You can't buy irony this good....

What's the word I'm looking for... Oh yeah, hypocrite:

Obama's for Equal Pay, Yet Pays Female Staffers Less Than Males
By Fred Lucas
CNSNews.com Staff Writer

June 30, 2008

(CNSNews.com) - While Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has vowed to make pay equity for women a top priority if elected president, an analysis of his Senate staff shows that women are outnumbered and out-paid by men.

That is in contrast to Republican presidential candidate John McCain's Senate office, where women, for the most part, out-rank and are paid more than men.

Obama spoke in Albuquerque, N.M. last week about his commitment to the issue and his support of a Senate bill to make it easier to sue an employer for pay discrimination.

Ha, ha, ha.... Glass ceiling and less pay. But he "supports" a bill to make it easier for women who've been discriminated against to collect fair compensation.

On average, women working in Obama's Senate office were paid at least $6,000 below the average man working for the Illinois senator. That's according to data calculated from the Report of the Secretary of the Senate, which covered the six-month period ending Sept. 30, 2007. Of the five people in Obama's Senate office who were paid $100,000 or more on an annual basis, only one -- Obama's administrative manager -- was a woman.

The average pay for the 33 men on Obama's staff (who earned more than $23,000, the lowest annual salary paid for non-intern employees) was $59,207. The average pay for the 31 women on Obama's staff who earned more than $23,000 per year was $48,729.91. (The average pay for all 36 male employees on Obama's staff was $55,962; and the average pay for all 31 female employees was $48,729. The report indicated that Obama had only one paid intern during the period, who was a male.)

McCain, an Arizona senator, employed a total of 69 people during the reporting period ending in the fall of 2007, but 23 of them were interns. Of his non-intern employees, 30 were women and 16 were men. After excluding interns, the average pay for the 30 women on McCain's staff was $59,104.51. The 16 non-intern males in McCain's office, by comparison, were paid an average of $56,628.83.

Sad, but it gets better:

The Obama campaign did not respond to written questions submitted on the matter Thursday by Cybercast News Service .

During his Albuquerque speech, Obama criticized McCain for supporting the Supreme Court ruling on the pay-equity issue.

"Sen. McCain thinks the Supreme Court got it right," Obama said. "He opposed the Fair Pay Restoration Act. He suggested that the reason women don't have equal pay isn't discrimination on the job - it's because they need more education and training. That's just totally wrong."

Obama continued, "Lilly Ledbetter's problem was not that she was somehow unqualified or unprepared for higher-paying positions. She most certainly was and by all reports was an excellent employee. Her problem was that her employer paid her less than men doing the exact same work."

So, the answer is stonewalling and criticizing McCain who doesn't engage in the practice while he does. Priceless. Just priceless.

Just one more issue to show that Obama is another phony "limousine liberal" who talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk. He funds the war. He won't fully support women's rights. Gays can go to hell in their quest for equal rights. He talks about equality then sticks it to his women employees. He supports FISA and the dismantlement of the Constitution.

Sometimes he sounds like Nixon, but without the garrulous personality and paranoia.

Kind of says it all...

Just can't get anything right...

This man is self-centered, corporate hack through-and-through.

Obama Does Not Support Return of Fairness Doctrine

There may be some Democrats talking about reimposing the Fairness Doctrine, but one very important one does not: presumptive presidential nominee Barack Obama.

The Illinois senator’s top aide said the issue continues to be used as a distraction from more pressing media business.

"Sen. Obama does not support reimposing the Fairness Doctrine on broadcasters," press secretary Michael Ortiz said in an e-mail to B&C late Wednesday.

"He considers this debate to be a distraction from the conversation we should be having about opening up the airwaves and modern communications to as many diverse viewpoints as possible," Ortiz added. "That is why Sen. Obama supports media-ownership caps, network neutrality, public broadcasting, as well as increasing minority ownership of broadcasting and print outlets."

We don't need it, no sir. Rupert Murdoch is always fair and balanced. Yes sir. Just watch Fox News. As fair and balanced as my crazy Aunt Jo.

BTW, I knew this was going to happen. It was obvious from his early record that he was a man of no substance and his word was worthless.

North Pole Could be Ice-Free This Summer

Bad news on the climate front:

Arctic sea ice could break apart completely at the North Pole this year, allowing ships to sail over the normally frozen top of the world.

The potential landmark thaw - the first time in human history the pole would be ice-free - is a stark sign of global warming, according to an article Friday on the web site of the The Independent, a London newspaper.

"Symbolically it is hugely important," said Mark Serreze of the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center in Colorado. "There is supposed to be ice at the North Pole, not open water."

Que Wing-Nut Whinging: But it's not truuuuuuuuuueeee.... It's just cows farting... We should add India to the Axis of Evil!!!

The rest of the story.

The Pandering Turd Speaks Again

He's just a pandering turd:

Democrat Barack Obama says he disagrees with the Supreme Court's decision outlawing executions of people convicted of raping a child.

Obama told reporters Wednesday that he thinks the rape of a child, ages six or eight, is a heinous crime. He said if a state makes a decision, then the death penalty is potentially applicable.

In a civilized society, with a solid prison system, there is no moral justification for the death penalty. It's just an atavistic hold over from our primitive, bronze-age ancestors who could do no better in protecting their societies from such people. In our modern times, there is no justice served and the practice only further dehumanizes all the participants without accomplishing anything of merit.

But when you're trying to drop the "liberal label," I guess the more heinious the attitude, the better.

Digby does a great job, better than I think I ever could, in breaking down Obama's slippery slope.

And now for something completely different

Mary Minifie, artist extraordinairre.
(As in it takes incredible skill to paint realistic still-lifes.)

Back in the Closet Again

I kind of feel sorry for the guy. Being unable to let go of his horrid religious views that, no doubt, leave him full of self-loathing and is forced to go back into the closet living a phony life.

Still, I can't feel too sorry for him. He is a wanker and has used his own self-loathing and intolerance to hurt others. And he is making a choice. A stupid choice considering his biological orientation, but it is his own, thus his suffering is self-inflicted so my capacity for empathy is limited:

Haggard, who also stepped down as president of the National Association of Evangelicals, confessed to undisclosed "sexual immorality" and said he bought meth but didn't use it.

Haggard then moved to Phoenix with his family to begin what church leaders called a spiritual restoration program, which was expected to include counseling and prayer and last five years or longer. Boyd said Haggard asked to released from the restoration program in January and is no longer connected with New Life.

Haggard and church officials clashed last summer after Haggard sent an e-mail to a Colorado Springs television station outlining his plans to work as a counselor at a Christian-run halfway house in Phoenix. The e-mail also solicited financial support.

The rest of the story is here.

Chris Dodd Speech on FISA

There are still a few white-hats in government. I hope there are enough. You can read it/watch it here.

Atheists nightmare debunked. Ray Comfort/Kirk Cameron

I love that video. Comfort and Cameron caught in their stone-cold ignorance. Amusingly, however, being made total fools of on the Internet can't keep them down.

At his blog, Comfort Food, the detestable Liar for Jesus tries to lay the smack down on someone (yesterday) with this post:

"There've been several hundred gay marriages enacted in California in the past few days. Maybe a couple of thousand by now, I haven't checked the numbers. And in the non-gay-marrying Midwest, they're fighting floods, while in California it's fair and dry. How is The Golden State managing to escape the wrath of your imaginary friend, I wonder?" Weemaryanne
Maryanne.

At present there are 840 wild-fires that are burning at once in California, destroying many homes. The fires were started by lightning strikes. Guess who’s in charge of the electrical department? These are from thunder storms that have no rain. Guess who gives the rain? You said "while in California it's fair and dry." We are having the worst drought in our recorded history. Last year 1,155 homes were destroyed. You live in an imaginary world. I suggest you get out more.posted by Ray Comfort at 8:11 PM on Jun 24, 2008

I left a comment on his ridiculous blog:

Maybe, Ray, Invisible Man is punishing California because you made a fool of yourself on YouTube with your banana argument... Seriously, epic fail on your part to not know that the modern banana was developed by centuries of artificial selection. Like modern wheat, cattle, dogs, potatoes, etc., etc., etc...

We'll see if it makes it past moderation (the tool of the unscrupulous hack).

As for you Ray, keep up the work. It's fools like you, shown to be ignorant liars, that create skeptics like me.

Spore creature copulating

I believe that porn is an irrepressible part of the human condition. From the first caveman making little stone idols to the most modern of technology, naked women, penis worship and all the rest, porn has been with us.

