...OR "Another step in my Republicanization"
So, Thursday: I was en-route to Alabama for the Darby Family Thanksgiving (Kevlar advised) and, desirous to evacuate my bladder, I pulled into the Welcome station on the AL/GA line. It was a miserable rainy gray day (not particularly cold as this is Alabama, where I’ve more memories of wearing short sleeves on Xmas than not). I literally had not been out of the car for a second when I heard from behind
”Sir- I don’t mean you any harm…”
This invariably means one of two things. Either
1- It’s an angel coming to tell me that "Blessed art Thou, for thou art to give birth to the Redeemer of all mankind", and then when I express utter fear and confusion say with angelic vibrato “Dude, Thou art so punk’d!” as they disparate into a fiery exit, OR
2- It’s somebody begging money with a tale so tragic that the life of Anne Frank looks like Paris Hilton's party tape when compared to their misfortunes.
This was the latter for a change.
Gimme gimme more more more »
While I find World Net Daily's angle on most everything pretty questionable, this deserves a closer look:
Canadian judges soon will be enforcing Islamic law, or Sharia, in disputes between Muslims, possibly paving the way to one day administering criminal sentences, such as stoning women caught in adultery.Regardless of the unlikelihood of the slippery slope to stoning, even considering applying Sharia law via the Courts is frightening. Folks, it's this kind of thinking that makes Roy Moore and his zealotry a threat in our own country.
Via the Discount Blogger.
Not that I was, but if I had been, that would have been a nice segue, don't you think? Of course you do.
Anyway, have a happy Thanksgiving, American readers - and a happy Thursday to the rest of you, unless you've finally accepted the reality of American cultural imperialism and are celebrating with us.
Blogging will be light to non-existent as the wife, Fiona, and I are off to dine with our friends, probably ending up both stuffed and moderately liquored (although Fiona is underage and the wife is our very own baby milk factory, so more wine and beer for the rest of us!). May your holiday be equally entertaining.
Well, if you're a woman:
Wanted: women to test new orgasm machine. No, really. An American surgeon who has patented a device that triggers an orgasm has begun a clinical trial approved by the Food and Drug Administration in the United States and is looking for female volunteers.Anyone? Michele? Vicky? Jo? Pieter?
Meloy, of Piedmont Anesthesia and Pain Consultants in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, is hoping to find eight more volunteers willing to have electrodes inserted in their spine and be connected to a pacemaker-size machine implanted under the skin to heighten their sexual pleasure.Somehow the words "electrodes inserted," "spine," and "sexual pleasure" don't go together for me. For Pinhead, maybe - for me, no.
The married woman who tested the machine, dubbed an orgasmatron, had not had an orgasm for four years. But during the nine days she used it, she had several.Be on the lookout for a lawsuit from these folks.
The Discount Blogger laments the dreaded combination of the holiday season and commercial radio:
What I really hate about Christmas music is not so much that it is played, but that some Program Director is naive enough and stupid enough to believe that people want to hear it 24/7 during the Christmas Season. There are good Christmas tunes - but no tune is good when you hear it all the time.I agree that it's a holiday horror, but if broadcasters do it year after year, there must be some group of people who encourage or demand such a relentless barrage of ol'time Christmas favorites. Perhaps like the kind of people who listen to KOSI 101 in Denver:
We're celebrating the Holiday season with Continuous Holiday Favorites everyday through Christmas Day.They say that like it's a good thing. Ack! Make it stop!
Those damned, dirty, Palestinian-baby-eating Jews are at it again!
In an act of compassion that sometimes seems unimaginable in that war-torn part of the world, Israeli doctors worked Wednesday to save the life of an Iraqi baby who was born with a congenital heart defect.I don't find compassion from Israelis unimaginable in the least. From the Islamofascists, well, that's a different story.
