RoguePlanet

2007-11-15T22:45:00.001-05:00

Just in case you haven't had enough of the SC Bar Exam

Here's a very nice editorial in The State . This is not something you'll hear me say often, but I think The State gets this exactly right.

This is probably the last you'll hear from me on this, unless I can think of something funny to say about it (unlikely), but NotVeryBright has been following it closely and will probably stay on it. I also recommend NVB's timeline here.

2007-11-15T22:07:00.000-05:00

More South Carolina Bar Exam stuff

As I posted below (semi-coherently), in March of this year the South Carolina Supreme Court issued an order changing the SC appellate court rule regarding bar examinations. Initially I posted, erroneously, that the new rule added a section prohibiting failing applicants (and their agents) from contacting the bar examiners or members of the Supreme Court about their grades, etc. Actually, that "prohibited contacts" section was in the old rule. What the Court did in the March, 2007 rule change was to remove the provisions allowing applicants to appeal a failing grade.

As part of my blogger public service I give you the pertinent provisions of the rule before the Court changed it:

Rule 402(i) Bar Examination

(5) Review of Failed Essay Sections Within fifteen (15) days of the date of the letter of notification, an applicant failing the Examination may, in writing, request permission to review the essay questions, model answers, and the applicant's answers for each essay section that the applicant failed. The request shall be accompanied by a filing fee of $25. The review shall be conducted in the Bar Admissions Office in Columbia, South Carolina, and the applicant will be notified of the date and time when the review will be conducted. No review or inspection of the Multistate Bar Examination will be permitted nor will the applicant be all,owed to copy or remove the essay questions, the model answers, or the applicant's answers. An applicant who receives 110 or less on the Multistate Bar Examination shall not be allowed any review of the essay questions, model answers or the applicant's answers.

(6) Re-grading. After reviewing the essay section, an applicant who feels an error has been made in grading may petition the Supreme Court to have the section re-graded. An original and two (2) copies of the petition, accompanied by a filing fee of $50, must be filed with the Clerk of the Supreme Court within ten (10) days of the applicant's review of the essay section and must enumerate the alleged errors in grading. No briefing or argument is permitted. The only identifying mark to be placed on the petition is the identification number previously assigned to the applicant. Any reference to the applicant's other scores, economic status, social standing, employment, personal hardship, or other extraneous information is prohibited. If the petition is granted, the section shall be re-graded by the member or associate member assigned to the grad the section, and the Clerk shall notify the applicant of the results of the re-grading.

(7) Request for Verification of Multistate Bar Examination. While no review or inspection of the Multistate Bar Examination (MBE) will be permitted, an applicant may request a hand grading of the MBE. Any such request must be filed with the Clerk of the Supreme Court along with the applicable fee within fifteen days of the date of the letter of notification in (4) above.

(8) Prohibited contacts. An applicant shall not, either directly or through an agent, contact any member or associate member of the Board of Examiners or the Supreme Court regarding the questions on any section of the Bar Examination, grading procedures, an applicant's answers, or review or re-grading of any Examination. This provision does not prohibit an applicant from seeking a review, re-grading or verification in the manner provided by (5), (6), or (7) above.

As a result of the Court's March, 2007 order, section (5) and (6) above were removed and replaced with this language:

5) Access to Examination Answers; Re-grading or Other Review. No applicant shall be given access to the answers the applicant submitted during the examination. The results reported by the Board of Law Examiners are final, and no applicant shall be allowed to seek re-grading or any other review of the results of the examination.

(emphasis mine).

The "Prohibited Contacts" section was revised as follows:

(7) Prohibited Contacts. An applicant shall not, either directly or through an agent, contact any member or associate member of the Board of Law Examiners or any member of the Supreme Court regarding the questions on any section of the Bar Examination, grading procedures, or an applicant's answers. This provision does not prohibit an applicant from seeking verification of the MBE score as permitted by (6) above.

So, as a result of the amendment (read the whole thing here), applicants who can no longer review the essay exams that they failed and the model answers, and they can no longer request regrading (though they are still allowed to request verification of the "MBE" portion of their exams - the MBE is a section of multiple choice questions, graded by computer; the other bar exam sections consist of essay questions).

2007-11-14T00:28:00.000-05:00

Things you won't see Brad Warthen blogging about

See John McCain's classy response when asked "How do we beat the bitch?" by a supporter in South Carolina.

Who is that "lady," btw?

I stand corrected! Brad Warthen DID blog about this, sorta. One suspects Mr. Warthen would have been able to work up a righteous froth of indignation had it been, oh, say, John Edwards being cutesy in response to a question calling one of his competitors a vulgar name. But that's just how one is! Cranky and pessismistic. Also, one realizes that one is not in any position to criticize others for being vulgar, btw. One realize that one is coming from a position of weakness in that regard. One is not totally un-self-aware. Then again, one is not running for president, is one?

Mr. W. is going to have plenty of chances to pleasantly surprise one as this election progresses, so let's see what happens. One will not be holding ones breath, is all one can say.

2007-11-13T23:10:00.000-05:00

One of my questions answered

I posted earlier about the South Carolina bar exam flap. The South Carolina Supreme Court issued a terse statement Friday stating that the results of the Wills, Trusts, and Estates section of the exam were tossed out because the bar examiner, on October 31, reported a "scoring error" to the Supreme Court. The State newspaper reported that two of the people who benefited (by having their grades changed from "Fail" to "Pass") by tossing that portion of the test were the daughters of the state legislator who is chairman of the SC House Judiciary Committee, and the daughter of a sitting SC Circuit Court Judge. The legislator and the judge both acknowledged having contacted the Chairman of the Board of Bar Examiners.

In my post below, I wondered: "Did the examiner discover and report the error because of the communications by the legislator and the judge with the Chairman of the Board of Bar Examiners?"

According to a story The State published today, attorney George Hearn, who is the Chairman of the Board of Bar Examiners, says that he wasn't aware of anything being reported to the state Supreme Court:

The head of the board that grades the qualifying exam for South Carolina’s new lawyers says he was left out of the loop about a scoring error the Supreme Court cited in reversing grades for 20 people, including the children of a state lawmaker and a circuit judge.

S.C. Board of Law Examiners chairman George Hearn said neither the high court nor any of his board members informed him about the matter after the board submitted final scores of the July exam to the court before they were posted Oct. 26.
“Our board doesn’t have anything to do with it once we report the scores,” he told The State in an interview Monday. “Anything that happens afterward is done by the court.”

At this point your correspondent would just like to say that George Hearn is a local (Conway) attorney, and he and his firm have an excellent reputation. She herself would retain his firm if she ever needed an attorney, which she hopes she won't, and if she could afford it, which she hopes, someday, she could, whether or not she actually needed an attorney. She digresses. In short, she believes what he says here. Also, she doesn't know why she is referring to herself in the third person.