In this video, the game Spore (not even released yet) has allowed users of the pre-release creature creator to generate scores, if not more, home-made "humerous" porn flicks.

Enjoy. ;)

No, it's not...

good news from Iraq.

While agreeing with the administration that violence [in Iraq] has decreased sharply, a report released yesterday by the Government Accountability Office concluded that many other goals Bush outlined a year and a half ago in the "New Way Forward" strategy remain unmet.

The report, after a bleak GAO assessment last summer, cited little improvement in the ability of the Iraqi security forces to act independently of the U.S. military, and noted that key legislation passed by the Iraqi parliament had not been implemented while other crucial laws had not been passed. The report also judged that key Iraqi ministries spent less of their allocated budgets last year than in previous years, and said that oil and electricity production had repeatedly not met U.S. targets.

The rest is here.

To be clear, I think the evidence in the drop of violence does not point to "the surge" but two main factors: "same sect" defensive enclaves being formed out of the formerly diverse neighborhoods which has dramatically cut down violence coupled with a truce between Shite Clerics who were fighting for power. A third factor, of lesser importance, but probably with some significance, is the US bribing Sunni's to not attack them.

The wing-nuts won't see it. Like a bunch of petty-Hitler's, they're all in their bunkers dreaming of glorious victories just around the corner.

If this was victory...

...I could stand a bit more losing:

In an interview with Politico on Monday, Hoyer called the FISA legislation a "significant victory" for the Democratic Party -- one that neutralized an issue Republicans might have been able to use against Democrats in November while still, in his view, protecting the civil liberties of American citizens.

The funny thing is, I am reminded of an interview with a WWII german citizen who said he knew that his country was going to lose the war as, by late 1943, each "glorious victory" over the Russians was closer to Germany.

And, no, I'm not calling the Democrats Nazi's. I'm calling them losers and I'm seeing the writing on the wall.

The least odious...

remains odious. And the only way to change from government as usual:

BERKELEY, CA—Last week, on June 20, the House of Representatives approved a compromise bill to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA). The bill sets new electronic surveillance rules that effectively shield telecommunications companies from lawsuits resulting from the government’s warrantless eavesdropping on phone calls and viewing of emails of private citizens in the U.S. Approximately 40 lawsuits have been filed with potential damages totaling in the billions of dollars.

On March 14 of this year the House passed an amendment that rejected retroactive immunity for phone carriers who helped the National Security Agency carry out the illegal wiretapping program without proper warrants. Ninety-four House Democrats voted in favor of this measure--rejecting immunity--on March 14, then ‘changed’ to vote in favor of the June 20 House bill--approving immunity.

“Why did these ninety-four House members have a change of heart?” asked Daniel Newman, executive director of MAPLight.org, “Their constituents deserve answers.”

MAPLight.org's research department compiled PAC campaign contributions from Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint and correlated them with the voting records of all House members who voted on last week’s FISA bill. (The analysis used data from CRP; contributions were from January 2005 through March 2008). Here are the findings:

Comparing Democrats' Votes (March 14th and June 20th votes): HERE

...is to vote them out. Even if it means you're not part of the "winning team" or in the "cool kids" club.

I mean, seriously, do you think that voting for the "lesser of two evils" is really going to accomplish much? Your rights erode a little slower, maybe?

We've already lost much of the 4th Amendment. Some of which is the wackaloon fault of the LIBERAL justices on the Supreme Court and their willingness to side with Congress on the war on drugs instead of with the Constitution. So it's not like fear-mongering me about Supreme Court appointments is going to phase me much.

Russ Feingold on FISA

One of the few grownups in government speaks about FISA.

George Carlin Passes Away at 71

One of his greatest comedy rants, ever.

John McCain - Like New Coke, but even crazier...

David Broder writes:

“McCain benefits from a long-established reputation as a man who says what he believes,” writes Broder. “His shifts in position that have occurred in this campaign seem not to have damaged that aura. Obama is much newer to most voters, less familiar and more dependent on the impressions he is only now creating.”

Not really. Not anymore.

Sure, in 2000 McCain had that reputation. That's why, in my last days as a Republican, I was a McCain guy.

But that was in 2000. And as they say, 9/11 changed everything. And for McCain it wasn't a "good" change seeing that he's gone crazy and repudiated just about everything he said he stood for eight years ago because he's a desperate man who wants to be President, no matter what it takes.

So, as a former McCain guy, I'm not seeing the same "straight-talking" John McCain. Which makes me wonder why the "Dean of Political Correspondents" can make that observation or twist his bald, pointy head into believing that it still applies. Just a partial list of McCain's flip-flops over the past few years:

Old McCain - Abortion to be kept safe & legal.
New McCain - Constitutional amendment to ban all but rape, incest & life of mother.

Old McCain - Right-wing religious zealots are "agents of intolerance."
New McCain - John Hagee is my buddy.

Old McCain - Pro strict campaign finance laws. Filed complaints against dirty users.
New McCain - Breaks the law according to the REPUBLICAN head of the FEC.

Old McCain - Grover Norquist was a crook and a fool.
New McCain - Grover Norquist a great guy to have on my side.

Old McCain - Confederate battle flag a symbol of racism and should not be in State Flags.
New McCain - Confederate battle flag is okay by me, so fly that puppy!

Old McCain - Believed in legal rights and was against torture.
New McCain - Me love me some GITMO.

I think Broder's real message is this: We're the (useless) Pundit Class and we tell you what to believe because We Know Best as we have our hands on the Pulse of America.

A shameless endorsement

Go there: Repeal FISA Blog Get involved. It's not just your life that could be ruined by our continued slide down the authoritarian slippery-slope we've been on since Reagan. It's also the lives of your children and grandchildren as more and more Constitutional rights are signed away, as many already have been.

Fairness...

Charles Gibson, Republican Talking-Points Stenographer and ABC World News anchor speaks of fairness:

“Let me ask you a question about basic fairness: People in this country like to believe that people play on a level playing field and that a campaign will be about ideas and personality; if you start with that much more money, is it basically fair?”

I laugh in his general direction. Because I remember when the Republicans had all the advantages. And I ask, where were piteous cries of fairness when the Republican K Street money machine was raking in the bucks hand-over-fist and the Republicans wallowing like pigs in the trough of special interest money? Funny, but I only remember laughing and scorn from the media at the pathetic, cash-strapped Democrats.

Also, just for the record, it's not like it's tainted money like the K-Street Government-For-Sale project; Obama's average donation is just $91. This is because a lot of very small donors like him. Unlike McCain who really isn't liked by much of anyone and seems to be getting Republican pity-donations.

If McCain wants fair, I suggest he drop a whole boat-load of crazy and maybe some people will give him some money. Or he can just hit up his incredibly rich wife.

Barak Obama supports the FISA abomination

The ACLU opposes it for these reasons:

H.R. 6304, THE FISA AMENDMENTS ACT OF 2008 (6/19/2008)

The ACLU recommends a no vote on H.R. 6304, which grants sweeping wiretapping authority to the government with little court oversight and ensures the dismissal of all pending cases against the telecommunication companies. Most importantly:

• H.R. 6304 permits the government to conduct mass, untargeted surveillance of all communications coming into and out of the United States, without any individualized review, and without any finding of wrongdoing.

• H.R. 6304 permits only minimal court oversight. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA Court) only reviews general procedures for targeting and minimizing the use of information that is collected. The court may not know who, what or where will actually be tapped.

• H.R. 6304 contains a general ban on reverse targeting. However, it lacks stronger language that was contained in prior House bills that included clear statutory directives about when the government should return to the FISA court and obtain an individualized order if it wants to continue listening to a US person’s communications.

• H.R.6304 contains an “exigent” circumstance loophole that thwarts the prior judicial review requirement. The bill permits the government to start a spying program and wait to go to court for up to 7 days every time “intelligence important to the national security of the US may be lost or not timely acquired.” By definition, court applications take time and will delay the collection of information. It is highly unlikely there is a situation where this exception doesn’t swallow the rule.

• H.R. 6304 further trivializes court review by explicitly permitting the government to continue surveillance programs even if the application is denied by the court. The government has the authority to wiretap through the entire appeals process, and then keep and use whatever it gathered in the meantime.