I've tried to avoid the Michael Jackson story, but something over at The Rant has prompted me to make this post. Tom Sawyer says:
Maybe it’s just me, but you would think this weirdo would have learned after settling out of court with the last kid’s family ten years ago. For one thing it cost him enough money. It also, unfortunately cost him a good part of his reputation. I mean, if he truly was innocent of child molestation, why would anyone settle and have to live with that suspicion?Sometimes it's easier to settle out of court and be done with it.
On the flip side, what kind of parent would settle for money when their child is molested? I speak as the father of a beautiful baby girl - if anyone sexually abused her, they would pay either through violent retaliation or prosecution in the courts. Money would not do it. Money could not undo it (nothing could), but locking the bastard away would keep it from happening again.
I personally find the original accusation and settlement suspicious. I won't be surprised if the newest one turns out the same.
is so juvenile and sophomoric that I can barely watch it repeatedly on a loop.
Well, not quite nix, but put on hold. There's simply no way in hell that I'll get 50,000 words before the end of the month - at least not 50,000 that I'd be happy to call my own or let anyone else see. After reaching my 3000+ words, the story sort of sputtered and losts its drive, and I wasn't sure why.
I think I know now.
I originally let someone read the first few pages. She's been hounding me to write more, and once upon a few weeks prior said to me that she liked the way the protagonist really seemed to care about another character. That got me to thinking, honestly I do think sometimes, and I believe I need to rewrite the story in the first-person point of view.
I originally envisioned the story from that point of view, but switched to an omniscient third-person view to include a wider array of scenes, thoughts, and personalities. At the same time, though, I lost my connection with the protagonist. I stopped caring about him. And the novel.
But maybe it's time to start over. Maybe. We'll see.
Some folks from my high school (and Tom's, I should mention) have gotten together to assemble a site for tracking down alumni. You can find it here: LAMP Grads.
If you attended the Lanier / Loveless Academic Motivational / Magnet Program, check it out, add your name, send some love.
You can find some more of our LAMP stories here.
I'm pretty sure it isn't this:
Pub grub is the inspiration for artist Mark McGowan’s latest stunt – sitting in a bath of baked beans for 12 days.However, I suppose if dropping a much-loved symbol of a deity in a jar and then pissing on it has artistic merit for some, then wrapping oneself in pork by-products and beans has its place. I've no idea where that place is, but it must exist. Somewhere. Unfortunately.Mr McGowan, who started his stunt this week, also has two chips up his nose and 48 sausages wrapped around his head.
The bath is in the window of the House Gallery in Camberwell, South London.
“We don’t support our culture enough, so I thought I would celebrate a part of it by turning myself into a traditional English breakfast,” he said.I love English grub (bangers and mash, toad in the hole, roast beef and yorkshire pudding) for all its love-handle-building, artery-clogging beauty, but this is a bit much. If a foreigner criticized the hamburger*, I'd not slap myself between two giant pieces of bread and call myself a Whopper in protest.And he claimed the idea was inspired by pub food. He said when a friend visited him from Italy he criticised traditional English grub.
* I'd rather they simply criticize the burger, though, than bastardize with it such horrors as pineapple and egg.
That's going to smart come morning.
Hossein Barkhah of Iran dislocates his elbow attempting to lift 157.5 kilograms in the snatch category in group A of the men's 77 kilogram weight class at the World Weightlifting Championship in Vancouver, British Columbia, November 18, 2003.
The economy roared ahead at an astounding 8.2 percent annual rate in the third quarter, the fastest pace in nearly two decades and a much stronger performance than previously thought. It raises hope that a long spell of lackluster business activity is finally over.I'm always wary of governmental tinkering with the economic engine, and this is no exception. It makes me wonder if the economy would have recovered at a more moderate pace, with less risk of inflation, had the Bush administration been more restrained in their approach to tax-cutting (although economists are saying inflation is not a great fear at the moment).