In any case, she is glad that the Chairman of the Board of Bar Examiners is clarifying his role, such as it was (nil, apparently) in the grade changing. However, as The State's reporter, Rick Brundrett, delicately puts it:

That apparently raises questions about what little the Supreme Court has said on the matter — that it was acting after “a scoring error reported by the examiner” Oct. 31.

It also would seem to put the court at odds with a new rule it imposed in March, banning any appeals and changes in grades after exam results are released.

Yes. So it would seem. Your correspondent hopes sincerely that the Supreme Court will further clarify this matter, in order to preserve the reputation of the legal profession in the eyes of the public . . . don't think she doesn't hear you giggling back there.

In related news, Rogue Planet favorite Thad the Impaler is one of the people who passed the bar exam without the Court's intervention. So, you know, how damn hard could it have been?

Clarification, or not: Maybe I'm making too much of this, but: Above, I said the examiner of the Wills, Trusts, and Estates portion of the bar exam reported a "scoring error" to the SC Supreme Court. However, if you read the Court's statement about this, it doesn't actually say that the examiner is the one who reported the error to the court. Rather: "On October 31, 2007, a scoring error reported by the examiner of the Wills, Trusts, and Estates Section, was communicated to the Clerk of Court." Thanks to the careless, or deliberately obscurative, use of the passive tense, we don't know WHO actually communicated the "scoring error" to the Clerk of the Supreme Court. The bar examiner "reported" it, according to the Court, but the Court doesn't say to whom the error was reported (Judge Burch? Rep. Harrison? The Clerk of the Supreme Court? Who knows?) If you parse the statement it's not clear the bar examiner who "reported" the error is the same person who "communicated" it to the Court. For whatever that's worth.

2007-11-12T18:58:00.000-05:00

Me blog pretty one day

Not Very Bright ran Rogue Planet through some kind of readaba - reedibbl - some kind of thing that annali - analisy - um, some thing that tells you how hard it is to read your blog. Anyway, this blog was rated "Elementary school."

Me so proud!

2007-11-09T19:09:00.000-05:00

Insert bad "bar" pun here

First of all, I apologize for my recent extended bout of non-blogging. I've been, ah, on strike. Yeah, that's it.

Anyway, I wanted to blog about something that caught my eye: Last week the South Carolina Supreme Court issued an order stating that the results of the "Wills, Trusts, and Estates" essay portion of the South Carolina bar examination would not be considered in grading the bar exam. As a result of this order 20 people who had received a failing grade had their grades changed to a passing grade. The State reported today that among the twenty are the daughter of the South Carolina House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Jim Harrison, and the daughter of a state circuit court judge, Paul Burch.

Moreover, The State reports, the grade change came after both Rep. Harrison and Judge Burch contacted bar officials about the results. Rep. Harrison contacted the clerk of the South Carolina Supreme Court, as well as the attorney who is the chairman of the South Carolina Board of Law Examiners. Judge Burch also contacted the chairman of the Board of Law Examiners.

Here's the problem: In June of of this year, the State Supreme Court issued an order [Correction: The Court issued the order in March; the new rule became effective in June] changing the appellate court rules to remove a provision that allowed appeals of bar exam grades. The new rule (and the old one) contain this provision: *

(7) Prohibited Contacts. An applicant shall not, either directly or through an agent, contact any member or associate member of the Board of Law Examiners or any member of the Supreme Court regarding the questions on any section of the Bar Examination, grading procedures, or an applicant's answers.

You can read the order here.

Prior to that, the court rules governing the bar exam contained a specific procedure that allowed bar applicants who failed the exam to review the essay questions, model answers, and the applicants' responses, and to petition the state Supreme Court to have a section regraded. In amending the rule, the Court eliminated the appeal process, while leaving in place the "prohibited contacts" language. *

I know of two SC lawyers (one has since moved to another state) who, after initially receiving failing grades on the SC bar exam, requested to review the essay questions, and discovered errors that, when corrected, resulted in these attorneys being given passing grades. (In one of these cases, the attorney told me that the model answer actually contained an error of law, which he identified - one wonders how many people got unfairly docked on that year's exam and never knew it). As far as I know the Supreme Court has never published any information on the number of applicants who successfully appealed an initial failing grade. I would imagine that the number is small, and it's probably just a fluke that I know of two such people. But maybe there are more than I think.

Anyway, the old South Carolina appellate rules allowed bar applicants a formal appellate procedure. But on March 12 of this year, our Supreme Court changed its rules to deprive people of this option. In the order changing the rule, the Court pronounced: " In our opinion, the internal review process conducted by the Board is more than sufficient to insure that any error in grading is determined before the examination results are released."

Well, that is manifestly not accurate, then or now.

The difference is, then, if you were Joe Shmo, you could, if you had reason, appeal a failing grade. Now, you can't. But it sure looks like if you have the right parents, you can still get around the rule.

Initially, I understand, the Supreme Court gave no reason for its decision to toss out a whole section of the exam. Today, after The State ran its story, the Court issued this statement about the decision:

The results of the July 2007, South Carolina Bar examination were released on the Judicial Department website at 4 pm, October 26, 2007.

On October 31, 2007, a scoring error reported by the examiner of the Wills, Trusts, and Estates Section, was communicated to the Clerk of Court.

On November 1, 2007, the full Court was advised of the examiner's communication and determined that owing to this error the results of the affected section would not be considered.

I still have two questions: 1) Did the examiner discover and report the error because of the communications by the legislator and the judge with the Chairman of the Board of Bar Examiners? And 2) Was the error so egregious that it justified tossing the results of an entire essay portion of the bar exam?

Oh, and 3) Does the South Carolina Supreme Court still think the SC Bar examination grading and review procedures are error-proof, justifying the Court's new rule cutting off any appeals by the ordinary people taking the exam?

For all I know the 20 people who had their grades changed from Fail to Pass deserved it. But judging from the available information, it sure looks like if two of them didn't have well-connected fathers, they all would have been shit out of luck, as they say in the legal field. If there was an error in the exam or the scoring procedure I do NOT have a problem with correcting it - in fact, I think the Court was wrong to change the rule (it's not like THOUSANDS of people take the SC Bar exam every year, so it couldn't have been that burdensome). I do have a problem with the appearance created here of special treatment for people with the right connections. It just doesn't look good. I hope my impression is wrong, but until the Court and/or the Board of Bar Examiners do a bit more 'splaining, the negative impression isn't going to fade away.

By the way, here's an interesting blog post from Brad Warthen, editor of The State, on the anomymous tip he received about this story.

*Update/correction: I revised this post to better reflect the effect of the Supreme Court's rule change. The "prohibited contacts" language existed in the old rule; the main effect of the new rule was to eliminate the formal procedure for requesting review of ones' exam and re-grading.

2007-09-12T23:07:00.001-04:00

Ju Neyre

Fun with literature. Teh Invisible Woman is so talented!

2007-09-06T22:42:00.000-04:00

Networking, Republican-style

There's the restroom scene.