• H.R. 6304 ensures the dismissal of all cases pending against the telecommunication companies that facilitated the warrantless wiretapping programs over the last 7 years. The test in the bill is not whether the government certifications were actually legal – only whether they were issued. Because it is public knowledge that they were, all the cases seeking to find out what these companies and the government did with our communications will be killed.

• Members of Congress not on Judiciary or Intelligence Committees are NOT guaranteed access to reports from the Attorney General, Director of National Intelligence, and Inspector General.

So much for the Constitution.

And so much for the "reality based" community. The second Obama signed-off on it, the Left-Wing Excuse Machine went into hyper-drive.

Obama caves...

In other news, gravity still works.

It is not all that I would want. But given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay. So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as President, I will carefully monitor the program, review the report by the Inspectors General, and work with the Congress to take any additional steps I deem necessary to protect the lives – and the liberty – of the American people.

I'm voting Green. He's already a disaster and he's not even president.

Teenager from faith-healing family dies in Oregon

We already know that prayer doesn't work. It might feel good, like eating a bowl of sugar, but, like a sugar diet, it isn't going to keep you alive. Yet we still live in the dark ages:

GLADSTONE, Ore. - Authorities say a teenager from a faith-healing family died from an illness that could have been easily treated, just a few months after a toddler cousin of his died in a case that has led to criminal charges.

Tuesday's death of 16-year-old Neil Beagley, however, may not be a crime because Oregon law allows minors 14 and older to decide for themselves whether to accept medical treatment.

"All of the interviews from last night are that he did in fact refuse treatment," police Sgt. Lynne Benton said Wednesday. "Unless we can disprove that, charges probably won't be filed in this case."

So, he was brainwashed to death. Because his family are a bunch of wack-a-loon cultists who have turned back the medical clock 2000 years and they crammed that crap into his head from a very early age.

An autopsy Wednesday showed Beagley died of heart failure caused by a urinary tract blockage.

He likely had a congenital condition that constricted his urinary tract where the bladder empties into the urethra, and the condition of his organs indicates he had multiple blockages during his life, said Dr. Clifford Nelson, deputy state medical examiner for Clackamas County.

"You just build up so much urea in your bloodstream that it begins to poison your organs, and the heart is particularly susceptible," Nelson said.

Nelson said a catheter would have saved the boy's life. If the condition had been dealt with earlier, a urologist could easily have removed the blockage and avoided the kidney damage that came with the repeated illnesses, Nelson said.

It would take just a catheter. It's not even surgery. They just put a tube up your willy. It's barely uncomfortable, despite all the traumatic whining you hear out of some men...

And yet that couldn't be done. Instead, futile prayer was the answer. And, I'm sure, after his death they said it was "the Lord's will" and "he's in a better place."

No. He's dead and his parents killed him by filling his head with superstitious nonsense. They are to blame. They taught their child wrong.

And what's worse, they want respect for their barbarous beliefs. They don't want science in your school. They do want their religion. So they can infect your children with their medieval world-view. And they too can die of treatable illnesses, get pregnant for lack of contraceptives, and set our culture back to when women and black knew their place - under the lash of the white man.

These people, in their own way, are more dangerous than terrorists. We can see that danger clearly. But this insidious corruption of society by religion... Not as easy because we're socialized to respect religion, not hold its feet to the fire.

Peter Gabriel - Games Without Frontiers

From 1980 - The lyric repeated at the beginning and end is "Jeux Sans Frontieres," which is French for "Games Without Frontiers."It is frequently misheard as "She's So Popular."

Peter Gabriel - Solsbury Hill

One of his earliest hits, from the 1970's. It wasn't a big hit. But it's enduring.

Peter Gabriel - Shock The Monkey

From 1982. Wow. That was a LONG time ago. Still, it's a great video even now.

Told you so -- the Demopublicans are completely corrupt.

Funny thing, but yesterday I turned down a Democratic Party fund-raiser who came to my door. He was talking about how Obama "opted out" and how the Democrats were going to take back the government, blah, blah, blah...

I was thinking "go to hell, you're a bunch of traitors." They won't get a dime out of me. Not again. Not after this. The least odious of two evils is still evil.

Dems Agree to Expand Domestic Spying, Grant Telecoms Amnesty
By Ryan Singel

President Bush is set to win a huge victory in the controversy over warrantless wiretapping, as the House Democratic leadership agreed to telecom immunity and expanded spying powers.

Breaking months of acrimonious deadlock, House and Senate leaders from both parties have agreed to a bill that gives the nation's spy agencies the power to turn a wide swath of domestic communication companies into intelligence-gathering operations, and that puts an end to court challenges to telecoms such as AT&T that aided the government's secret, five-year warrantless wiretapping program.

Civil liberties proponents quickly blasted the deal.

"The proposed FISA deal is not a compromise; it is a capitulation," said Wisconsin Democratic Senator Russ Feingold, the only senator who voted against the Patriot Act in 2001. "The House and Senate should not be taking up this bill, which effectively guarantees immunity for telecom companies alleged to have participated in the President’s illegal program, and which fails to protect the privacy of law-abiding Americans at home."

You can read the rest of the details on the sellout at Wired.

The life of a 49er fan...

Mocked around the Internets.

Obama says something...

They're nice words, and he does blast the Bush Administration:

I have consistently opposed this Administration's efforts to use debates about our national security to expand its own power, whether that was in regard to the conduct of the Iraq war or its restrictions on our civil liberties through domestic surveillance programs or suspension of habeas corpus. It is time to restore oversight and accountability in the FISA program, and rejecting this unprecedented grant of retroactive immunity is a good place to start.
Giving retroactive immunity to telecom companies is simply wrong. Thankfully, the most recent effort to pass this legislation at the end of the legislative year failed. I unequivocally oppose this grant of immunity and support the filibuster of it. I have cosponsored Senator Dodd's proposal that would remove it from the current FISA bill and continue to follow this debate closely. In order to prevail, the proponents of retroactive immunity still have to convince 60 or more senators to vote to end a filibuster of this bill. I will not be one of them.

This Administration has put forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we demand. When I am president, there will be no more illegal wire-tapping of American citizens; no more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime; no more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war. Our Constitution works, and so does the FISA court.

But, in fact, the Democratic Majority Leader in the House is pushing the Telecom immunity bill that was written by one of the Republicans. So while Obama rightly blasts them, he wrongly hides the complicity of a substantial portion of his own corrupt party.

Which gets me to my observation: Am I one of the few to learn the lessons encompassed in Orwell's Animal Farm? Seriously, the whole damn book was an obvious metaphor of the inevitable corruption of good intentions.

I believe it is obvious that the 'lesser of two odious,' regardless of the "team" you're rooting for, remains odious. I think the obvious, and sad, truth is, but for the occasional maverick that comes in under the radar, until the straight-and-narrow is routinely enforced by the voters, odious is all we will receive. And until people say "I'm voting for the best, regardless of the perceived futility, not the least-worst" we're going to have government full of quislings. After all, the costs of betrayal are too small compared to the rewards of power when elections are limited to a false-choice of two "electable" candidates.

Dear Moderator: You Suck

I played Fallout and Fallout 2. I'm really, really, really, really looking forward to the sequel. So much so that I actually try to participate in a message board run by Bethesda Softworks.

Because I am excited. I really, really, really, really want to play this game. I really, really, really hope it's good. And I really want to share my excitement with others who loved the first two games.

In light of that, once again, knowing that the Fallout 3 board will probably be a useless whine-fest, I still go to participate in the vain hope that maybe, just maybe, there might be something worth reading.

Unfortunately, the moderators there suck. They've let the flamebaiters, whiners and cry-babies destroy the community with their free-floating anxiety compounded by their natural assholetry.

So, I'm pretty much sick and tired of it. I can't participate in the fan-excitement of one, for me, of the potential most important games to be released in the past decade. And every now and then, I'll rip into one of them because I'm pissed that they've got to shit on it for everyone.

So, when I log on today, I get this private message:

I have deleted this post of yours from the forum.

[quote name='XXXXXXXXX' date='Jun 18 2008, 09:00 PM' post='111111111']
Another week, another self-important clown "telling it like it is" from his fact-free universe. Go crawl under a rock and stop wasting people's time with idiotic vanity threads of doom.

It is both flamebaiting and flaming. Perhaps you could remind yourself of the [url="http://www.bethsoft.com/bgsforums/index.php?showtopic=724862&st=0&p=10466758&#entry10466758"]forum rules[/url] so there will be no future need for a moderator to contact you.

Have a good day.