Regardless, it's been interesting to watch the Democrats turn from attacking Bush to attacking one another as they lose talking point after talking point. Only candidate John Edwards seems to get it:
North Carolina Senator John Edwards said all of the Democrats needed to quit fighting each other and focus on their vision for America. "Now, the Democrats are all at each other's throats," he said. "People are tired of listening to politicians yell at each other."Hey, keep on yelling if it keeps you out of office.
Just this morning, I rolled over and there was David Horowitz.
I am not going to argue the merits of preserving the institution of marriage as it has been traditionally understood. Personally, I believe the family is an institution under attack and needs to be defended, but I also believe that all citizens are deserving basic respect and individual rights and that society has a vested interest in recognizing and supporting stable relationships between consenting adults who do no harm. What I am going to argue is that the idea of amending the Constitution to resolve a political issue of the culture war is (no pun intended) to court disaster. This will not necessarily be a disaster for the political cause of the defenders of traditional marriage, but it will be to the durability of the Constitution and therefore the nation.Via Instapundit, where you probably read it eariler.
Natalie Maines, lead singer of The Dixie Chicks, was so distraught over the attention her group received the last time they criticized the President that she decided it was time to do it again:
"I think people were misled and I think people are fighting a war that they didn't know they were going to be fighting," Maines said Friday on NBC's "Today" show. "And I think they were misled by people who should have been asking questions and weren't."Oddly enough, the group released a live double-CD set and accompanying DVD the same day. No press is bad press, I guess.
Just remember, if you dare to put her down, or stop buying her CDs, or turn the radio station when the "domestic-abuse-can-be-funny" song comes on, you're obviously an enemy of her freedom of speech.
Natalie would do well to remember that just because you have freedom of speech doesn't mean anyone has to listen.
Ted Rall is endorsing Howard Dean for President, and Dean likes it. Hmmm, one more reason to not vote for him.
The change of season has finally hit Denver, as it has been blowing snow since 10am this morning and the temperature has been hovering around 15-20F. Unfortunately, I had to venture out to get my car's emissions test done (passed with flying colors - I'm so proud!). After that, a trip to Home Depot to look at paint samples. After minutes of feverish debate, the wife and I are leaning toward the all-mighty Southwesternish triumvirate of Sandpoint, Mexican Chile, and Peanut Butter (with an off-white trim). How exciting.
'Twas the ideal day for grilled cheese sandwiches and cream of chicken soup, prepared by yours truly. Ladies, I'm quite the chef. And off the market. But move on, girl, you'll be ok without me.
Lastly, today is the 2003 Iron Bowl. The day when Alabama and Auburn come face to face for, if nothing else, bragging rights. Given each team's record this season, that's about all there is to play for today. Kick off is at 5:45 Mountain time.
More blogging later.
Update: Matt Moore has a photo of the first snowfall. He lives about 4 miles from me.
Hopefully by now you've learned you can skip these posts if reading isn't your bag, baby.
Anyway, "Under the Banner of Heaven" has been thrown on the ever-growing stack of literary works I've consumed, figuratively speaking. Although, if I were starving, I'd eat a book or two if only for the fiber to keep me regular.
But to the point: a very good book. Naturally, the Mormons found their panties had wadded themselves right up their collective buttcrack, claiming it presented an unfair image of the Mormon Church, and unfairly linking them to the Mormon Fundamentalists in Colorado City. However, the picture of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is quite balanced, portraying Joseph Smith as very much a human with all the virtures and foibles that come with the tag. And the modern LDS church can't pretend that Mormon Fundamentalism is not associated to their own way of life - the only difference is that the modern church got dragged along by progress, while the Fundamentalists have a firm grip on the church of days gone by.
Ah hell, go read it. Enjoy.
Well, not yet, but there's a wildfire heading my way, about a mile from the house. I say "heading my way" because the 30MPH winds are blowing in my direction, judging by the thick cloud of smoke floating past my neighborhood. Thankfully, a reservoir of water stands between it and me (not to mention, a whole bunch of other houses that would have to burn first - which would be sad, but better them than me, although in an ideal world none would go up).