And then there's this:

Thursday, September 6, 2007

COLUMBIA — Former state treasurer Thomas Ravenel pleaded guilty this morning to a federal charge of possessing with intent to distribute cocaine.

Ravenel said he would buy cocaine occasionally and then might not do it for a month or a couple weeks. It was all about sharing it with people he was partying with and making contacts.

2007-09-06T22:32:00.002-04:00

45-year old Republican Blames Parents' Divorce For Coke Habit

that he claims started when he was 43.

Ravenel pleads guilty.

By ADAM BEAM and JOHN O’CONNOR, Staff Writers

Former state treasurer Thomas Ravenel admitted he’d been using cocaine for the past two years this morning in federal court in Columbia, as he pled guilty to conspiring to buy and distribute less than 100 grams of cocaine.

Ravenel, according to federal prosecutor, held parties at his home where he bought cocaine and gave it to party goers. Prosecutors say Ravenel on several occasions bought cocaine from co-defendant Michael L. Miller, a Charleston disc jockey.

Flanked by attorneys, Ravenel at first told Judge Joseph Anderson that he had not been treated for drugs, but then clarified that the treatment was more about his “childhood issues,” and “why I was engaging in reckless or immature behavior.”

This afternoon, Ravenel released a statement through his attorneys clarifying what he meant by “childhood issues.”

“The childhood issues I referred to are the ones that arose when my parents divorced 35 years ago when I was just 10 years old. A divorce is always hard on young children and, through counseling, I am learning that I am no exception to that rule,” he said.

[coughBULLSHITcough]

I wonder how long it will be before he's back in our faces again.

2007-09-06T22:32:00.001-04:00

Geez

It's been so long since I blogged I almost forgot my password.

Boy, that would have been a huge loss to the blogosphere . . .

2007-07-12T22:05:00.000-04:00

Churlish signs

I was driving on Highway 501 today and stopped for gas at Sparky's, pictured above, located a few miles west of Galivant's Ferry. Sparky's is one of those joints that line the roads into Myrtle Beach; it sells fireworks, moccasins, shells, Myrtle Beach t-shirts, hats, bumper stickes, and other such, well, shit.

So I thought this sign near the gas pumps was refreshing example of truth in advertising:

When I went inside to pay for my gas, a hand-lettered sign greeted me. It said:

NO Heelys
or rollerskating!
NONE!

And in tiny letters underneath:

For your safety

Inside Sparky's, a dozen or more hectoring signs festooned the walls. And the support posts, and the display cases, and the cash register.

This was actually the most polite one:

On a post near a stack of styrofoam cups customers can fill with peanuts, handlettered signs warned, "If you overfill cup and lid does not fit, YOU WILL BE CHARGED EXTRA!!!"

Over some clear bins containing candy sold by the pound, signs read, "IF YOU SCOOP CANDY YOU MUST PAY FOR IT!!" and "DO NOT MIX CANDY!!"

And so forth.

I was a little put off by the angry tone of these interior signs. The implied accusation that I would overfill my peanut cup insulted me. I mean, what kind of ill-mannered person does Sparky's think I am? But I do appreciate the candor of the outdoor sign. We need more of that kind of honesty in the retail business.

(Don't give me any grief about those pictures. I never said I was a photographer)

2007-07-12T21:58:00.000-04:00

Bush's Al Qaeda-rebuilding initiative a huge success!

See here.

Credit where credit is due.

2007-07-12T21:17:00.000-04:00

Two degrees of separation from Atrios

Atrios links to (the Republican-ish) Palmetto Scoop's post linking to NotVeryBright's post (by Silence Dogood) about Junior DeMint's empathizing with poor Senator Vitter.

Congrats, NVB! And condolences also - you wuz robbed of your rightful link!

2007-07-05T22:50:00.001-04:00

Tell me how you really feel, God

Last week, You killed a kitten I had been feeding. Sure, I probably had some kind of divine punishment coming, but did You have to take it out on the poor kitty?

A few days later I was driving east on Highway 501. There were big fluffy cumulus clouds in the sky. One cloud, looming directly over the highway, was shaped like a forearm, extending a clenched fist. It was giving me the finger.

Was it something I said, God? Or maybe You were flipping some other motorist off?

2007-06-30T14:03:00.000-04:00

The straw that broke the camel's back for the GOP base

Brown people speaking Meskin.

Here in South Carolina the far-right Republican base was already ticked at Lindsey Graham for helping engineer the "Gang of 14" compromise on Bush's judicial nominations, among other things, but his support of the now-dead immigration bill has driven them into a blind, frothing rage. Just check out the comments at Brad Warthen's blog here.

I think these remarks by President Bush, posted June 3, 2007 on the official White House website, pretty much sum it up:

President Bush Rigorously Defends Immigration Bill to His Rapidly Imploding Base of Xenophobic Crackers

Folks, we've been together through a lot. And you've stood by me through it all. Through the illegitimate election of 2000. Through the double-dip recession. Through the terror attacks of 9/11TM. Through Enron. Through the botched war in Afghanistan and failed hunt for Osama bin Laden. Through the clusterfuck kickoff to the Iraq war in 2003. Through the Patriot Act and illegal wiretapping of innocent Americans. Through "Mission Accomplished." Through Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay and a policy of torture. Through Katrina. Through failed Social Security reform. Through Armstrong Williams & Jeff Gannon. Through Terri Schaivo. Through Tom Delay. Through Mark Foley. Through Scooter Libby. Through $3.00 gas. Through Walter Reed. Through "the Surge". Through Alberto Gonzales. And now even through 3500 US troops killed in Vietraq.

And after all that, the thing it takes to get you folks pissed at me is letting a few million Mexi-Ricans pour over our borders and steal your jobs so you can't afford to put Ramen on the table? Well, I think I understand your problem. On one hand, you correctly accept that I'm practically Jesus. But on the other hand, you can't help but feel a surge of simple-minded, paranoid racist hatred every time you hear one of those dirty Spics yammering away in that nonsense gibberish of theirs

Sure enough:

GAINESVILLE, GA -- Stephanie Usrey strode up to her local Wal-Mart store the other morning with the steely look of a boxer about to step into the ring.

A stay-at-home mother of two, Usrey has dreaded shopping at this particular branch ever since a Friday afternoon about five years ago, when she said she suddenly noticed she was the only non-Latino customer.

“That was the first time I looked around and said, ‘Man, I didn’t realize how many Mexicans there were here,’ ” Usrey, 39, recalled. “And they don’t seem to feel any discomfort when they’re, like, six inches from your face and talking to each other in their language, either. I just felt very encroached upon. . . . It was like an instant feeling of ‘I’m in the minority, and if we don’t get control over this, pretty soon all of America will be outnumbered.’”

Yep. Lindsey Graham may well be facing defeat in the next election due to his failure to apprehend the desire of Americans in elastic-waist stretch pants not to hear any funny languages.

