Random thoughts, dubious rants, curiosities and worthy citations on the media, politics, marketing, music, inanity, and animals, among other things. Words and pictures and stuff, mostly from south central Wisconsin USA
Yeah, well that was then and this is now. Republicans, in an almost humorous twist of irony, are proclaiming Sonia Sotomayor is a racist. Isn't that right, Rush?
It will be an interesting show. As Joe at AmericaBlog notes...
...[K]eep your eyes on Senator Jefferson Beauregard Sessions
(R-AL). He's the ranking Republican on the Judiciary committee and is
leading the charge against Sotomayor. In 1986, Sessions own nomination
to become a federal judge was defeated (in a Republican-led Senate)
because he was accused of being a racist. Let's just say, the leopard
hasn't changed its spots. The Jefferson of 1986 is the Jefferson of
2009. He can't help himself. The nomination of a Latina to the Supreme
Court could put him over the edge.
It says a lot about the
current state of the GOP that Sessions is the leader of the
anti-Sotomayor effort. (It's really not too hard to imagine Sessions in
the uniform of a Confederate officer.) In some ways, the hearings will
show us more about Sessions and the GOP than Sotomayor.
Meanwhile, CBS Radio News White House reporter Mark Knoller is now tweeting the hearings, but not before pimping a new CBS News poll that shows 62% of Americans are undecided on Sotomayor. No shit? You mean each and every one of us hasn't thoroughly researched the nominee and come to a reasoned conclusion, Mark? Wow. Who knew.
In any case, I expect Sessions and other Republicans to more or less give Sotomayor a hearty helping of their best character assassination and baseless harassment. Go ahead, dimwits; chase away whatever remaining Hispanics consider your party a viable alternative. Be true to your xenophobic selves.
Oh, yeah, and keep in mind: Empathy is a dirty, awful liberal thing. Feeling empathy, like drawing on your personal life experience, is so anti-American.
Some might call them socialst countries. That wouldn't be quite correct... not that those who throw around the word "socialism" are concerned about factual definitions and stuff
It seems like every week, some media outlet reports on some list of cities, states, regions or countries, proclaiming them the best this or most that. This time, it's the world's happiest places to live, ranked by nation.
What makes this interesting, and a touch ironic, is that the study and attendant list was reported in Forbes, the magazine that identifies itself as the "Capitalist's Tool," and all of the countries are governed primarily or significantly under socialist policy.
Where in the world do people feel most content with their lives?
According
to a new report released by the Organization for Economic Co-Operation
and Development (OECD), a Paris-based group of 30 countries with
democratic governments that provides economic and social statistics and
data, happiness levels are highest in northern European countries.
:::
The report looked at subjective well-being, defined as life
satisfaction. Did people feel like their lives were dominated by
positive experiences and feelings, or negative ones?
To answer
that question, the OECD used data from a Gallup World Poll conducted in
140 countries around the world last year. The poll asked respondents
whether they had experienced six different forms of positive or
negative feelings within the last day.
Some sample questions:
Did you enjoy something you did yesterday? Were you proud of something
you did yesterday? Did you learn something yesterday? Were you treated
with respect yesterday? In each country, a representative sample of no
more than 1,000 people, age 15 or older, were surveyed. The poll was
scored numerically on a scale of 1-100. The average score was 62.4.
The top ten shake out like this:
Denmark
Finland
Netherlands
Sweden
Ireland
Canada
Switzerland
New Zealand
Norway
Belgium
This kind of study must drive the wing-nutty righties crazy. The magazine (and name behind the magazine) that so many identify with capitalist economic policy and conservative ideology finds that people are happiest in countries that take a more socialistic view of how the conduct government and work for the good of all people. In other words, these are nations with higher taxes but that also provide many more social services (i.e. medical care, good public schools for all). What a concept!
Of course, most of the Glenn Beckians likely don't read magazines, let alone magazines as intellectually complex as Forbes. I just can't picture Joe the (Pretend) Plumber and former McCain spokesman reading Forbes. Maybe Hot Rod, or Soldier of Fortune... described by Google as "Famous and simultaneously infamous magazine, for 'mercenaries and professional soldiers' as well as for arm-chair dreamers and wannabes. [emphasis mine] But their conservative political and ideological masters do. Sarah Palin does claim that she reads "all of then" in terms of newspapers, and she gets a lot of coverage in US Weekly, People and the National Enquirer, so maybe she gets Forbes. Right. Who am I kidding?