Anyway, it looks like arson since the picnic pavillion seems to be where it started. It's now a flattened picnic-pavillion-resembling pile of smoldering embers. I think this is proof positive that al Qaeda really can't do much these days.
Wait, wait, wait one minute. If you look at this image and turn it upside down, it looks somewhat like a sickle - as in Soviet flag - as in Russian extremists!
We must invade Russia now!
You can get a live picture from Trafalgar Square in London here. Trafalgar Square is where the anti-Bush, anti-war crowd will be protesting to their free little hearts' content, while terrorists meanwhile blow up innocent Turks and Brits.
Granted, I wasn't a math major in college, but it doesn't look like 100,000 people protesting to me. I suppose they still have a few hours though.
Update: Thanks to Instapundit for the link - I wonder if the webcam site's owners are in a traffic panic right about now.
Update The Second: From the BBC -
Deputy assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Andy Trotter said the attacks in Istanbul underlined that his officers were working for the protection of demonstrators as much as Mr Bush.Oh, but remember, my dear protesters, Bush is the senseless murderer, right? Idiots."As we have seen, terrorists really don't care who they blow up or who they target," he said.
"They would have no compunction to take out demonstrators, no compunction in any way at all. And that's a very difficult message to get across to some demonstrators."
Update The Third: Well, color me impressed, the London constabulatory says the protesters managed to swell their ranks to the 100,000 they claimed they'd get. Of course, the organizers now claim it is 150,000.
Either way, the Brits still are more passionate about fox hunting than Dubya.
Glenn Reynolds alerts us to the imminent demise of MP3.com. Once upon a long ago, it was a great place to find interesting, new, undiscovered bands from around the country or the world, bypassing the fickle ear of the recording industry. Of course, once the site needed a generous cash infusion, it became more or less a repeat posting of Billboard hits. Big media won again.
But they'll never stop the sound of Dodgy Lesbian Girl*. At least not until December 2, when the site goes down.
Get it while it's there! Or don't.
* It's no Patriot Act Woo, but it'll do, pig.
In previous comments, I've been told that - as a libertarian-leaning individual - I should be against judicial activism. Judicial activism is, from my experience, generally what someone calls a court's decision when it upsets them.
But I'm at a bit of a loss as to why I should be averse to judicial activism in a case such as the Massachusetts gay marriage brouhaha. When the executive (to a lesser degree) and the legislative branch (always too happy to trample on the minority in favor of the majority) fail to protect the equality of the individual under the law, to where can we turn?
I refuse to endorse the legislative process as a respect-deserving tool of the will of the people when the will of the people is directly contrary to one's constitutional rights (or, perhaps, even with regard to rights that are not specifically enumerated). And when a court's interpretation of a law also runs counter to my view of said rights, I will not be sad when an interpretation I consider proper comes along, no matter how long the offensive interpretation stood.
Judicial activism's proper use is as a tool against the tyranny of the majority. In this case, the tool has been properly used. For me, this entire issue is not a subject in which the government should be involved anyway except from the view of enforcing contracts - but since the state has made it their business, I won't be displeased that they have ruled in favor of the rights of the individual.
Granted, allowing judicial activism does open the door for abuse when new rights-violating interpretations come along, but I would rather risk that and deal with each instance as needed rather than blindly proclaim that "the people have spoken, that is that, and rights be damned!"
That's a bit of a ramble up there, written off the top of my head, but oh well. Do a Google search for "libertarian" and "judicial activism" and you're bound to find someone more eloquent and well-versed.
Update: Andrew Olmsted gives his thoughts.
is no respecter of age or beauty. Former celebrity/former teen idol Jonathan Brandis (probably best known for Sidekicks, the Chuck Norris/Joe Piscopo movie that alternates with Beastmaster and Mississippi Burning for most overshown movie on cable) joins Katharine Hepburn and Nell Carter in the Choir Invisible. Odd choice for the next fatality; if I were a celebrity in 2003 I'd be hiring Thom Felicia to decorate all of my doorposts with vintage Lamb's Blood to be safe.