Rohugh.

My response:

I'll admit I was rough on the whiner. The whiners, flamebaiters and trolls have, through their constant whining and thread-jacking, ruined any reasonable
participation over the past year and I let my frustration at the lack of proactive moderation get the best of me. But I am perplexed because in light of the conduct of the members of this board, my post was not even special. So, I wonder:

Did you delete half the threads/posts here?

Because, honestly, the flame-baiting and trashing is so pernicious, such as the flambating original post of the thread to which I responded, that
people like myself who'd actually like to talk about the game, who enjoyed the
past games and are looking forward to the new game and don't automatically
assume Bethsoft is a mendacious cabal bound and determined to totally screw-up
the game seem to be in a minority. Rather, it seems that every other thread is a
flame-bait about how Bethsoft is screwing up the game along the lines of:

The plot sucks.
The concept sucks.
The combat system sucks.
The music sucks.
The graphics suck.
The devs suck.
The board sucks.
Anyone who might like the game sucks.

And, like it or not, that's the environment I see that has been allowed to grow here. Every day this is what goes on regarding the development of this game. It's so bad that, at best, I generally come in once a week looking for updates. I'll read the the top three or four threads and they are SUCK SUCK SUCK SUCK in the themes I outlined above.

Just like the fact-free, flame-baiting original post in the thread I made my comment. So, I'm seriously perplexed that my post was considered "so bad" in light of the environment and conduct of the board regulars that I was moderated. Are there some secret rules? You can rip Bethsoft, the programmers and everything Fallout 3, but not call-out flame-baiting whiners for their flame-baiting threads? Or did someone just whine because they can dish it out but not take it?

I'm sure I'll be banned. Honestly, I don't really give a damn anymore. The Internet is a great thing, but it has its dark-side.

Externalized Costs

A classic example of the "free market" externalizing a cost that is born by the members of society in various economic and quality-of-life ways. In this case, toxic lead-dust is contaminating the homes of nearby city:

Dust in homes 'proves lead risk'

DUST collected from window sills, airconditioning units and floors in Mt Isa provides hard evidence that emissions from the nearby mine are driving the dangerously high blood-lead levels found in the central Queensland city's children.

The first independent study to look at household dust, rather than air and soil samples, shows lead levels as high as 40 times international guidelines.

Environmental scientist Mark Taylor of Sydney's Macquarie University collected 101 dust samples from roadside verges and two schools' entrances, as well as from inside, outside and beneath houses.

All the household samples, analysed at the National Measurement Institute, exceeded the guidelines and showed high concentrations of fine lead and other heavy metal particles.

Dust samples collected outside the homes in the study, which was commissioned by solicitors Slater and Gordon, showed far lower levels of lead contamination as the soil was a mixture of contaminated and natural uncontaminated material.

"It's clear the data show there's ongoing and serious contamination of homes and gardens which demands urgent remediation at the source, the stacks and the slag heaps," Professor Taylor said yesterday.

The true-believer Libertarians will tell you this is not so. Or that the market would "punish" this type of firm.

Reality says that without strong government over-sight, free of special interests, such practices are common. Even with government over-site to help mediate the worst, it requires distressingly little effort to find horrible examples.

Dead Puppies

Enjoy!

Dead puppies
Dead puppies
Dead puppies aren't much fun

They don't come when you call
They don't chase squirrels at all
Dead puppies aren't much fun

My puppy died late last fall
He's still rotting in the hall
Dead puppies aren't much fun, no no no
Mom says puppy's days are through
She's going to throw him in the stew
Dead puppies aren't much fun

Dead puppies
(Dead dead dead) dead puppies
Dead puppies aren't much fun

(Come on everybody out there, sing along ok?)

(Dead dead dead) dead puppies
(Dead dead dead) dead puppies
(Dead dead dead) dead puppies aren't much fun

(One more time for rolling resca)
Dead puppies
Dead puppies

Camp Grenada

Enjoy this oldie!

Another fine Greenwald column...

Is it any wonder the rest of the world looks down on us? Seriously, as a country we can't get anything that relates to compassion or respect for our fellow man right:

The company we keep
This article from Agence France-Presse, regarding UN chief Ban Ki-moon's call for all countries to eliminate travel restrictions on individuals with HIV, contains this passage:

According to UNAIDS, the global standard-bearer in the fight against HIV, 74 countries are subjecting HIV carriers to restrictive measures, including a mention of the disease on their passports.

Twelve among them -- Armenia, Colombia, Iraq, Oman, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Solomon Islands, South Korea, Sudan, the United States and Yemen -- barred entry to HIV carriers, often citing public health concerns and the high cost of treatment.

Even China recently removed itself from this lovely list by rescinding its ban. A few weeks ago, Andrew Sullivan had an Op-Ed in The Washington Post regarding the extraordinary fact that the U.S. is only one of 12 countries in the world to ban HIV-positive individuals from entering the country, and he described the heavy toll that ban exacts on people such as himself who are living with the virus (This week, the new ACLU blog is hosting a symposium on lesbian and gay issues that includes a discussion of these and related matters).

It's like we're a bunch of gutless cowards who are, emotionally and intellectually, stuck in the 14th Century or something.

The rest is here: Salon

Animal Farm and the Demopublicans...

In the novel Animal Farm’s final scene, a group of neighboring farmers are given a tour of Animal Farm. When the tour is over, the pigs and men meet in the dining-room of the farmhouse. Mr. Pilkington, a neighbor, makes a toast to Animal Farm and its efficiency.

Napoleon, the head pig, makes a speech where he outlines the farm's new policies: No longer will animals be "comrades," the Sunday policy meeting is abolished and there will be some other changes as well. The greatest change in policy, however, is his announcement that Animal Farm will again be called Manor Farm, essentially driving home the slow corruption of a once independent, democratic farm and it's final slip into "what it was" from "what it could have been."

Soon after Napoleon’s speech, the men and pigs begin playing cards, but a loud quarrel erupts when both Napoleon and Pilkington each try to play the ace of spades. As the other animals watch the arguments through the dining-room window, they are unable to discriminate between the humans and the pigs.

When Orwell wrote this he was writing about communism and how the Soviet Union turned into an authoritarian dictatorship, quite similar to the Empire of the Tsar's, and away from the "high minded" principles of equality from which it nominally arose. That, in the end, the majority of the populace ended up being no better off, having traded one master for another.

In an analogous manner, I have seen, over the past few years, the same type of changes in Congress. When the Democrats, the "party of the people", should have had to rise in opposition to the Republicans, what has been the result:

1. When Bush has been shown to have engaged in criminal activities, the Democratic Leadership tabled impeachment. Just like the Republicans would.

2. When Feingold pushed-back on Telecom immunity, the Democrats attacked him. Just like the Republicans did.

3. When Feingold pushed a censure measure against the President since the worthless leadership of the Democrats tabled impeachment, they attacked him again. Just like the Republicans did.

4. When Bush attacked the Constitution and wrote-out Habeas Corpus with the Military Commissions Act of 2006, the Democrats were there with him. They even supported the bill instead of filibustering.

5. When the Patriot Act has come up for renewal, the Democrats have been there with him. Just like the freedom-hating Republicans.

6. When people have been polled multiple times and the majority of America wants us out of Iraq, the Democrats just write big checks and give Bush what he wants. Just like the Republicans.

7. When obviously partisan-hack Judges were being appointed, the Democrats did nothing to stop the fleet of radical conservative appointees. Just like the Republicans.

These have been among the most important Democratic litmus tests to push-back against the Bush presidency. And it's been very close to a complete failure. Which is why, despite the pandering promises of change the Obama Campaign promises, I see nothing but another Jimmy Carter, Rev. 2.0. Great man, on a personal and ethical level (though I'm not as sure of Obama) but could not integrate with or defeat the entrenched corruption that is the Beltway.


This November, I'm sure Obama the spineless wonder will get elected President. I'm sure he'll make many fine speeches. I'm sure he'll be full of proposals. I'm sure there'll be much rejoicing.

And then the pigs will band together to protect their trough from the interlopers. Maybe a few nominal changes will be permitted. But certainly not anything really revolutionary like actual equal rights for all humans under our flag and/or control. And, I'm sure, nothing that will threaten to destabilize the unhealthy relationship between big business and our Corporate-Owned government that's been going on since the days of Woodrow Wilson.