I don't put too much stock in polls and studies like this, but the do provide insights into how people see their world, and suggest more in-depth study. I hope someone follows up on this with a closer eye on socialistic government policy. It would be great to demonstrate a real correlation between socialism and happiness. Of course, even if that happens, the conservatives will just dismiss it as junk science from liberal academics. (To me that usually suggests validity in and of itself.)
I am NOT making light of pedophilia. I am, however, ridiculing the "Our Christian values are better than your sick, twisted ungodly values" Focus on the Family and the pedophiles they allegedly employ.
Seems the guy who is the voice of FOTF's Spanish Bible verse recordings found out -- the hard way -- that sometimes cops pose as 15-year-old girls to trap pedophiles.
A man who narrates Christian CDs has been arrested on suspicion of using the Internet to arrange sex with a teenage girl.
Juan Alberto Ovalle, 42, thought he was corresponding with a
girl under the age of 15, but instead it was undercover officers with
the Jefferson County district attorney's office, according to court
documents.
Ovalle works for a Spanish-speaking arm of the Colorado
Springs Christian group Focus on the Family and narrates Biblical text
for CDs, according to Internet websites that sell the products.
"We're shocked," said Gary Schneeberger, a spokesman with Focus
They're "shocked." Really? "Shocked?" I'm not. This is becoming kind of a regular thing these days over on the way religious right. Although mostly it's married men who are discovered to be closet cases, usually while in the company of a prostitute and/or ingesting some kind of illegal substance or something.
Now, why is that?
UPDATE: The arrest affidavit is not likely to be read in one of his Bible recordings.
Americans may paint themselves in increasingly bright shades of red and blue, but new research finds one thing that varies little across the nation: the liking for online pornography.
A new nationwide study (pdf) of anonymised credit-card receipts from a major online adult entertainment provider finds little variation in consumption between states.
"When it comes to adult entertainment, it seems people are more the same than different," says Benjamin Edelman at Harvard Business School.
However, there are some trends to be seen in the data. Those states that do consume the most porn tend to be more conservative and religious than states with lower levels of consumption, the study finds.
"Some of the people who are most outraged turn out to be consumers of the very things they claimed to be outraged by," Edelman says. [emphasis mine]
OK, not so shocking. Just kind of hypocritical, no? And funny, at least to me.
To listen to the way Republicans and conservatives throw around the word "socialism," you would think that anyone with a social consciences (e.g. Democrats) all steeped in Marxism and want to take away all the rich people's riches.
Here's an interesting little snapshot. I was friended a while back by a guy I went to school with who, it seems, is a conservative. He posted this as a Facebook status last night:
Due to wasteful spending in Washington & overall market conditions, The Light at the End of the Tunnel has been turned off. I apologize for the inconvenience.
I had to respond...
Indeed, they sure screwed things up the last six or eight years. But those days are over, thankfully. So the light is just kinda dim, but it's there.
That drew a few other comments...
You are right! This new administration sure is putting the screws to us and our kids! Talk about elitists! ::: I agree. We lost so much in so short time and a shot was never fired. I never would have guessed Americans would embrace socialism so quickly & without a fight. Question is...where do we go from here?
There were a few other comments, and I wasn't the lone liberal voice in the thread. But those last two I cited above were rather thought provoking. I wonder if the man who thinks we are "putting the screws to us and our kids" was vocal about the rampant waste of blood and treasure during the misguided Iraq war. Most thinking people realized that our leaders bamboozled us into that conflict, and took a nice healthy surplus and turned it into the trillion dollar deficit left for the new administration to fix. And, following this man's logic, we left the war tab to our kids to pay off. (I recall Dick Cheney saying back then that deficits don't matter. Unless it's one under Democratic management, apparently.)
Remember how all the conservative pundits and politicians told us that to question the President at a time of (needlessly created) war was at the very least unpatriotic, and was even called treasonous? We spent a shitload of borrowed money on Bush's war, and it lived outside the budget so as to mask the real cost. This happened with no-bid contracts that charged ridiculously high amounts of money on outsourced stuff the military could have done for far less money. Good for KBR, Halliburton, Blackwater, oil companies and other war profiteers; bad for the rest of us. But, hey, we did build the Iraqis some new schools and power plants... to replace the ones we destroyed.