Gimme gimme more more more »
Let's see what Thursday brings.
Every asshole has one.
Thus spake Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council:
The ruling Tuesday by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court amounted to a political grenade, which the court now has tossed to the state legislature.Tradition, ah, always a good reason to do anything important, such as view women as submissive to men, blacks as subhuman, Russians as evil, yada yada. Traditions are fine and dandy when we're talking about Turkey Day or Alabama football, not the rights of individuals.By authorizing the granting of marriage licenses to homosexual couples, this court has defied not only tradition, but also democracy and common sense.
Democracy - see above. Also, someone inform Tony that the opinion of the majority doesn't matter when an issue of constitutionality is brought to the Courts. Constitutions generally serve to protect the individual from the tyranny of the majority or of the government (which that majority and/or government do their best to usurp, at least if they're right-wing).
Common sense. Common to whom? Based on what? Supported how? Tony might be shocked to know that it was once "common sense" that a baby didn't have a soul until the quickening (no, not "The Quickening," that soulless piece of celluloid poop), which would have made abort-o-fever perfectly ok until that point. I wonder if Tony accepts that so-called common sense is malleable and forever changing. Of course he does - but only when it suits him, and here it doesn't.
Marriage is the most fundamental institution of society.Opinion. I'd be more inclined to argue that some minor form of governance is the most fundamental institution of society, for without it, society becomes a bit unlikely in the first place.
The law does not create it, it merely recognizes it.Uh huh, that's why you have to get a marriage license just to be married and why it can be denied to same-sex individuals in almost every state. If the law does not create it, then same-sex couples should be able to marry themselves freely and on their whim - however, I imagine Tony will say "that's not marriage," undermining his own statement. Imagine that, incoherence from the fundie right!
Marriage exists to bridge the gap between the sexes by bringing a man and a woman together in the context that is best for the reproduction of the human race and for raising children to be responsible adults. Healthy families are beneficial to the state.Which is why Tony is pushing for a public referendum to prevent infertile or elderly couples, or those who do not want children, from marrying, unless they agree to adopt to help the human race along. Oh, he's not pushing for that? You mean he's babbling again?
A large and growing body of social science research......conveniently not provided here...
...has shown that husbands and wives and their children are happier, healthier and more prosperous than adults or children in any other living arrangement.Which, of course, has nothing to do with allowing gay people to marry. Perhaps he could use this nebulous research to argue against gay adoption, but the happiness of us straight folks when we're married only HELPS to make the argument that allowing gays to marry might make them happier. Damn, this guy doesn't have a clue on how to argue a point coherently.
The benefits conferred upon marriage under the law are not an entitlement - they are a recognition of the benefits that marriage confers upon society.Not an entitlement? I wonder what one calls rights of survivorship, the ability to sponsor a loved one for immigration, etc. Sure sound like entitlements to me, courtesy of matrimony.
Nope, no entitlements at all.
Other research has shown that same-sex relationships lack permanence and fidelity. Therefore, if such unions are recognized as "marriage," those values will be further stripped from the ideal of marriage that is held up to our children.Leaving aside the permanence and fidelity of heterosexual marriages (claims of which are rather dubious), one need only look at unmarried heterosexual relationships to see that they tend to lack the same. It's apples and oranges to compare same-sex relationships in general to married relationships; how about being honest and comparing committed homosexual relationships to marriage? Let me guess: Because that wouldn't help your baseless argument.
The deliberate creation of motherless and fatherless families will have the government's highest stamp of approval.Again, Tony, stay on topic. This isn't about gay adoption, but about gay marriage. But, while we're here, what about single mothers? The government just allows women to go out and have sex, make babies, and then raise them alone - holy cow, a fatherless family! Maybe we should imprison those women, or abort the babies, rather than give such tacit approval, eh, Tony?
Expanding the definition of marriage will weaken the institution, not strengthen it, in the same way that counterfeit money devalues even the real thing.In today's episode of piss poor analogies...