I myself was in the local Wal-Mart Superstore recently (I know, I know. Sorry). When I got to the checkout line, I looked around and realized that every other person in every checkout line, not just mine, was hispanic. And yes, they were speaking in Spanish. I didn't have time to become irate at all those people speaking not-American around me, because I was too busy enjoying the realization that I was the tallest person in the whole front of the store. At five feet three inches tall, I don't get to experience that sensation very often. So I'm all for more immigration, for people of smaller stature than me.

However, there is a progressive, non-xenophobic case to be made against the immigration bill, and here it is.

(WaPo article via Sadly, No! )

2007-06-30T13:28:00.000-04:00

Thad Viers, victim

Thad the Impaler's supporters, all three of them, write The Sun News.

The first letter comes from Ms. D__ M_________ of Socastee:

Viers is 'big enough person' in situation

I was very happy to read the article on Rep. Thad Viers and to know it is over. The testimony given by Viers speaks of what a gentleman he is and how he took full responsible [sic] of the charges against him.

Well, no. Mr. Viers continued to blame unnamed "friends" for making some of the calls. The accounts I've read of the tapes from reporters who have heard them mention only one caller, so I think Mr. Viers is full of baloney when he blames others. But whatever.

James Zeigler was not man enough to say whether or not he is still seeing [Viers' estranged wife, Natalie] McKelvey.

Not sure how that is relevant to Mr. Viers' criminal charges.

Viers is a big enough person to offer to take the paternity test, as the story stated now McKelvey is pregnant.

No news accounts have said anything about Viers offering to take a paternity test, and he and Ms. M have been separated for some time. This statement is just a bizarre non sequitur, and I can't imagine why The Sun News didn't edit it out of the letter. Then again, they'll print anything in their letters section.

This is more than I read in your paper about Zeigler. I think it is time the people of Horry County understand the type of a man Viers is.

Oh, I think they do.

We should all be praying for him now. It is time for him to be able to go on with his life.

Yes, let us all stop holding the criminal actions of this elected official up to public scrutiny.

The second letter comes from Mr. J___ W__________ of Myrtle Beach:

Viers' complainant should expect calls

Re Rep. Thad Viers' threatening phone calls:
Enough is enough. It's not like this isn't happening at an alarming rate in our communities and our nation.

What, there's an epidemic of elected officials calling their estranged wives' paramours and making threats against the paramours' mothers? I had no idea.

Yes, Thad was wrong, and I don't condone his actions. But let's be realistic. Any man who dates another man's wife opens himself up to the cards that are dealt. How many times have we read about jealous husbands shooting their wife's lover? I think this guy played it to the hilt.

Yeah, the guy's just lucky Thad didn't shoot him with his new AK-47.

Then there's this from Ms. B______ C_________ of Myrtle Beach:

Shame on Mark Sanford [note from kc: Sanford wanted to censure Viers]. I am sure if someone researched back his or his employees' lives, they would find some bad behavior.

Thad Viers is a fine young representative. My husband and I have met him and his ex-wife. He tries to do what's right but he is human, so who can cast the first stone?
He should never have gone to trial. People say things before they think, especially when it comes to exes. Do not hurt this man's career because of a lapse. We'd like to see him run for governor one day. How would Sanford like that? If Sanford wants to do something, how about stopping these rising gas prices?

Also, there are always two sides to every story. What about this ex-wife?

"What about this ex-wife?" Geez.

Classy supporters for a classy politician.

UPDATE - or maybe I should call it a "CORRECTION": In comments, Silence Dogood (who blogs here) says he attended the hearing and that the prosecution noted that not all of the phone calls were from Viers, "but that the worst ones did seem to be his voice." Thanks for the info, Mr. Dogood!

2007-06-30T13:01:00.000-04:00

Shorter Douglas Kendall

"I was 100 percent wrong about Justice Roberts and I'm damn proud of it!"

Context here.

2007-06-30T11:35:00.001-04:00

Saturday catblogging

Romeo. He's looking good these days, fat and frisky.

2007-06-29T00:09:00.000-04:00

Growing up in Hell

This is a great post by JuBlu, nka The Nvisible Wmn. I love it. I command you to read it now.

2007-06-26T21:54:00.000-04:00

Happy cat blogging!

OK, time for a success story: The orange cat is named Romeo. He and the gray kitty both came to my house on the same day back in January. After that first day, the gray kitty went back to his original home, I guess, and I didn't see him again for a while. He reappeared in late February or early March and graced me with his sweet presence until yesterday.

Anyway, back in January, I was inside one Saturday morning and heard Rocky yowling his little head off. Rocky was sitting at the door that opens onto the deck and staring intently outside. I went over to look and there was a beautiful little gray kitten out there. I went outside to pet it; it ran off a short distance, but then stopped and rolled over and let me come up and rub its tummy while it purred like mad. It was the gray kitty in the post below. It was, I guessed, about 3 or 4 months old then.

When I stood up from playing with this kitten, I saw a big orange cat squeezing under the fence that separates my place from the crab man's house. The big orange cat strolled confidently right over to me and started rubbing on my legs. I petted it for few minutes, then went back inside.

An hour or so later I looked out the front door and the big orange cat was sitting on the front porch, staring in the house. I went outside and tried to gently shoo it away.

The cat hissed at me! "Hey, who do you think you are?" I said. "This is MY house."

The cat stayed on the porch all evening. When I opened the door Sunday morning, there it was. Staring at me with big green eyes. It was there all day Sunday, and Monday morning when I went to work, the cat was still on the porch.

"Look, I am not going to feed you," I told it. "You can just forget about that. What kind of sucker do you take me for?"

Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, the cat was on my front porch. It was there when I went to work and there when I got home.

"I am telling you, I am not going to feed you," I said. "Go home! Go to your own house and eat! Don't your own people have food? Stop looking at me like that!"

The cat's fur was coming out in great tufts. After a couple of days my welcome mat was coated with orange fur. Most of the fur was coming off the cat's hind end. The cat had longish hair, with a ruff around the neck, and a rather large head. Its skin was lumpy, and it had little sores and scabs here and there on the bare parts. A very bedraggled creature. Still, it carried itself with dignity. With the skinny, hairless back end and the big furry head and chest it looked kind of like a little lion.

The following Saturday, the cat was still there. It seemed to have gotten skinnier since it had started hanging around my house. As far as I could tell, it had been camping on my front porch or under my bushes day and night; it hadn't been going anywhere else to eat. I wimped out and fed it. It gobbled the food up as if it had been starving for, like, a week.

So I started feeding it morning and evening, and putting water out for it.

The cat looked like a male, but it didn't have any . . . well, you know . . . so I wasn't sure. One day I saw the crab man's daughter outside and asked her if the big orange cat belonged to them.

"Oh, that's Romeo," she said. "He's the one that started it all. That's why we have all these cats. I hope he's not bothering you."

"No, no, he's fine," I said. "I like him."

I wasn't sure if she meant that Romeo was the daddy of the dozen or so cats that hung around the crab man's place or if he was just the first cat they owned. Anyway, I started looking at him as sort of a feline patriarch after that, albeit one who had his . . . well, you know . . . cut off.