So, while a lot of people are happy the Democrats are going to get further entrenched in power. I'm skeptical anything will really change. Maybe the corruption will slow down. But evidence seems to be to the contrary as the Democrats are raking in the $$$$ and corporate interests are being protected. What I see is this country has been firmly entrenched on wrong-track for nearly thirty-years now and, frankly, the Democrats have been almost as big a part of the problem as the Republicans.

Monopoly and Hedge Funds...

You'd think that people could learn something from the children's game, Monopoly. The economy generally grows with little help from anyone as life itself requires goods and services. In Monopoly we call this "passing Go."

Beyond Chance and Community Chest, everything else is a zero-sum game that leaves one person incredibly enriched and everyone else beggared. In a game, it doesn't really matter.

In real life...:

HIGH-RISK hedging strategies by AWB cost farmers $260 million in one year, the Export Wheat Commission has found.

The report’s release this morning came as more than 500 farmers began marching to Parliament House in Canberra protesting plans to abolish the single desk wheat export market.

In its report, the commission says the monopoly bulk grain exporter did not maximise returns to growers from its 2005-06 national pool.

The commission, an independent statutory authority established to control the export of wheat, raised concerns that losses from AWB's hedging strategy were borne by farmers alone while the company retained a portion of any gains.

The report noted that non-bulk wheat exports continued to increase with about 1.5 million exported in the eight months since non-bulk wheat deregulation to April 30 this year, compared with 550,000 tonnes exported during the same period in 2006-07.

The Rudd Government, with the support of the Liberal party, is proposing to deregulate the bulk wheat export market by opening it up to competition from July 1.

Legislation, due to be considered by the Senate today, is being opposed by The Nationals, the Liberal's coalition partner.

Farmers were this morning being led from old parliament house by a farmer playing the bagpipes.

Many of the farmers are carrying placards with messages for both the Government and the Liberals.

One placard read: “What's worse than weevils in wheat - rats in parliament.”

Stupid move, this. Unregulated capitalism leading to monopolies is never a win-win prospect. Especially when you stupidly create one by fiat. At least most competitive-originating monopolies had a superior product or service at one time. Even if they become entrenched and backwards as they fail to compete (as all monopolies eventually do).

No matter how many supply-siders and Libertarians lie to the contrary.

Why Do Women Give McCain a Zero?

It's just a "dumb ad" but it helps highlight how far McCain's changed since he went crazy after losing to Bush in 2000. A far cry from the man who seriously considered moving to the Democratic Party and supported women's rights, if imperfectly.

Black Sabbath Paranoid

Now, this is one of the early defining Black Sabbath songs - Paranoid. It took them 25-minutes to write it. Hardly their best tune. Still better than anything the Glam-Metal band JP put out.

And if you don't like that, try Ironman (favorite), War Pigs or (my second favorite) Sabbath Bloody Sabbath.

So there.

Judas Priest - Electric Eye

Got into a bit of an Internet tiff -- Who was better, Black Sabbath or Judas Priest?

This is Electric Eye, considered to be one of their best, and most defining, pieces of music. Pfffttt... A bunch of pretty boys pretending to play heavy metal.

See for yourself.

Win Ben Stein's Brain...

WARNING: Contains nuts; is very small, you may be hungry later. From the June 11 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:

STEVE DOOCY (co-host): Now, let me ask you about this. I saw on one of the debates Barack Obama was asked -- I think by Charlie Gibson at ABC: "What are you going to do about capital gains?" Right now it is at 15 percent --

STEIN: Right.

DOOCY: -- which is -- a lot of people say that's about where it should be. Now, he's suggesting he would jack it up to maybe 25 or 30 percent, perhaps doubling it.

Whoa nelly, let's stop right here. Did Obama really say that? To some limited extent:

OBAMA: So the general principle of raising taxes on higher-income Americans like myself, and providing relief to those who haven't benefited as much from this new global economy, I think, is a sound one. And keep in mind on all of these proposals, what I have said is, let's make sure that we define the well-off so that we're not hitting the middle class. I generally define well-off as people who are making $250,000 a year or more, and that means, for example, if we raise the capital gains tax, I would exempt people who are essentially small investors, and really capture the -- those who have done very, very well over the last two decades.

Less than one-percent of the population and people who, frankly, if they can't live on that, well they just suck. So, knowing what Obama said, we can put Stein's whine in perspective -- he's shilling for the rich because he's rich.

So, continuing on:

DOOCY: What does that mean to us?

STEIN: It means a huge amount in terms of retirement planning, because if you are retiring, you're going to depend a lot on capital gains from your investments to fund your retirement.

DOOCY: Mm-hmm.

STEIN: If that's going to be taxed away, your retirement is in severe jeopardy. So I'm very worried about increasing the capital gains tax, unless you want to just increase it on people that are terribly wealthy. I have no problem with increasing the tax on people who have an income of $5 million a year or more.

DOOCY: Neither do we.

STEIN: Like you two, I would say that would be your --

CARLSON: Yeah, right.

STEIN: I'm guessing that's your income. But people who have incomes in the hundreds and the low hundreds of thousands, people that have incomes in the five digits, that's way -- that's crazy to increase their capital gains tax. People are in a retirement crisis.

Not these people. Unless they're complete morons. They've got 401(k)'s that are loaded. All kinds of investments out the wazoo and, should, have a ton of wealth by now.

To put it in perspective, I just finished up a tax return for a client. He made $746,000 last year. He paid, after deductions, etc., $207,000 in tax. If he can't live on $539,000 he's too stupid to live and needs to kill himself.

Well, he can live on that because he's smart and doesn't let his wealth go to his head and waste it profligately. In fact, he hasn't changed his lifestyle from when he was making $100,000 a year and he's increased his net worth by millions over the past decade. A 30% capital gains tax will not change his retirement prospects in any material matter.

Unlike the small investor who is actually exempt under Obama's plans. And the middle-class that, frankly, has little retirement savings and is going to be working at Target well into their eighties at this rate. Continuing on:

DOOCY: Yeah.

STEIN: A major retirement crisis. We have something like 30 million baby boomers who have no preparation for retirement at all. We've got to get them investing. We can't tax away their gains, otherwise it's just going to be a catastrophe. I could see the retirement crisis being the biggest crisis in this country since the Great Depression.

DOOCY: Oh, man.

CARLSON: Really? Well, and also part of the Barack Obama plan, I think, is to increase the tax when you try to sell your home, as well --

STEIN: Yes.

CARLSON: -- which could affect, well, everyone, but retirees as well.

STEIN: It's going to affect everybody. I don't think he's thought this through. I think he's a good man, but he hasn't thought this through. And I think he's getting advice from people who are more interested in envy and in soaking the rich than in helping the middle class.

No, just the rich. So, in the end, by knowing what Obama said, and knowing what Stein is, we can easily see the Pretensions of Doom to disguise the continuing class-warfare against the middle class and poor. The only people who've gotten anywhere in the past 30 years are the rich. Because they whine and whine and whine and pay shills like Stein to muddy the waters and cry "foul."

Obama's tax proposals do not touch the middle class. And while I've been frank I don't like many of the things he's done and said and have real issues with his competency. Stein's lies are cheap and silly.

Yet fools will believe them. Which, of course, explains Libertarians like Stein.

Jesus, The Movie

Must watch. Enjoy...

How to Speak Republican

Enjoy...

I'm Voting Republican

....

Supreme Court (5-4) enforces detainee rights

I must admit I'm somewhat surprised, the Supreme Court restored Habeas Corpus:

High court: Gitmo detainees have rights in court

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that foreign terrorism suspects held at Guantanamo Bay have rights under the Constitution to challenge their detention in U.S. civilian courts.

In another rebuke of the Bush administration's treatment of prisoners, the court ruled 5-4 that the government is violating the rights of prisoners being held indefinitely and without charges at the U.S. naval base in Cuba. The court's liberal justices were in the majority.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the court, said, "The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times."

Kennedy said federal judges could ultimately order some detainees to be released, but that such orders would depend on security concerns and other circumstances.

Five-to-four, I don't even need to read "liberal justices" to know who dissented. It'd be the four Constitution hating "conservatives" (Alito, Roberts, Scalia & Thomas) who, despite touting strict construction and respect for the Constitution and eschew the "living document" standard from which things like "Right of Privacy" have been determined, couldn't see fit to recognize the actual provisions of Habeas Corpus written into the Constitution. I should point out, by the way, two of them wouldn't be there if the Democrats had shown a spine.

