Google bombing the GOP

Turnabout, bitches

--AZ-Sen: Jon Kyl

--AZ-01: Rick Renzi

--AZ-05: J.D. Hayworth

--CA-04: John Doolittle

--CA-11: Richard Pombo

--CA-50: Brian Bilbray

--CO-04: Marilyn Musgrave

--CO-05: Doug Lamborn

--CO-07: Rick O'Donnell

--CT-04: Christopher Shays

--FL-13: Vernon Buchanan

--FL-16: Joe Negron

--FL-22: Clay Shaw

--ID-01: Bill Sali

--IL-06: Peter Roskam

--IL-10: Mark Kirk

--IL-14: Dennis Hastert

--IN-02: Chris Chocola

--IN-08: John Hostettler

--IA-01: Mike Whalen

--KS-02: Jim Ryun

--KY-03: Anne Northup

--KY-04: Geoff Davis

--MD-Sen: Michael Steele

--MN-01: Gil Gutknecht

--MN-06: Michele Bachmann

--MO-Sen: Jim Talent

--MT-Sen: Conrad Burns

--NV-03: Jon Porter

--NH-02: Charlie Bass

--NJ-07: Mike Ferguson

--NM-01: Heather Wilson

--NY-03: Peter King

--NY-20: John Sweeney

--NY-26: Tom Reynolds

--NY-29: Randy Kuhl

--NC-08: Robin Hayes

--NC-11: Charles Taylor

--OH-01: Steve Chabot

--OH-02: Jean Schmidt

--OH-15: Deborah Pryce

--OH-18: Joy Padgett

--PA-04: Melissa Hart

--PA-07: Curt Weldon

--PA-08: Mike Fitzpatrick

--PA-10: Don Sherwood

--RI-Sen: Lincoln Chafee

--TN-Sen: Bob Corker

--VA-Sen: George Allen

--VA-10: Frank Wolf

--WA-Sen: Mike McGavick

--WA-08: Dave Reichert

Ouch

Say you're the best team, by far, in the NL all season long.

How then, do you get to the point, where your year is going to be determined by one start from Oliver freakin Perez?

That's got to sting a bit.

What Liberal Media?

Local edition. Here in my neck of the woods, Mike McGavick is the GOP nominee to unseat the execrable Maria "I voted for scAlito, Iraq, and the Bankruptcy Bill!" Cantwell. He's losing and he's going to lose. Today's Seattle Newspapers are carrying this front page:



Gee, notice any bias there? Any emphasis of one party or perspective over another? Like, oh, phrasing that emphasizes the weak and feminine memes regarding Dems? And how 'bout that picture, eh?

The online presence is no better. Here's the top story o' the day. Top of the page, first story on the site:



Mmm... it's GOoP GOoP GOod.

Even worse was that this debate was an undemocratic forum that should incense each and every citizen of this state. To be a part of the debate, the candidates had to prove some $1M in worth or campaign finances. To which I say - what the fuck kind of requirement is that? If they're on the ballot, they get a spot at the stage. TV is the one and only forum that can give lesser known voices a wide forum, and making the one and only televised debate subject to how much money a candidate has is both wrong for Democracy and violates the television broadcasters duty (as part of their unconstitutional grant of exclusive use of certain frequency spectrums) to the public.

Just a heinous performance all around.

Goodbye, America

It was nice knowing you. Bush Signs Bill Setting Detainee Rules

President Bush signed legislation today that created new rules for prosecuting and interrogating terror suspects, a move that Mr. Bush said would enable the Central Intelligence Agency to resume a once-secret program to question the most dangerous terrorists.

...

The new law strips the federal courts of jurisdiction to hear petitions from detainees for writs of habeas corpus, meaning that terror suspects cannot go to court to challenge the constitutionality of their confinement. As such, it has already spawned one legal challenge and both supporters and critics say it is likely to result in others.

Torture. No habeas corpus. Indefinite detention. Secret prisons. Kangaroo courts.

Oh, and the kicker? This isn't even top-line news on the papers. No, that's reserved for the birth of the 3 millionth person in this formerly great country. Woo. Hoo. Way to have the priorities straight, media.

No Obamarama, Please

This is so 2005

The ability to give a great speech is the most visible and, I argue, one of the most important responsibilities of the individual who leads any nation, and particularly, the most powerful nation on earth.
It also acts as a window into the soul of the man or woman behind the speech, communicating far more than the transient issues and positions of the day.

Barack Obama’s speech at the Democratic Convention proved that he has what it takes to be a phenomenal President.

I’m sorry, but projecting Obama as the Great Hope is ridiculous. Not only is it premature, but they are wishcasting traits onto Obama that he simply doesn’t have, and that’s ignoring the astoundingly poor record of Senators running for President.

Was his speech at the Dem convention a good one? Sure it was. But now he’s got two years of Senate experience and what has he done? Nothing of note, and certainly nothing spectacular, and with many a blunder that ought to be sufficient to remove the blinkers from people like Richard Greene.

* He’s called for leadership without actually providing any
* Through his clubfooted political dance steps, he allowed batshit crazy McCain to shiv him and hand the lobbying reform high ground to the GOP (!!!)
* He’s supported the creation of a Great Wall of Texas
* He’s internalized the Democrats are not sufficiently religious malarkey, not to mention the Democrats are hostile to religion libel

For all these reasons and more, Obama is not what those star struck teenybopper wannabe admirers present him as being. He’s just another Senator who can make some good speeches, but no demonstrated ability to get anything done, let alone anything good done.