I took Romeo to the vet to get vaccinated and to have his skin condition checked out. I didn't ask the crab man first. I figured that the cat probably hadn't had his shots, even though someone had taken the trouble to get him fixed. The vet told me it wouldn't hurt him to be vaccinated more than once, on the off chance that someone had already taken care of that.

Romeo tested positive for FIV. When the vet told me that I blurted, "Well, I'm not gonna have him put down!" That wouldn't be necessary, the vet said, cats with FIV can live long lives. But the virus could be transmitted to other cats via a deep bite, so there would be some risk to other cats. The vet said it was fairly common in strays, ferals, and cats who live outdoors.

The vet estimated Romeo's age to be 11 or 12. His skin condition was probably from flea allergies. Otherwise, he seemed to be in pretty good shape.

Early in March I put my hand on his right flank when I was putting his food down and noticed that it felt slightly hardened in the area of his right rear leg. It didn't seem to bother him, though, and I didn't think much of it.

A week or so later, I noticed that he had a lump under the skin near the right rear leg. Still, he gave no sign that he was in any discomfort, and he was just an outside cat, not even technically mine, and I had already spent well $100.00 on him so I figured the lump had better just go away because what did I look like, some kind of cat rescue mission?

A few days later the lump was the size of a golf ball, and so I loaded him up and took him back to the vet. A different vet saw him, and she thought maybe it was cancer. So there I was wondering if I was going to have to finance chemofreakintherapy, for a stray cat! That was not my cat!

A few days later, the test came back negative for cancer. Phew. I went to the vet to pick up the antibiotics they'd prescribed. This was a Saturday morning, again.

When I got home, I went to pick Romeo up to put him on my lap and give him the first pill, and felt a big wet spot on his fur. When I inspected him I saw that the lump was now oozing reddish fluid. Ick. I called the vet to see what I should do, and they said bring him in. So I did.

A few hours and hundred dollars later the vet told me Romeo had a very deep and messy abcess that they'd misdiagnosed the first time. Romeo wasn't running a fever and didn't seem overtly sickly, which I thought was a good thing, but the vet said that was actually a bad sign - his immune system was compromised because of the FIV, and it wasn't fighting off the infection.

The vet prescribed an intensive regimen of antibiotics, and I installed the cat in a spare bedroom for the next couple of weeks in hopes of keeping the abcess from getting worse and so that I could medicate him and keep an eye on him. After two weeks, the swelling was down and the wound was healed. And Romeo's skin was smooth and his fur was coming back in . . . he looked downright glossy. The vet gave him a clean bill of health.

At that point I would have been happy to let him live inside, but Romeo clearly was ready to go back outside and be Lord of the Porch. So I let him, and he's out there now. He looks good and seems content, and I just hope he stays that way for a long time.

Now, my friend Anntichrist is trying to raise money for a spay/neuter organization in Louisiana. All you have to do is take a poll (and Annti's raising money too, if you're so inclined). If you like cats, go check it out. Go check it out even if you can't stand cats . . . if you don't like them, you ought to give double to a spay/neuter group!

2007-06-26T21:45:00.001-04:00

More sad kitty blogging

I might as well bum y'all out some more. This is one of a trio of cats that has been mooching off me this year. Him, the gray kitty below, and the orange cat above. Black Cat wasn't the prettiest cat I've ever seen, and he wasn't the most charming, but he did have a certain feisty appeal. He stopped coming around a few weeks ago. I went around the neighborhood looking for him, with no luck. I assume the worst. There are speeding cars, raccoons, dogs, cat-hating humans, probably a gator or too. It's tough out there for a kitty.

I wish I could take them all in the house and make indoor cats of them, but I already have three shelter rescues

2007-06-25T19:08:00.001-04:00

Sad kitty blogging

This little kitty has been hanging around my house for a few months, and of course I've been feeding him. He's a little sweetheart; if I'm sitting on the deck, he'll come and jump in my lap. He's lounging in a beach chair in the pic above. With a martini.

Anyhoo, he's been lethargic for the last few days and he stopped eating almost entirely this weekend, so I took him to the vet this a.m. Long story short, he's very sick and might not make it through the night (he's at the vet. hospital now). So please keep your fingers crossed for the little guy.

UPDATE: He didn't make it. The poor little thing. I feel silly being so bummed about about the death of a neighborhood stray. But he was a special little kitty.

2007-06-22T19:50:00.000-04:00

Blogrollofascism!

Fellow South Carolina blogger Notverybright has de-blogrolled me for the thought crime of not blogging. Fools! Don't you know that my not-blogging is actually an advanced form of blogging? That by posting nothing, I am speaking volumes? Obviously the left blogosphere is intimidated by the sophistication of my not-blogging, as evidenced by Notverybright's attempt to assassinate my character by de-blogrolling me.

Actually Notverybright has fallen into the clever trap I have set by not-blogging for many months. I just knew that if I not-blogged long enough, someone would de-blogroll me, thus drawing even more attention to Rogue Planet. The joke is on you, my friend!

[/Althouse]

2007-06-21T00:21:00.000-04:00

Thad the Impaler

'Member Thad Viers? Socastee, SC's Republican representative to the South Carolina House of Representatives? Mr. Viers was accused of using his cell phone to make threatening phone calls to his estranged wife's paramour. Mr. Viers claimed his buddies used his cell phone to make the calls. With friends like that, eh?

When yours truly last blogged about Mr. Viers I was expressing puzzlement that he was being allowed to enter pretrial intervention. As it turns out, a judge revoked the PTI and ordered Mr. Viers to stand trial; he pleaded no contest last week and was fined $500.00. His attorney said he was a victim of luv. Love makes people do funny things:

In copies of the recordings obtained by McClatchy Newspapers, a caller tells Ziegler to expect to be attacked and beaten. The caller repeats profanities in describing various sex acts that he claims to have performed with Ziegler's girlfriend, as well as with Ziegler's mother.

Ah yes. In the Spring a young man's fancy turns lightly to thoughts of having sex with his estranged wife's new lover's mother.

The GOP leadership of the SC House has declined to discipline Mr. Viers. The Sun News editorial board is not happy with that decision.

I don't really have much new to say about Mr. Viers . . . I just wanted to use "Thad the Impaler" before I forgot.

2007-06-20T23:29:00.000-04:00

Free T-Rav!

I have mixed feelings about Thomas Ravenel's being charged with possession with intent to distribute a bucketfull of cocaine.

On the one hand, I think cocaine possession should not be a criminal offense, and it's a damn shame that a man is facing 20 years in federal prison for a non-violent, victimless offense.

On the other hand . . . BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! HAHAHAHAHA! HOO-HOOOOO! HEEHEHEEEE! HAHAHAHAHAHA!

A-HEM. Excuse me while I compose myself.