But that's typical of conservative appointee appellate judges and Supreme Court justices. The Constitution is a fine old thing, as long as it serves their interests when strictly interpreted. When a strict interpretation would benefit criminal defendants, unliked people with little (or no) constituency (such as the men in GITMO), or plaintiffs against the government and/or large corporations, the "strict interpretation" doctrine they love goes the way of the dodo.

While I am, by the way, happy that these Constitutional Rights were restored. I'm still mortified that it was by a narrow margin and that entire swaths of my countrymen don't see fit to understand these rights are for everyone or no one. The slippy slope is a cliff, not a gentle-rise, and once government gets a tool to oppress, it has been shown, even in our country, time-and-time again that the tool will be used against its own populace.

Stephanie Wins Top Chef

Whew! Top Chef and Project Runway are big family-time television shows in our house. The only other shows we watch regularly are Battlestar Galactica (in its final season) and Dr. Who. So last night, the season finale, was pretty tense. Not because of who was going to lose, that happens, but of how another hack might win the prize, like the nightmare of Season Two.

In Season Two, the cliff-failure flaw of a single-elimination contest were exposed when the total tool and culinary hack, Ilan Hall, won Top Chef. He had, through the season, cribbed his culinary superior's recipes from Casa Mono in New York and reproduced them on the show winning, or at least placing high, in many elimination contests. However, while he successful at cribbing Casa Mono's menu, he utterly failing in his dishes when he was required to go outside his boss' recipe book. Add in he was a spoiled-brat tool, a momma's boy (his mother wrote a column defending his outrageous behavior in a local newspaper and played "poor Ilan is a victim" when he was actually an abusive jerk) and is, to this day, pretty much the most reviled and belittled Top Chef contestant in the history of Top Chef; a repeat championship of a clown like Ilan, due to the flaws of a single-elimination contest, was an anxiety provoking possibility.

In Season Three we avoided that possibility as all the finalists were worthy.

Coming back to Season Four, the possibility reared its ugly head. Going into the finale Lisa was, literally, the worst qualified finalist in the history of this show. She had one elimination challenge win, one top-three finish and seven bottom-three finishes where she faced elimination giving her a pitiful record of 1-1-7.

Both Richard Blaise (4-4-1) and Stephanie Izard (4-6-3) had fantastic records going into the finale and many eliminated contestants, like Antonia (1-6-3), Dale (2-3-2) and Andrew (1-4-2) were all better chefs that just had a bad day and fell on their knives while Lisa slid through, probably on the grease in her unwashed hair. I'd rather have seen any of them in the finale because, even though they were weaker than Richard and Stephanie, they were at least more competitive and talented.

Well, last night the presumptive favorite, Richard Blaise, had a bad night. And Stephanie didn't have a "knock the judges socks off night." Without a clear knock-out by one of the two actually-talented chefs, my daughter and I, during the suspense building moments of judging, started freaking out about a possible Lisa win. Not nervous break-down freaking out, but we were literally incapable of remaining still due to the fear that the massively undeserving Lisa would win the night. An anxiety filled 30-minutes that, thankfully, left us screaming in joy when Stephanie won.

All is right in our little universe today. The undeserving Lisa didn't win. The deserving Stephanie did win. But man, it was a television-viewing nightmare as a mid-pack contestant who should have been eliminated much earlier in any properly constructed "true competency" was eligible for the prize.

There Can Be Only One

Top Chef finale tonight. Please not Lisa.

Gun Nuts...

Bill White, 24, a graduate student at the University of Colorado at Boulder, wears his Colt pistol when he goes to his local Starbucks in Westminster, Colo

Jesus Christ, it's Starbucks you fool. The most dangerous thing that you'll face is a bad latte or soy milk. For rest of the cowboy wannabes:

PROVO, UTAH -- For years, Kevin Jensen carried a pistol everywhere he went, tucked in a shoulder holster beneath his clothes.

In hot weather the holster was almost unbearable. Pressed against Jensen's skin, the firearm was heavy and uncomfortable. Hiding the weapon made him feel like a criminal

Then one evening he stumbled across a site that urged gun owners to do something revolutionary: Carry your gun openly for the world to see as you go about your business.

In most states there's no law against that.

Jensen thought about it and decided to give it a try. A couple of days later, his gun was visible, hanging from a black holster strapped around his hip as he walked into a Costco. His heart raced as he ordered a Polish dog at the counter. No one called the police. No one stopped him.

Now Jensen carries his Glock 23 openly into his bank, restaurants and shopping centers. He wore the gun to a Ron Paul rally. He and his wife, Clachelle, drop off their 5-year-old daughter at elementary school with pistols hanging from their hip holsters, and have never received a complaint or a wary look.

Jensen said he tries not to flaunt his gun. "We don't want to show up and say, 'Hey, we're here, we're armed, get used to it,' " he said.

But he and others who publicly display their guns have a common purpose.

The Jensens are part of a fledgling movement to make a firearm as common an accessory as an iPod. Called "open carry" by its supporters, the movement has attracted grandparents, graduate students and lifelong gun enthusiasts like the Jensens.

Morons, one and all. There are many potential consequences in owning and/or carrying a firearm. One is that it's quite the myth that open carrying deters crime. The other is accidental discharge, like this:

A four-year-old girl shot herself in the chest on Monday after snatching her grandmother's handgun from the woman's handbag while riding in a shopping trolley at a discount store, authorities said.

A witness, Lueen Homewood, said workers at Sam's Club in Columbia, South Carolina, grabbed first-aid materials from store shelves to help the grandmother as she cradled the wounded child near the store's pharmacy, The State newspaper reported on its website.

A tragedy that was perfectly avoidable. By grown-ups, at least.

Fact is, more people are killed with their own gun, or their friend's/neighbors' gun than ever "protect" themselves from crime by carrying a gun. Some studies have even found that people who carry guns are more likely to be violently assaulted, even killed, because the criminals (already lacking moral restraint) immediately escalate the violence to lethal from mere intimidation.

And, yes, I do own guns. I don't carry them around. I tend to keep them stored in the attic in a disassembled state with absolutely no ammunition in the house. But I'm not afraid of them. I just think most people have never gone through all the training I have plus really don't have the healthy level of respect firearms command. They're for killing. That's what they do. And they'll kill you over a simple mistake. Like the one above, or this one:

Dog Triggers Gun Blast, Killing Owner
“It's the strangest case that I've seen”

A tracking dog apparently stepped on a loaded shotgun in the bed of his owner's pickup truck, firing a fatal blast into the man's thigh during a goose hunt, officials said.

Perry Alvin Price III died at a hospital Saturday from severe blood loss from his femoral artery shortly after the southeast Texas accident.

Killed by his dog who stepped on the loaded gun.

Lewis Black - The Devil's Handiwork

Enjoy.

How Evolution Works Part 3- DNA

I really like this guy's series on evolution.

Sex, Lies & Videotape...

Why Johnny thinks he's right when he's wrong:



It's pathetic that the most informative news source in our country is a COMEDY SHOW.

Finally...

After playing in a number of on-line worlds and MMORPGs, I finally found an MMORPG which I can share with my pushing-12 daughter -- Mabinogi. It's an amusing Korean interpretation of a Fantasy/Magical Celtic/Welsh world (with some very traditional Korean clothing juxtaposed) in an anime style.

What I like about the game is that there's no non-consensual PvP (I'm not sure there is any PvP, but I haven't been to the Arena so maybe there is some PvP), they've got a swear filter, a minimum of gold-farmers and you can play a completely free version that allows you to dungeon crawl, perform short quests and grind with the paying accounts pretty-much equally. If you choose to pay for support you get some advantages, such as ability to customize things to a greater extent, form a guild, more equipment storage, a bit of Adam Smith's "unseen hand" and some whatnots that can mean the difference between life and death plus you can also do a very long (29-sub-parts) quest in Generation 1 and there's a Generation 2 quest being implemented now.

You can also buy upgraded character models and pets (even on the free account) to further individualize yourself. So far, the Monkey's gotten herself a cat and is screaming about its "cuteness" and "awesomeness" while I have yet to even activate my game-card. She can also, if she wants, play as the cat. Which, of course, she does and I hear her screaming about the cat being like some "super ninja."

While we do play together quite a bit, we're not entirely compatible as players. I play the way I always do - low-risk sniping (magic in this game). My daughter, OTOH, has shown she's really got the blood-lust and routinely charges into the fray with her sword in hand. She's also very social and made four-friends in the first four-hours and joined a guild. Me... Well, I'm pretty much soloing everything.