Let's now look at that last comment I included above... the one that suggests Americans "embraced socialism so quickly and without a fight." Well, ma'am, there was a fight. It was called the November 2008 General Election. People voted for a change from the policies that mostly enriched the rich and beat down the middle and lower classes. But this woman seems to think that "socialism" is something that just got sprung on us, and it's a bad thing. I wonder if she drives on any of the public roadways or walks on public sidewalks. Might she have ever visited a public library? Do her children attend a public school? Has she ever visited a national, state or local park, forest or monument? Is her home on a municipal water and/or sewer system? All of those -- every one of them -- can be called socialistic, can they not? Monies are collected and redistributed through various government agencies so we have roads, schools, parks, and other infrastructure elements we so often take for granted. (Of course, when the snow plow doesn;t come by soon enough or the kids' school drops art classes, how much do you want to bet those who oppose "socialism" bitch up a storm?)
To me, what has over time made this country great, and makes some societies and nations stand out among the rest, is how the population as a whole is supported. Not everyone has the means or even the basic opportunity to obtain a good education. Not everyone had a grandmother leave them a educational trust fund and parents who pretty much made up the difference so they could go to college (like I did). But not everyone who is mired in economic hopelessness is a lazy bum or a welfare queen. Not everyone whose job was outsourced to a distant land is just not trying hard enough to find a new one.
This reminds me of a bit of bumper sticker philosophy I remember reading on some car (probably a hybrid): Liberals treat dogs like people. Conservatives treat people like dogs. A sweeping generalization, to be sure. But in my view, what it comes down to is this: some people care as much about others as they do about themselves. They see a healthy and secure society as a way to ensure their own health and security. At the other end of the scale are people who think of themselves, and perhaps their family, but care little about the rest of society as long as that society doesn't' interfere with their lives. "Society" is not their concern, for that would mean they are socialists. It's a polarizing set of positions, and it is reflected in our current Congress. When every one of the Republican members of the House of Representatives vote on ideology, they affirm the position of party over people. They would rather see the country and the current administration fail than take a wider view of society.
So to that woman who asks above, "Where do we go from here?" I suggest developing a modicum of compassion, empathy and understanding of the society in which you live and from which you draw your wealth, security and children's future. Try to look beyond yourself and care about the rest of your fellow citizens for a change. Believe it or not, you'll likely end up ahead, both financially and -- dare I say it -- spiritually as a result.
Poor Sarah Palin. She can't catch a break. No sooner had the dust from the lsing campaign, John McCain's pointed non-endorsement of her potential as future presidential candidate, and Ted Steven's legal face-plant comes this news (via the Anchorage Daily News)...
WASILLA -- A 42-year-old Wasilla woman was arrested Thursday at her home by Alaska State Troopers with a search warrant in an undercover drug investigation. Sherry L. Johnston was charged with six felony counts of misconduct involving a controlled substance.
Johnston is the mother of Levi Johnston, the Wasilla 18-year-old who received international attention in September when Gov. Sarah Palin and her husband, Todd, announced their teenage daughter was pregnant and he was the father. Bristol Palin, 18, is due on Saturday, according to a recent interview with the governor's father, Chuck Heath.
Oh, my. First Sarah had to put a smiley face on her unwed daughter's pregnancy and subsequent shotgun wedding to the dad-to-be, young Levi Johnston. Now we come to learn that Levi's mom is waist deep in some kind of drug trafficking thing.
Shame on me. Upon hearing the news, I immediately figured it involved crystal meth, being that Wasilla, the city Sarah governed so well as mayor, is Alaska's meth capital. But, as it turns out, this is much more middle class, don't you know. Mother Johnston's drug of choice is none other than Rush Limbaugh's favorite, oxycontin.
Family values, Palin-style. Still don't think we dodged a bullet when McCain-Palin lost, America?
It's too easy to make a pun about one of the biggest mouths in the conservative movement being silenced. So I'll leave the clever quips about Ann Coulter's broken jaw to the pop blogs. But I do have to admit to some schadenfreude upon hearing that the woman who just can't keep her mouth shut will have to quite literally do so for several weeks, as her jaw is to be wired shut.
Reports have been sketchy as to the reason behind the broken jaw. I'm sure there have been visions of a fist fight with Rosie O'Donnell or just any liberal pundit taking a crack shot at that long face but it seems that it was only a nasty fall that Coulter took about a month back.
The timing is less than opportune, as Coulter is currently in the process of finishing the audio version of her upcoming book, The New Ann Coulter.
From the comments, I was advised to beware of Liberal Fascism.