Ravenel is - was - the Republican treasurer of South Carolina. He's the millionaire son of longtime SC politician Arthur Ravenel (who wanted to have the military shoot down planes merely suspected of drug smuggling and, uh . . . HAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Er, sorry.). Ravenel's name was being bandied about South Carolina as a potential ultra-right-wing GOP challenger to Senator Lindsey Graham, the dread TRAITOR to the GOP ideal of no-more-brown people and one of the scurrilous Gang of 14. I guess that's out now, and we will, alas, be deprived of the fun of watching two swingin' single bachelors (NTTAWWT!) compete for the GOP nomination for Senator from South Carolina. Ah, well.

According to The State newspaper, the Ravenel investigation originated with the Charleston Police Department, which asked the South Carolina State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) to get involved; when SLED learned of the involvement of a government official who "administers the use of vast public funds," IT asked the feds to come in. Hence the federal indictment. Fun item of trivia: Attorney Reginald Lloyd signed the indictment. Mr. Lloyd became the US Attorney for SC just last year. In March of this year, Senator Graham recommended Mr. Lloyd for a seat on the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Flying Spaghetti Monster will surely punish me for the unseemly glee I felt when I first read the news. In fact, the FSM has already shown His displeasure: Governor Sanford has appointed would-be book-banner Ken Wingate to replace party-boy Ravenel. Let that be a lesson to me.

Update: Soaring and roaring.

2007-06-20T23:04:00.000-04:00

Digby!

The greatest blogger in the universe, revealed.

Turns out she's a she. I don't care . . . I still have a crush on her.

Transcript of her remarks here.

She speaks for me:

Democracy suffers when not being held accountable by a vigorous press. During the last decade, there have been three catalyzing events that drove people like me to the Internet, to research, investigate, and write about assaults on democracy itself. In 1998, the political media lost all perspective, and aggressively helped the Republicans pursue a partisan witch-hunt against a democratically-elected president and against the will of the people. The coverage of the presidential election of 2000 was legendary for its bias and sophomoric personality journalism. The press actually joined the Republicans in telling the majority who had voted for Al Gore to get over it. I don’t know about you, but I never got over it. And the third event (I don’t need to tell anyone in this room) was the almost gleeful support of the invasion of Iraq, a journalistic failure of epic proportions. If you had not been sufficiently aroused from your complacency by this time, you never would be.

2007-06-20T21:27:00.000-04:00

Blogroll stuff

The illustrious Rogue Planet blogroll is being updated to reflect the new home of the talented and highly readable JuBlu. Here it is.

2007-06-12T23:31:00.000-04:00

Steve Gilliard

I was truly sad to learn that Steve Gilliard died. He was only 42.

Some of the things he wrote infuriated me (though I don't recall what they were right now). But he was a lively, entertaining writer and he was against the war before everyone and his brother was, and he was a strong liberal voice in the blogosphere before there were many of those. He also, at least in my experience, was way more tolerant of dissent in his comments than lots of other bloggers. I don't remember ever seeing him use some of the bullying tactics bloggers can use on disagreeable commenters; Mr. Gilliard and his co-blogger Jen would just get down there and duke it out with gusto, giving his comment section an entertaining barroom brawl quality.

Plus he knew how to make a mean potato salad.

Anyway, I am really sorry that he is gone.

2007-03-12T22:37:00.000-04:00

Why your blog sucks

Possible reasons not as many people read your blog as you would like:

1) You post way too often. People need a break, time to fold their laundry, open a bottle of wine, have sex, etc. Not necessarily in that order. If people are constantly refreshing your blog they won't have time to do other things. So put a sock in it every once in a while.

2) Your page design sucks. Seriously. It looks like you started your blog using one of Blogger's original boring-ass templates, and you never bothered to change it, even though many fine new templates with eye appeal are now available. Change your template, you lazy bastard.

3) People are sick of your incessant blogwhoring. Look, good marketing/PR is a skill. But trust me, people won't buy what you're selling if you come off as being desperate. So stop spamming my comments. And don't think you're fooling anyone with your "MD" alias. And stop constantly emailing me. "Dear kc, please link to this great post I just did about Andrea Mitchell!" Please. If you think you have something I'll be interested in, then send it to me. Don't email me every time you update your blog. I mean, Jesus!

4) Your blog actually sucks. Didja ever think of that? Look, I'm sorry, but if you've been blogging since 2002 and you don't have a huge global readership like I do, maybe it's just YOU.

5) Kos tells you what to post. Don't deny it.

6) A sizable chunk of your content involves you telling other people how to blog. C'mon. If people want blogging tips, they'll look to a successful blogger, like me.

Hope this helps you build up your readership. Persevere, update strategerically, and maybe some day you'll reach the top of the blogworld, kiddo. It worked for me.

2007-02-03T14:07:00.000-05:00

So much for "Don't be evil."

Google Used Heavy-Handed Tactics In Molding N.C. Incentives Package

POSTED: 10:43 am EST February 1, 2007
RALEIGH, N.C. -- Google Inc. tried to silence North Carolina lawmakers and used heavy-handed lobbying tactics to help mold its own $100 million package of business incentives, according to records released this week.

While the General Assembly worked last year on tax breaks that would save Google millions of dollars on a new data center in Caldwell County, the search engine behemoth demanded that lawmakers never speak its name, according to e-mail records.

"I sort of had to work in the dark," said Sen. Jim Jacumin, R-Caldwell. "That bothered me. They need to respect the laws of the land, even if they're business."

A spokesman for Google, based in Mountain View, Calif., did not return a phone call seeking comment Thursday.

Records show that the company was often agitated by the legislative process. Google executives threatened to walk away from the negotiating table and asked Commerce Secretary Jim Fain to exercise his power over the bill writing process.

"I always believed North Carolina to be a good state in which to do business," Google executive Rhett Weiss wrote to Fain in June. "But the legislation's long saga increasingly concerns us. Will creating and operating a North Carolina facility continue to be so hassle-prone?"

Weiss added, "Without the legislation being passed with its correct substance, our project will not proceed in North Carolina."

Lawmakers had been working to approve a measure that eliminates sales tax on electricity and equipment used by Internet computer centers.

Critics have complained that the state is offering too much in trying to lure jobs and investment. Though Google will invest $600 million in the Lenoir facility, it will only create about 200 jobs with the $100 million incentive package.

2007-02-03T14:01:00.000-05:00

New Blogger SUCKS.

Good thing I'm not payin' for this.

2007-01-27T13:56:00.000-05:00

Bingo hooligans

This letter appeared in the Myrtle Beach Sun News the other day. Isn't it sad?

This is my fourth and final visit to Myrtle Beach. The drivers here, people staying at hotels and bingo players are rude and inconsiderate. The bingo players laughed at me and talked about me behind my back because I didn't know how to play bingo their way. They think they own their places at the bingo hall because they are regulars.

One man threw his garbage at me, told me not to sit in a certain spot and told me to sit in the smoking section. I told him I was allergic to smoke and tobacco and take allergy pills. He got mad and moved to another table. I reported him to the manager and she did nothing about the situation.