It's going to be an interesting summer.

George Takei is Getting Married

Take that Tim Hardaway. :)

Well, it's Texas...

...which goes a long way in explaining this idiocy"

BROWNSVILLE, TEXAS (AP) -- A Los Fresnos family is going to court to prevent a Cameron County justice of the peace from ordering spankings in his courtroom.

A lawsuit filed today alleges Justice of the Peace Gustavo "Gus" Garza told a 14-year-old girl's stepfather to strike her repeatedly on the buttocks in open court.

If he didn't, the judge said the girl would be found guilty and fined $500 for truancy.

The lawsuit by Mary Vasquez and her husband, Daniel Zurita, described the paddle provided by Garza as large and heavy and fashioned from a thick piece of lumber.

In a story for The Brownsville Herald, Garza declined to comment on whether he has people spanked in his courtroom. He also said he had not seen the lawsuit.

Zurita says he didn't feel as if he had a choice but to follow the order.

In an affidavit, Zurita says that when he was through, the judge told him he had not struck the girl hard enough.

Frankly, I think they should beat the judge until he realizes that there is only so much control any parent has over their child. And when the child realizes that, it can be, well, nearly impossible to control your child.

Short of imprisonment and vicious child-abuse disguised as "parenting." And if you're at that point, you've failed for so long, in so many ways, that there's no point in trying to salvage the situation without everyone in some serious therapy and parenting classes. Even then, the prognosis is poor.

I do wonder, though, if the judge is a holy roller. Since beating the crap out of your child and severe religiosity seem to go hand-in-hand.

The Problem with Sudden Death Reality Shows

How Top Chef is getting it wrong: Lisa is in the Final 3. She has the chance to win the title. Far better chefs have been eliminated as she's squeaked by, despite being up for the axe SEVEN TIMES.

Watching her sullen, greasy-haired train-wreck of a self ruin dish-after-dish, even as simple as RICE (multiple times), and she's still in the final... I mean, once she even blew TWO dishes in one elimination challenge and should have been sent home. Yet they sent her teammate, Dale, home instead. Dale, albeit prone to emo outbursts, was twice the Chef of Lisa and he was a better player in the train-wreck of that team loss. Our favorite chef, but not the strongest chef and a dark-horse to win it, Andrew, was stronger than Lisa and he's gone. Even the little weasel Spike was stronger and he was pretty-much mid pack.

Bravo needs to add a cumulative scoring process to keep hacks like her out of the final. If she wins, it'll be like Ilan and the buyer's remorse Bravo had with the Season Two results.

Welcome to Banana Republic America...

So, what's the difference between Bush, the Right Wing, fascists and Hugo Chavez, the socialist President invested with near dictatorial powers in Venezuela? Apparently not much as he has taken a page out of our book and put in his own version of The Patriot Act:

A new intelligence law brought in by Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez has caused concern among rights groups who say it threatens civil liberties.

Mr Chavez argues the law will help Venezuela guarantee its national security and prevent assassination plots and military rebellions.

The new law requires Venezuelans to cooperate with intelligence agencies and secret police if requested.

Refusal can result in up to four years in prison.

The law allows security forces to gather evidence through surveillance methods such as wiretapping without obtaining a court order, and authorities can withhold evidence from defence lawyers if it is considered to be in the interest of national security.

Can it be any clearer these two clowns are peas in a pod? Or what we have become as a country?

Some of you may still see the land of the free, home of the brave that requires a bit of tinkering. I see a land that has imprisoned more people than Russia and China and lacks basic civil liberties and equal rights for a large portion of its people. I see a land whose populace routinely gives control of the government to an incompetent, inhumane conservative cause, which works to destroy, or at least limit, most of the guaranteed rights within it's own Constitution. I further see a cowardly country that is run by draft-dodging, war-avoiding cowards and their enablers with just the barest minority willing to make any sacrifice of their life to serve their country. All because the majority of this country is, well, a bunch of narrow-minded, incompetent bigots.

So, flag-cling-magnets, delusions of self-righteousness and patriotic slogans to the contrary, really, how are we different? Our courts are corrupt. Our executive branch is corrupt. Our legislative branch is corrupt. Further, the entrenched, corrupt players in the game have set it up that squeaky wheels are demonized and cast-out of the political process.

Threat Level Chicago Dog

I'm at a "liberal" blog that I really enjoy: The Left Coaster. Unlike the blogs that totally jumped the Obama shark, they were more Clinton-leaning in their collaborative efforts. Now that Hillary appears to be dropping out, the Obama-bots who frequent the blog are acting just like little Rovians:

So you're okay with no abortions or contraception then? What do you think McCain stands for anyway? What do you think a McCain Supreme Court will do?

Posted by Anonny at June 2, 2008 08:31 PM

Anonny is just another sheeple who doesn't get it. The Conservatives already own the Court and likely will for the NEXT TWENTY YEARS. And it is the fault of the Democrats who allowed it to happen. So, considering the havoc they're likely to wreak for the next twenty years, another few years at the end of that shouldn't make that much difference. After all, they'll have already destroyed the fabric of society in their demented fantasy-land reasoning as they hearken back to a Conservative Utopia that never happened.

So, really, try as you like, you're just not going to get enough traction with the "fear card" to make independent-minded Obama-detractors jump on board. At least those of us who are thinking people who, oh I don't know, actually dialed into the reality of the Supreme Court situation.

No matter how many times you Obama-bots try to scare us, most of us realize that we can vote Democrat in EVERY OTHER RACE and dominate the Congress. We don't need Obama to win the Presidency to stop the erosion of our liberties and win the most important branch of government. We just need a veto-proof Congress, and some leaders to stand up to the President, and any crazy appointee can be "Borked."

For people who tend to vote "split-ticket," in order to create an inherent tension in government, such as myself, it's not a big deal to piss on the Obama candidacy. He hasn't earned my vote. He's done nothing in his entire political career to earn my vote. Clinton, whom I've pretty much abhorred since she and her husband burst on the national scene, has at least done that.

So, Obama-bots, if you want people to vote for your candidate, find POSITIVE reasons for us to vote for him. Trying to scare me about the composition of the Supreme Court isn't going to get the job done. Trying to scare me about McCain isn't going to get the job done.

5 Year Old Boy Voted Out of Class

And people wonder why I homeschool.

You're Pitiful - 'Weird Al' Yankovic

Enjoy.

Donna Brazile - Superdelagate and Obama supporter...

An empassioned letter from a Hillary supporter:

From: xxxxx@yahoo.com
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 2:17 AM
To: donna@brazileassociates.com Subject: This Race Hi Donna!!!!


I am emailing you on behalf of many people. I am, as you may know, a Hillary Clinton Supporter. You have probably gotten a lot of emails from her supporters, and I understand from the blogs I often frequent that you have responded to many of them.

I want you to know that I read bits and pieces of your autobiography, Cooking With Grease, and thought it was wonderful and well written. I came to understand from your book and from a lot of what I have witnessed in this election cycle that to simply put groups of people in Demographics and Exit polls is a misunderstanding of both America and the Democratic Party.

What I have learned is that people often vote based on their experiences. You, as an Undeclared Obama supporter, probably identify strongly with his candidacy because of the struggles you went through during a time when race relations in this country were in turmoil. I voted for Hillary Clinton, not only because I relate to her strongly as both a person and a woman who is very spiritual and devoted to her family and to helping others, but also because she is the greatest candidate to lead this country out of the mess we're in, and because her policy proposals have been phenominal and close to my heart, because it proves to me that she is not simply talking and promising change, she is telling me how she is going to make it happen. It proves to me that she actually cares.

As a young person, I have a big future ahead of me, and I also have dreams and ambitions, and strong opinions and many other things. CNN tells me every day that I should be supporting Barack Obama, because his freshness and newness should appeal to my fickle nature.

But I support Hillary, and like many of her supporters, I feel sad and dissappointed and hurt and many other things by what I see, based on rationality and facts, as the poor and undeserved treatment she and her husband have received by the DNC party elite and the Chicago Style Campaign tactics of Senator Obama's Campaign that I have witnessed with my own eyes and heard a number of stories about.

I understand that many of the emails you have received by Clinton Supporters urging you to do the right and ethical thing by seating Michigan and Florida delegates have been angry and often probably obnoxious. But you cannot possibly understand how frustrated they are. And while you may say that they are "the reason" Hillary is losing, whatever her supporters have done or said pale in comparison to the abuse and mistreatment we have suffered from some supporters of Senator Obama.