Counterfeit money decreases the value of real money in two ways: first, by increasing the apparent supply of cash (although I doubt it's enough to make a difference) and second, by reducing the trust people are willing to put in the cash they have in their own possession or in the cash that they might receive from another. Unless you're using marriage as a currency, your analogy is complete nonsense.
If the way someone conducts their marriage influences how you value your own, you are both undeserving of the marriage in the first place, and also a COMPLETE IDIOT.
The Massachusetts Legislature should begin the process of rolling back this decision by adopting the proposed Marriage Affirmation and Protection Amendment to the state constitution. It defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman.How about polygamy, Tony? Don't want to piss off those god-fearing Mormon Fundamentalists in Colorado City just to fight the EAAHA (Evil Atheist And Homosexual Agenda) do you?
At the same time, Congress should pass and the states should ratify a federal marriage amendment to the U.S. Constitution to preserve that essential definition of marriage.Yes, let's tinker with the Constitution for every little thing. Also, if they did try this, and it failed (you know, via "democracy") - do you think Tony would shut the hell up?
No, I'm not taking bets.
Protecting marriage will be a major issue in the 2004 elections.Yeah, because that little thing of Islamofascists wanting all of us dead is surely running in second place. The need for our soldiers to win the peace in Iraq and come home is way down the list. It's amusing, or frightening, how much religion makes people blind to real issues (Iraq? How about you get your hands off our God!) and so-called conservatives ready to expand the government's money-spending ways (amendments! enforcement! court cases!).
Every candidate seeking the votes of pro-family Americans must be ready and willing to offer an unwavering defense of not only the word "marriage," but also the institution it represents.That's a blanket statement if ever there was one. I'm pro-family; all in favor of them. I also realize that what I consider a family arrangement that works best for me, might not work best for others. I'm willing to consider my household a family, two gay married men a family, a single mother with her daughter a family, and Tony's head shoved so far up his own ass that he can't see daylight a family.
(Warning: May not be appropriate or suitable viewing for straight people.)
about the ordination of Gene Robinson?
Well, according to some it seems he would make catty and libelous comments about anal sex, glory holes, and other things that while taboo sure do seem to be of inordinate and unhealthy interest to street-praying conservative Christians.
Gimme gimme more more more »
Turns out the Blogrolling fun from yesterday was an accident. Sort of like the blogosphere's very own Hindenburg, except that we all survived.
Found via Ocean Guy.
From CNN:
Massachusetts high court rules that a ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. Details soon.Oh, great, next they'll be saying it's ok to boink your dog!
I kid, of course. This is good news.
Update: AP has more:
Massachusetts' highest court ruled Tuesday that same-sex couples are legally entitled to wed under the state constitution, but stopped short of allowing marriage licenses to be issued to the couples who challenged the law.A rather silly ruling, akin to saying that something is obviously wrong under the law but let's not do anything about it. In fact, let's give the other side time to shore up the state constitution so they can maintain their *cough* defense of marriage *cough*.The Supreme Judicial Court's 4-3 ruling ordered the Legislature to come up with a solution within 180 days.
It'll be interesting to see if this goes the way of Vermont or not. Here's hoping.
And George W. Bush feels fine, because it's all his fault, don't ya know?
Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, launched a stinging attack on President George Bush last night..."I actually think that Bush is the greatest threat to life on this planet that we've most probably ever seen. The policies he is initiating will doom us to extinction."Look for the new film "Dubya Impact"* in 2004, in which the President of the United States single-handedly destroys all life on Earth.
Ken Livingstone will reprise his role as The Mayor of Simpleton.
Thanks to The Daily Ablution for the story.
* I know, that sounds like a porn title. My apologies. Boom chicka bow wow.
