems, they are run by conservatives.

C'mon networks, at least be consistent in your bigotry.

Who is really to blame?

Some very interesting posts recently on the toture at Abu Ghraib prison and on torture policies in the US Goverment.
First the President and his weak explanation of how we send prisoners to countries who 'say' they don't use torture:

We operate within the law and we send people to countries where they say
they're not going to torture the people.

You can find other instances of sketchy behavior by the United States in the official report from Guantanamo and also from Uzbekistan. These links are courtesy of Andrew Sullivan who does a decent amount of commentary on the subject.

But we have Environmental Republican and some of his commentors who, while rightly admonishing those involved in the actual torture, fail to even connect it with the policies of Alberto Gonzales and the Bush administration. Lyndie England, Charles Graner and the rest of the soldiers actions are a direct result of this administration's rationalization of torture. Gonzales gets a promotion and Bush gets a 'pass' from the media. As Sullivan points out:

But why hasn't the press corps been more aggressive than they have been?
Open-ended questions about "rendition" don't hack it. How about asking Bush
directly how he can send terror suspects to Syria and Uzbekistan? How about
asking him why he won't allow a legislative ban on CIA torture? How about asking him directly whether he considers "water-boarding" to be torture? This is about
as profound a moral issue as can be found in today's politics. And yet the press
lets the president off the hook. What gives? Are they really that

If you feel so strongly about the perpetrators, you should feel as strongly about WHY they are doing this.

On the other hand, England is a 'skank' and a 'dirty whore'; he doesn't say why, so I'm left to assume it is because she while she was in Iraq and got pregnant. For someone so concerned with prejudices and Nazi this and Nazi that, you would think he wouldn't chose those specific words to describe a woman soldier. She is morally weak, there is no doubt about that, and I'm sure a lot of other words that a former soldier has every right to call her, but I think 'dirty whore' shows a little bit of his own prejudices.

Find an Attorney