Mr Webster, if you please...
liberal |ˈlib(ə)rəl| adjective 1 open to new behavior or opinions; willing to expand beyond traditional values • favorable to or respectful of individual rights and freedoms • (in a political context) favoring maximum individual liberty in political and social reform : a liberal democratic state. • ( Liberal) of or characteristic of Liberals or a Liberal Party. 2 [ attrib. ] (of education) concerned mainly with broadening a person's general knowledge and experience, rather than with technical or professional training. 3 (esp. of an interpretation of a law) broadly construed or understood; not strictly literal or exact : they could have given the 1968 Act a more liberal interpretation. 4 given, used, or occurring in generous amounts : liberal amounts of wine had been consumed. • (of a person) giving generously : Sam was too liberal with the wine.
fascism |ˈfa sh ˌizəm| (also Fascism) noun an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. • (in general use) extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.
The term Fascism was first used of the totalitarian right-wing nationalist regime of Mussolini in Italy (1922–43), and the regimes of the Nazis in Germany and Franco in Spain were also fascist. Fascism tends to include a belief in the supremacy of one national or ethnic group, a contempt for democracy, an insistence on obedience to a powerful leader, and a strong demagogic approach.
oxymoron |ˌäksəˈmôrˌän| noun a figure of speech in which apparently contradictory terms appear in conjunction (e.g., faith unfaithful kept him falsely true).
It's probably safe to say that nearly every convention delegate that had a shred of ego at either party's convention had opportunities to talk with the press. That was true for Denver attorney Gabriel Nathan Schwartz, a delegate to the Republican convention. A combing of the transcripts by the St. Paul Pioneer Press reporter David Hanners uncovered these pearls of wisdom attributed to Mr. Schwartz...
In an Associated Press article about Sen. John McCain's acceptance speech, Schwartz was quoted as saying that as far as oratorical skills go, McCain "has more experience in his little pinkie" than Democratic nominee Barack Obama.
[Foreshadows lack of judgment. Usually lawyers can tell the difference between inspired and sedated oratory skills.]
In an interview filmed the afternoon of Sept. 3 and posted on the Web site LinkTV.org, Schwartz was candid about how he envisioned change under a McCain presidency.
"Less taxes and more war," he said, smiling. He said the U.S. should "bomb the hell" out of Iran because the country threatens Israel.
[Why do I get the feeling this guy honks and flips people off a lot when driving his car, presumably a Hummer?]
Asked by the interviewer how America would pay for a military confrontation with Iran, he said the U.S. should take the country's resources.
"We should plant a flag. Take the oil, take the money," he said. "We deserve reimbursement."
Attorney Schwartz looks even more like a real palooka when you see one of his interviews...
Even many reasonable Republicans would likely bristle at Mr. Schwartz's crass and, frankly, ignorant commentary. But this is America, and we can all say whatever we want, no matter how boorish.
I like reporter Hanners next sentence in the article. For me, it's the money line...
A few hours after [that] interview, an unknown woman helped herself to Schwartz's resources.
Apparently, Mr. Schwartz met a woman in the bar at the Hotel Ivy sometime around 4am, invited her up to his room, and got quite the V.I.P. (very important patsy) treatment. Hanners with the details...
He met her in the bar of the swank hotel and invited her to his room. Once there, the woman fixed the drinks and told him to get undressed.
And that, the delegate to the Republican National Convention told police, was the last thing he remembered.
When he awoke, the woman was gone, as was more than $120,000 in money, jewelry and other belongings.
The thief's take stunned cops.
"It's very, very, very rare," Minneapolis Police Sgt. William Palmer said. "I can think of a couple of burglaries where we had that much stolen, but it's the first time I've heard of this kind of deal."
Whoever this woman is, she knows how to pick a mark.
The haul included a $30,000 watch, a $20,000 ring, a necklace valued at $5,000, earrings priced at $4,000 and a Prada belt valued at $1,000, police said. ... Aside from the watch, ring, necklace, earrings and belt, Schwartz also reported a $1,000 purse or wallet, a $1,500 cell phone, $500 in cash and a couple of rings worth $50 had been taken. ... "Victim reported suspect made victim drinks, told him to get undressed, which is the last thing he remembers," a police narrative said. "Upon waking, victim discovered money, jewelry gone; total loss over $120K."
In fairness to Schwartz, he claims the police report was erroneous; he
only lost about $50,000 in cash and prizes. (I hope he wasn't inflating the value of the haul when talking to police. That would be... what's the phrase? Insurance fraud.)
Lessons to be learned? Sometimes life has a way of evening the score. And nothing good comes from getting loaded and making new special friends in the hotel bar at four in the morning.