Reports of the death of America's reputation in the United Kingdom seem to be a bit premature:
More than half of Labour supporters back US President George Bush’s state visit to Britain, according to a survey released today.As with much of the war-related press, it seems that this was once again a case of the squeaky wheel getting the grease.They were among an overall 43% of voters who told pollsters ICM they welcomed the visit – some 7% more than the 36% who said they would prefer the President to stay away. Twelve per cent were undecided.
The survey, to be published in The Guardian tomorrow as Mr Bush flies to the UK, contradicted the widely-held assumption that the visit will damage Prime Minister Tony Blair.
It recorded improved ratings for the Prime Minister personally, as well as a slump in opposition to the war in Iraq.
And it indicated that public opinion in Britain is overwhelmingly pro-American, with 62% of respondents agreeing the US was “generally speaking, a force for good”, compared to 15% who described it as “an evil empire".
Today's news:
Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein gave terror lord Usama bin Laden's thugs financial and logistical support, offering Al Qaeda (search) money, training and haven for more than a decade, it was reported yesterday.
Update: Josh Claybourn says that the Defense Department is distancing itself from the memo. They start out by saying that the claim of a link is inaccurate, but sum up by saying the memo "drew no conclusions." In other words, feel free to draw your own.
Thanks to this blog, I've discovered the joy of MS Word's Auto-summarize function. I ran my novel-in-progress through it, condensing it to 100 words or less, and got gobbledygook. Anyway, rather than post that, I ran some other works through it.
Such as Thoreau's Civil Disobedience:
Why has every man a conscience then? Men at all? The mass of men serve the state thus, not as men mainly, but as machines, with their bodies. How does it become a man to behave toward the American government today? I know this well, that if one thousand, if one hundred, if ten men whom I could name--if ten honest men only--ay, if one HONEST man, in this State of Massachusetts, ceasing to hold slaves, were actually to withdraw from this co-partnership, and be locked up in the county jail therefor, it would be the abolition of slavery in America. If the alternative is to keep all just men in prison, or give up war and slavery, the State will not hesitate which to choose. A man may grow rich in Turkey even, if he will be in all respects a good subject of the Turkish government. Confucius said: "If a state is governed by the principles of reason, poverty and misery are subjects of shame; if a state is not governed by the principles of reason, riches and honors are subjects of shame." If a plant cannot live according to nature, it dies; and so a man. Webster never goes behind government, and so cannot speak with authority about it.Not bad, actually. Much better than what it did to my masterpiece, pulling dialogue from unrelated scenes, jamming it together, and resulting in something I never intended. I've read that when you edit your novel, you should seek to remove something like 10% of it - maybe I'll just let Auto-summarize do the work for me.
Or not.
Well, that was fun. I'll have new toys to report on soon.
Naturally, the Roy Moore debacle has the Bamafundies coming out in droves to their local newspaper and television websites, espousing that we really need Jesus to save us, that atheists want to bring down America, that we're a Christian nation, and other such malarkey. I've joined the discussion.
Incoherent Babbling has this to say about super-mass-produced-star Clay Aiken:
First off, he looks like a complete twit. And his album is called "Measure of a Man"- but have his balls even dropped yet?I, for one, am unwilling to check if they have. Oh, Jon?
Vicky brings us a tale of the moral imperative, Billy Graham style: If you're bad, it's all your fault and you had better repent, because, sucka, you goin' straight to Hell. However, if you're good, it's all because of the Baby Jeebus and his proud papa.
I realize this is a common brain fart among the devout, those same people who thank God when something positive happens but neglect to blame the Almighty when a truck hits their dog (even if the truck did have a "Jesus is my Co-Pilot" bumper sticker).
Yes, folks, I can make puns off this guy's name all day long:
MONTGOMERY, Ala. -- Chief Justice Roy Moore was removed from office Thursday for refusing to obey a federal court order to move his Ten Commandments monument from the rotunda of the state courthouse.Moore, still possessed by his megalomaniacal theocratic delusions, is reported to have looked skyward and said "My god, my god, why have you forsaken me?"