You may use Roe V Wade as a trump card for accusing them of being petty in their vows to not support Senator Obama, should he be the nominee, but I assure you that using something like that as a threat will not work, because there are few (actually, no) politicians I have seen that are as devoted to a woman's right to choose than Hillary Clinton, and you know that as well as I.

Ms. Brazille, I urge you not to disclude and disenfranchise millions of voters from every walk of life from this nominating process simply for the sake of one candidate, because doing so would be an awful mistake. I have respect for you as a person, Ms. Brazille, but I would implore you to make the right decision and seat Florida and Michigan . I would also implore you to stop encouraging super delegates to force Senator Clinton out of the race, because the more they do this, the stronger she gets.

Ms. Brazille, I cannot pretend to understand what you have gone through in your life, nor what you are going through now. It would be ignorant of me to try. But many people feel angry when they are stereotyped or put in a box because if what candidate they support. I support Hillary Clinton, and I love all of my friends. Including the great African American friends I have that I adore. and all of the African American women at my mother's church who embrace me and always tell me how "pretty" I look every time I see them. I also love my Latino friends, my Italian friends, my Jewish friends, my Catholic friends.

As I said, I cannot pretend to understand your experiences, but nor can you understand mine. Just because a person's skin may be paler that yours, does not mean their lives are without suffering. I, for one, cry at night wondering what my republican mother will do if anything happens to her, because she doesn't have Health Insurance. And because of this, my mother may just support Hillary Clinton over John McCain come this fall. She is a Republican who supports Hillary Clinton not because Rush Limbaugh told her to, but because she believes that Hillary Clinton is a Candidate that may actually care about her.

So Ms. Brazille, I would yet again urge you to do everything you can to seat Michigan and Florida properly, and also, I would ask that you stop saying you are "undeclared" on CNN's panels when clearly you know which candidate you support.

Thank you very much for reading this email. Like you, I am very emotionally invested in this Campaign, (as is Stephanie Tubbs Jones, a Congresswoman from the district next to mine who also supports Hillary :D) and wish you all the luck in the world.

respectfully,

A young female voter from Ohio

The reply:

From: "Donna Brazile" Add Mobile Alert
To: xxxxxxxxx
Subject:

RE: This Race
Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 07:58:35 -0400

Thanks Natalie, As of today, I am not going to respond to any more anti American, Anti Democratic emails. Have a nice day.

I am sorry because you are sincere, but the Hillary forces are uncivil, repugnant and vile. When you come up for air and would like to email a person who cares about America and not just a personality, I will respond. (emphasis added)

Thanks for your time and your interest.

Donna

Project much, Donna? I haven't heard the "you're a traitor" bit since the run up to the illegal, immoral and completely unnecessary Iraq War. And the people I did hear it from were generally the frothing-at-the-mouth right-wing-nut-jobs.

Over-all though, I think the e-mail is amazing. First, that it really does expose some of the putrid, rancid thinking that goes on with many of the Obama supporters. It's like the Obama campaign is some giant HS clique/college frat party with the epicenter of the shrill-o-fest originating from the DailyKos (which sold its credibility long-ago). Everyone on the inside is cool and "above it all" (even though they're demonstrably not) while anyone who supports Hillary Clinton is a "traitor."

Really, it's just so high-school.

Second, I notice that in the whole game of "your surrogate said this" has it's own obvious double-standards. That is while the Obamabots are quick to label Hillary with anything stupid said by someone who supports her, Obama is (by the rulz) immune from criticism for what his supporters say. I know campaigning tends to engender a certain double-standard in thinking, but I think the Obama supporters have taken this to the heights previously reached by only the worst of the Freepers, Right-Wing Nut-Job politicians and the worst of the Konservative Preachers and their faux-outraged victim-hood.

I tell people, I owe my country vote used in a responsible manner and I do not owe it to the Democrats or Obama. And if I judge Obama to be the "lesser of two evils" that is not sufficient. I have no business voting for the "lesser evil" because he/she may win. What I do have are principles to uphold, and if that means voting hopelessly for a candidate that can't win (like the Green party) then that's what I need to do with my vote. Long before the crap-fest movie 300 was made, I understood the Battle of Thermopylae and fighting a hopeless cause to save others, if only by sending a defiant message to power.

And what I don't "owe" to anyone, or party, is my vote. There is no right given to the supporters of any candidate or party to demand my vote as the "lesser of two evils." And, having done a lot of protest voting the past three election cycles, I know for sure I'm not obligated to give it to a content-free suit lacking spine and who has, demonstrably, failed in the issues I feel are important to my (and his) children's future-ability to engage in rational self-determination within this country. Even if my personal feelings about these issues are in odds to my political beliefs about these issues.

Biofuel Blowback - Bad Policies aren't just for America

Bio-fuels are a great paper solution to irresponsible energy use. Just convert soy-beans, corn, sugar cane and other biomass into gas and drive that Hummer downtown with a "More Green than Thou" bumper sticker fastened on the back.

There are, unfortunately, a few pernicious problems with bio-fuels that should question the entire industry and the shallow and vapid thinking from which it spawned:

The bad oil on ethanol

GEOFF Cornford has battled years of drought while managing the North Australia Pastoral Company's Wainui cattle feedlot near the southern Queensland town of Dalby.

Now, just 20km down the road, a new threat looms for the $3 billion feedlot industry in the form of Dalby Bio Refinery's $150million plant, the first in Australia to be devoted to ethanol production. The plant is due to open in August, using sorghum to make a product that until recently held great hope for containing spiralling petrol costs.

Despite a bumper sorghum crop following summer rains, local feedgrain prices of $300 a tonne are twice what they were pre-drought. Like other ethanol producers, the Dalby plant will receive a commonwealth subsidy to compensate for a 38.14c-a-litre fuel excise, about $34 million for its annual production of 90 million litres.

Cornford says further hikes in feedgrain prices are inevitable because of the biofuel plant, which will need about 250,000 tonnes of grain a year: "We've had grain shortages in three of the past four years. The ethanol producers are our competitors for grain but are subsidised by taxpayers."

Like the US, producers of bio-fuels in other countries get large welfare-payments, through subsidies, to produce their wares. This is, despite (of course) the usual political twaddle of "free markets" and "capitalism." These subsidies have can dramatic impacts on a nation and its people.

First, they help guarantee profits (at the taxpayer expense) for inefficient industries. As the Soviets found out the hard, state support of grossly inefficient industries will wreck your economy. The reasons for this are complex, but I think simply put we can see that without the risk of failure, the remaining driving forces required for efficiency simply don't work.

Another impact of bio-fuels is on food prices. Allowing a bio-fuel producer to, through subsidies, buy-up the market in commodities like wheat, sorghum, soybeans and corn will effect other parts of the commodity market and strain those businesses (and their consumers) that rely on these commodities.

Without question, the cost of producing meat will increase as feed-stocks are converted to bio-fuel. Another effect is a down-grading of diets, especially to the poor who, in order to get meat in their diets, will have to downgrade to cheaper, less-healthy meats (if not go without). Other food-price issues include the run-up of cereals, breads, soy products, corn products and a whole-host of processed foods from pasta to provolone. In all cases, it will lead to a worsening of diets as healthier choices become less affordable and poorer food stuffs become the way of life.

But for some, it's more than a difference between rib-eye's and chuck-roast. These price increases can mean the difference between life and death as the impoverished, in many countries, cannot even afford to eat.

An impact generally not foreseen, or much discussed, is increased land use. Truth is due to our modern farming methods western countries already use more land than is necessary to feed our population and substantially help-out the world. Over the decades various western governments have instituted (to a greater or lesser degree) "land bank" programs that have allowed farm land to go fallow and revert to a wild state helping the wild-life while maintaining farm commodity prices within a tolerable range for both consumer and producer while producing enough excess production to export this over-production world-wide.

With the bio-fuel demand substantially increasing commodity prices, land is flying out of these land-bank programs. This not only directly impacts wild-life as habitat is destroyed, but it also impacts watersheds through erosion and runoff issues, water resources through increased irrigation needs, and even increases the production of fertilizers which are made from petrochemicals or bio-stocks (which feed back into the cycle). This environmental impact doesn't, of course, include the massive deforestation going on in South America. Much of which is directly related to soybean production for bio-fuels.