The rest of Greene’s argument is equally risible. Ignoring the distinction between Obama’s position as a Senator and Clinton’s as a Governor is something I would expect from a high school student, not someone selected to post on HuffPo. Governors have two huge advantages over Senators - one, no voting history; and two, it’s an Executive, not Legislative position. There have been a total of seven Senators who became president, the last being Nixon (finishing a weird run of three in a row, from JFK to LBJ to Nixon). There have been 17 governors who became president, including the last two, and four of the last five (Bush41 being the exception).

This article by Greene is strange. It seems like a regurgitation of something stuck in the HuffPo spam filter from 2 years ago. Obama’s star has dulled considerably since his speech at the convention, most of all from that horrendous religiosity finger wagging period in late June. Reading Greene’s article feels as out of touch with current events and the pulse on the actual street as TNR’s infamous (and embarassing) cover issue supporting rape gurney Lieberman as the Democratic candidate in the 2004 elections.



Now, I’m not against an Obama run (though the internalizing of the “lack” of religion in the Democrat party makes it a near thing), but his supporters really need to get those stars out of their eyes and start playing in reality. If we’re going to elect a black man as President (and you know that’s what he’ll be labeled), it’s going to take a lot more than one good speech and delusions of rose petals and candy. Hell, McCain got ratfucked by Rove for having an adopted nonwhite daughter, and if Obama can’t even play McCain-level mushy hardball, he’s got no chance in a general election.

Show some leadership, Barak. Do something good and you’ll have my interest. Until then, stay off my lawn you hippies!

Anchorman - 0/5

I finally got around to watching "I like scotch!  Scotchy scotch scotch scotch" <a Anchorman this weekend and...

it is quite possibly the worst movie I have seen in the past five years.

As best as I can tell, it was a vehicle to see how far Will Ferrell could carry a crappy movie.  The answer?  About 10 minutes.  From the boring opening to the stylish-but-not-nearly-stylish-enough 70s schtick, it was pure, unadulterated crap.  The dialogue was abysmal, the characters were amateurish, the plot was nonexistent, the acting was pure dogshit (natch), and the only single redeeming feature was Steve Carell - and he seriously needs to watch out for that typecasting thing (though I think he may be big enough to avoid that wrecking ball.  Evan Almighty should tell us one way or the other).

You know, if I wanted to watch a 2 hour movie about a moron in an absurd setting - but one that was actually funny - I'd pop in Happy Gilmore or Billy Madison.  

Will, I know Adam Sandler, and you, sir, are no Adam Sandler.  At no point in this rambling, incoherent mess of a movie did you come close to engaging the audience or obtaining even a chuckle.  I award you no points, and may FSM have mercy on your soul.

Familiarity, meet contempt

OK, the more I watch Battlestar Galactica, the more I'm hating it.  I just can't get past the hackneyed, deus ex machina, by-the-numbers writing.  It's got a serious case of 24-itis.  When ultra narcissist Gaias doesn't turn in Cylons because it would be too much effort, you know the writing sucks.  A real self-interested motivation would be to turn the Cylon in for the glory and life preservation.  Not ratting out Boomer the second she leaves the room is dogshit writing and the next episode with Ellen is straight out of Jack Bauer bullshit plot twist 101.

I may just have to write my own damn spec script for this show and show 'em how it's done, yo.

Beta. Woo

I'll have some real content up shortly. Promise.

Bush Drowns in the Blood of the Innocent

and plays fiddle while the Constitution burns

A team of American and Iraqi epidemiologists estimates that 655,000 more people have died in Iraq since coalition forces arrived in March 2003 than would have died if the invasion had not occurred.

The estimate, produced by interviewing residents during a random sampling of households throughout the country, is far higher than ones produced by other groups, including Iraq's government.

It is more than 20 times the estimate of 30,000 civilian deaths that President Bush gave in a speech in December. It is more than 10 times the estimate of roughly 50,000 civilian deaths made by the British-based Iraq Body Count research group.

The surveyors said they found a steady increase in mortality since the invasion, with a steeper rise in the last year that appears to reflect a worsening of violence as reported by the U.S. military, the news media and civilian groups. In the year ending in June, the team calculated Iraq's mortality rate to be roughly four times what it was the year before the war.

Of the total 655,000 estimated "excess deaths," 601,000 resulted from violence and the rest from disease and other causes, according to the study. This is about 500 unexpected violent deaths per day throughout the country.

I've been sitting on this because I don't know quite what to say.  The total deaths caused by our country in an illegal, elective war of invasion, brought about by the lies and bloodthirsty sociopathy of a small number of chickenhawks is beyond my powers of comprehension.

Maybe this will help.  Iraq had approximately the population of California.  Due to our invasion of Iraq we have wiped out the equivalent of most of San Francisco, or all of Anaheim and Bakersfield.  Or Sacramento and Fremont.

All of those people are dead because of us.  Because of Bush.  Impeachment is an insufficient remedy, but it is at least a step towards justice.

Oh, and the story?  It was carried on page <strong>A12</strong> of the WaPo.  A-12, people, so that the valuable front page real estate could carry things like a warning of the demise of handwriting.  What liberal media?

Posting by Email sort of sucks

What's the point if it strips the formatting?  Let's try it this way and see if the link comes through.

Test post via email

Well, here goes nothing...

Trying this again

Setting up a backup site in case the "home" sites are down or whatnot. Other than that, I've got nothin for ya this morning.