The Alabama Court of the Judiciary unanimously imposed the harhest penalty possible after a one-day trial in which Moore said his refusal was a moral and lawful acknowledgment of God.
To which God replied: "Because you're an ass."
* Heaven's to Murgatroid, Jon and I came up with the same pun. I'll try to make sure that doesn't happen again.
Praise de lawd thank you Jeebus, the Right Reverend Hizzoner has been removed from the Alabama Supreme Court! More to follow as links become available.
The latest installment of the drinkfest known as The Rocky Mountain Blogger Bash, this incarnation being v2.75, is on. Friday, December 5, at the Wynkoop - mark your calendars.
Zombyboy, who has graciously taken over planning duties from yours truly, has the details. Check here, there, and everywhere (maybe not everywhere) for updates as they become available.
I'll probably be there by 5pm, per the norm for a lush of my calibre and skill.
Walter in Denver points to this article by former Labor Secretary Robert Reich. While he doesn't come right out and say it, the implication is that progress is the enemy of employment, that efficient markets and factories are a bad thing for the laborer.
I believe that's how the Soviets maintained an unemployment rate, and a short-term one at that, of around 2%. Yeah, let's follow that model, Bob.
To quote Walter:
I can scarcely believe he was once the Labor Secretary.
I recommend all of you join me in hating this man:
Stephen Cooke walked into the Georgia Lottery office in Atlanta on Wednesday morning thinking he'd won $13 million.Sigh.He walked out with a check for $26.6 million.
The 60-year-old school bus driver from Roswell had two of the three winning tickets for the $70 million jackpot and didn't know it.
Shanti over at Dancing With Dogs is going to have a litter of puppies baby! Go send your congratulations.
Good news for those us who like to drink the beer that eats like a meal:
The old advertising slogan "Guinness is Good for You" may be true after all, according to researchers. A pint of the black stuff a day may work as well as an aspirin to prevent heart clots that raise the risk of heart attacks.Ah, music to the ears, as during winter I like to go to the faux-Irish, overly-commercial restaurant Fadó, sit in the under-lit corner by the fireplace, and imbibe our dark friend by the happy hour pint glassful.Drinking lager does not yield the same benefits, experts from Wisconsin University told a conference in the US.
It's about as close to the feel of a true pub that I've been able to find, as somewhere along the way of translating British/Irish culture to America, our forebears forgot about the good cheer and good beer of the community drinking establishment.
The Wisconsin team tested the health-giving properties of stout against lager by giving it to dogs who had narrowed arteries similar to those in heart disease.Lucky dogs.
Just when you think Ted Rall can't get any more stupid, he proves you wrong once again. Today's episode of "Ted Rall Makes Michael Moore Look Smart" has our pal drafting an imaginary letter from the (nominally) Iraqi resistance to a new member:
It is no easy thing to shoot or blow up young men and women because they wear American uniforms. Indeed, the soldiers are themselves oppressed members of America's vast underclass. Many don't want to be here; joining America's mercenary army is the only way they can afford to attend university. Others, because they are poor and uneducated, do not understand that they are being used as pawns in Dick Cheney (news - web sites)'s cynical oil war.It makes one wonder then just how much pain these terrorists felt when they attacked the Red Cross compound, doesn't it? I mean, after all, those Red Cross employees were there, giving aid to the wounded and those in need, and all because of a horrible lie. Since the terrorists couldn't disabuse them of the notion that giving medical aid where it is needed is a good thing, they had to die.
Unfortunately, we can't help these innocent U.S. soldiers. They are victims, like ourselves, of the bandits in Washington. Nor can we disabuse them of the propaganda that an occupier isn't always an oppressor. We regret their deaths, but we must continue to kill them until the last one has gone home to America.
And, oh ho ho, the United Nations employees, the way they oppressed the people of Iraq and rolled in tanks and guns and things that go boom. Yes, surely, even though they wanted to avoid this war, right or wrong, they must die as well.
Ted Rall's Brain: Where logic goes to die.