Bye bye, Myrtle Beach.

D. M.
Buffalo, N.Y.

2007-01-21T22:23:00.000-05:00

The victim

I think this is taking the whole victimhood thing a little too far:

Police are looking for a man witnesses say gave passers-by an eyeful when he exposed himself and committed a lewd act Thursday night in the parking lot of the Coastal Grand Mall, a report shows.

According to an incident report, the victim, an off-duty Horry County police officer, told Myrtle Beach police that he and his wife saw the suspect driving a white sport-utility vehicle at an unsafe speed and nearly hitting other vehicles near Pine Island Road and Grissom Parkway about 8 p.m.

The victim told police he followed the man at a safe distance and watched him get out of the SUV in the Dillard's department store parking lot and expose himself to motorists in the area. The "suspect did the lewd act for at least one minute," the report states.

The man who exposed himself then got back into the SUV and fled the scene in an unknown direction . . .

Apparently "the victim" decided not to chase the perp further.

2007-01-21T21:45:00.000-05:00

Zal and Denny, workin' for a penny

Some years ago, when Myrtle Beach was a modestly tacky little beach town, not the monstrously tacky nightmare it has become, I was tending bar in a small restaurant up at the beach. One quiet evening a middle-aged, slightly paunchy, fast-talking little man with a big mustache came into my bar. After I'd served him a couple of drinks he asked me if I'd heard of the Mamas and the Papas. Of course I had. Then he asked me if I could name all the Mamas and Papas. Well, sure. There was John, Michelle, Mama Cass . . . and . . . uh . . . well, I drew a blank on the last one.

The man said, "I'm the other one. I'm Denny!"

Although I had vague mental images of Michelle, Cass, and John, of course I had no idea what the other guy looked like. So I had no idea whether he was shining me on or what. But he seemed harmless enough, so I played along.

Denny, or "Denny" as the case may be, came into my bar every night for a week or so after that first evening. He did that "name all the Mamas and the Papas" routine on just about everyone who came in the bar; no one could name the other Papa. No one disputed that Denny, or "Denny," was not in the fact the other Papa, and he was a big hit. He got tons of drinks bought for him, even from people who were sure he wasn't really one of the Mamas and Papas. Especially from those people, in fact. Then he just stopped showing up.

If it was a scam it seemed like a harmless one; as far as I know Denny ("Denny") never tried to scam anyone out of more than the cost of a cocktail. I was pretty sure "Denny" wasn't the real Denny, but couldn't say for sure that he wasn't. If you were going to pick an ex-celebrity to impersonate, you couldn't do worse than pretending to be the other Papa.

The real Denny Doherty died a few days ago. I looked at the pictures accompanying the stories of his death and tried to remember what "Denny" from the bar looked like. I still can't tell if he was the real Denny.

Anyway - RIP, other Papa.

UPDATE: Post title corrected - it's "Zal," as in Zal Yanofsky, not "Sol" as I originally had it.

2007-01-17T22:10:00.000-05:00

Vote

Early and often.

2007-01-16T21:56:00.000-05:00

Martin Luther King

A day late, I'm sorry. Here's a lovely post by hilzoy at Obsidian Wings.

2007-01-16T20:38:00.000-05:00

'Scuse me for not being right enough

I thought the Iraq invasion was a bad idea from the start, based as much on the obvious bad faith and lying and overselling by the administration as anything else. But as Megan McArdle points out (via tbogg - McArdle pissily blocked traffic from tbogg so to hell with linking to her), I am guilty of not predicting every single way in which the administration would fuck this up.

For example, I failed to oppose the invasion on the grounds that we would completely fail to secure the capital and protect the infrastructure and deploy sufficient manpower to get the electricity back on and prevent looting of Iraq's treasures.

I didn't figure we'd create a Coalition Provisional Authority and stock it with snot-nosed junior idealogues whose only qualifications were their daddy's name and their adherence to Bushie idealogy.

I never suspected Bush would put on a fighter pilot costume and pretend to land a fighter jet on the deck of an aircraft carrier and get out and strut around without loosening the parachute harness straps and then stand in front of a banner proclaiming "Mission Accomplished" and announce "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended," long before major combat operations ended.

I didn't figure that when that particular publicity stunt backfired, Bush would blame the troops.

Abu Ghraib? I confess: I didn't see that coming.

The whole unleashing of Islamic fundamentalists bit? I sorta was afraid of that. And of this. But I figured the administration's big shot foreign policy experts surely knew more than I did, and that I must be worrying too much. So, again, I was wrong in assuming that anyone in the Bush administration knew his ass from a hole in the ground.

Saddam Hussein's lengthy trial for only some of the crimes he committed, with the verdict's being suddenly announced just in time for the US midterms and the hasty execution conducted by a gang of Shia thugs chanting the name of an Islamic fundamentalist cleric? And that execution being videotaped and put on the Internet for all to see? You got me. I totally failed to anticipate that.

So in short, although Megan McArdle was completely totally wrong, I myself am guilty of not being right enough.

Mea fucking culpa!

2007-01-16T19:50:00.000-05:00

Send good thoughts Jane Hamsher's way

I suspect that if anyone can kick cancer's ass, it's Jane Hamsher.

2007-01-09T20:22:00.000-05:00

Jesus wept

Digby has a post about an anti-Keith Ellison chain email now making the rounds.

You read it, and you think, THEY call US moonbats?

I remember when Clinton was president, and I really wasn't paying all that much attention to politics. An acquaintance put me on his email list, and I started receiving, on a regular basis, forwarded emails that enumerated in loony, conspiracy-theorist detail all the innocent people Bill and Hillary murdered in their ruthless rise to power, and the nefarious ways in which Bill and Hill offed their victims.

So help me, when I first started getting those emails, I would read them and laugh. I would occasionally respond to my acquaintance with an offhand, self-deprecating joke. Making fun of myself for voting for Clinton, and also lightly making fun of the loony-tunes mentality that spawned those emails. Because, you see, I thought he was in on the joke, and he was forwarding them to me because he too thought the insane conspiracy theories were funny.

And then I learned that he BELIEVED that shit. He actually BELIEVED that Bill and Hillary Clinton had 40-plus people murdered. So help me God, he believed it. And so apparently did the thousands of other fucking idiots who received those chain emails.

These batshit-crazy fools are still out there, and they're gunning for Keith Ellison now. One wonders why - after all, Ellison is just a freshman Congressman.

Maybe they're just getting warmed up for the Democrat who will be elected President in '08.

2007-01-09T19:33:00.000-05:00

Sad news

Poor fourslegsgood had to make the wrenching decision to put down Lionkitty Maxx, the indescribably majestic beast shown in these beautiful pictures. Please go over to Plush Life and give 4lg a big cyber-hug.

Also, Kevin Drum's cute kitty Jasmine died suddenly on January 4. Not to minimize Kevin's loss, but in a way I think he was luckier than 4lg. I can say that because my most excellent first cat died much the same way Jasmine did. I didn't see it - I found his body shortly after it happened - but it looked like he just dropped dead, basically. I mean, it didn't look like he suffered. He had been diagnosed with a heart murmur a few years before, but he seemed perfectly healthy and happy. He was a cool cat, the coolest. The most suave.

Anyway. As heartbroken as I was when he died, I remember that even then I realized I was lucky that I knew what happened to him, and I knew he didn't suffer. And I was never faced with the sad decision of having to put him down due to illness. My heart truly goes out to fourlegsgood.

Do go to 4lg's blog and admire Maxx's pictures - what a magnificent creature. Not to gush, but just look at that face. You can tell he had personality to burn.

On a happier note, the prognosis for Anntichrist's beloved Biddy looks good, so please keep your fingers crossed for her.

2007-01-04T21:45:00.000-05:00

Fuck all y'all!

Ya know, it's not easy being a liberal-ish Democrat living in South Carolina, amongst mostly really right-wing Republicans, but you won't catch me WHINING about it, the way some righties whine about how tough it is to be liberal in California or Tennessee (Tennessee? What-the-fuck-EVER).

But it DOES rankle me a bit when people like Digby, whom I respect, hell worship, say things like this:

I had originally rejected Tom Schaller's idea that Democrats should demonize South Carolina or Alabama the way the Republicans (with the help of alleged liberals like Ana Marie) have demonized San Francisco and Massachusetts. But I'm beginning to see that it may actually be a necessary thing.

Oh yeah? Well kiss my cracker ASS!

Plus - I hate to break it to Y'ALL - but plenty of African-Americans live in SC. And Alabama. So, rather than insulting their choice of domicile, Democrats ought to be spending time pointing out why Democratic policies are better for everyone than Republican policies.

Digby's SUCH a good egg, I forgive him (or her, as the case may be) for that intemperate remark, which was I bet written in a moment of sheer disgust at the nonstop nastiness coming from the GOP. I've felt that same disgust myself many times, but I really, REALLY don't think it's ever EVER a good political strategy to demonize an entire state or region (well, it's OK for bloggers to do it, in the spirit of snark, but I'd really hate to see legions of left-leaning pundits resorting to it in their TV appearances). Plus, it's just WRONG.

It always struck me as repugnant when Bush made his sneering references to the fine state of Massachusetts, and the constant contemptuous references by Republicans and their pundits to "San Francisco values" make me SICK. But it seems to me the appropriate response is not for lefties to sneer at Alabama (at least not serious-type lefties - leave the sneering-at-Alabama to the likes of me).

Rather, I think the next time some Republican ASSHAT, or Chris Matthews, or whoever, snickers about "San Francisco values" on TV, the appropriate response from the token lefty or semi-lefty guest would be to adopt a grave expression, and say sorrowfully, "You know, San Francisco is a great American city, full of fine AMERICANS and American patriots who vote, pay taxes, and contribute to our great American society. If you want to trash an entire American city, I suppose that's your right. But when you trash San Francisco, an American city, you're insulting millions of Americans. And I for one will not stand for it. Gentlemen!"

And then get up and stalk out off the set while the crew softly hums "America the Beautiful."

2007-01-03T23:26:00.000-05:00

No Duck Left Behind

Republican Karen Floyd was one of the few South Carolina Republican candidates to have lost in the last election; she ran for Superintendent of Education, and was defeated in a state where having an "R" beside one's name generally ensures victory.

Anyway, NotVeryBright has a shot of her family Christmas card here.

Yeah, Santa - send her some more ammo.

At least she didn't shoot anybody in the face.

(I'm not anti-hunting, by the way. Just anti-shooting-way-the-hell-more-than-you-can-eat)

2007-01-03T23:16:00.000-05:00

I can not-blog on more than blog!

The lovely Diane (fka Desi) of Mia Culpa has invited yours truly to be one of her guest bloggers while she's moving. Go check out my first feeble effort. And check the bonus bear-blogging by Diane while you're there.

2007-01-03T22:38:00.000-05:00

For Biddy

One of Anntichrist's kitties, Biddy, is having some feline trouble. The poor baby. If you know anything about this, drop Annti a line or leave a comment here.

[waves to MMG]

2007-01-02T21:18:00.000-05:00

I suck.

Look at this place. Deserted for weeks on end. The wind whistles; an occasional cyber-tumbleweed blows by. What a desolate, godforsaken blogscape.

As soon as I digest these black-eyed peas and collards, I'll blog more. I SWEAR TO THE FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER.

2006-12-23T13:47:00.000-05:00

Local Wankery: Do Not Taunt the Happy Fun Thad Viers

Hey, remember Thad Viers? Well, he's back:

COLUMBIA - Members of a special House subcommittee heard plenty of complaints Wednesday about the state of the S.C. Transportation Department, one day after embattled executive director Elizabeth Mabry retired.

[snip]

At the hearing, several people complained that road construction was based on political favoritism, and no standards existed by which certain projects were chosen over others.

"I'm for a rational process that is transparent to the public," said Jane Lareau, project director of the Coastal Conservation League. "We need a framework, a selection process, that allows the department to analyze objectively which projects should move forward ... without political influence."

As an example, Lareau complained about the priority given to the I-73 project in the PeeDee. She said upgrading I-95, dealing with congestion on I-26, or repairing some of the state's "2,000 below-standard bridges" might come first.

That brought Rep. Thad Viers, who isn't on the panel, to his feet. He told his fellow lawmakers that "DOT has unfairly become the whipping boy." Viers, R-Myrtle Beach, said the I-73 project was needed as a hurricane evacuation route and that "DOT ... is a great organization."

He charged that many of the complaints came from those who had "a hidden agenda to stop growth at all costs."

Actually, Rep. Viers never went away. Not only did the superlative young Republican win re-election to his South Carolina General Assembly seat, he didn't suffer any serious consequences from his cell phone sock puppetry.

While yours truly was, er, on sabbatical, Mr. Viers's cell phone harassment case came up for trial before a Richland County, SC magistrate judge, who on his own decided that Mr. Viers was a good candidate for "pre-trial intervention" ("PTI"), meaning that if Mr. Viers performs a little community service, he won't have a criminal record.

Now I don't have a problem with PTI for non-violent crimes, and if the cell phone message allegations are true, Mr. Viers didn't commit any violence: He only threatened to do so. However, I had previously been under the impression, since SC went to the trouble to enact one of those stupid "victim's rights" amendments to its Constitution, that the victim of an alleged crime had to consent to PTI before a defendant would be eligible to participate in PTI. But apparently I was wrong (and it's a good thing - I don't think crime victims should have veto power over the disposition of a criminal case, but then I am not a Republican). So, Mr. Viers got "PTI", which means, according to the local newspaper stories I read (stories now sadly now available online only for a fee), that what The Sun News described as "hours" of tapes of Mr. Viers' alleged threatening calls will be available only after the PTI community service is completed.

So, readers, another year will pass before we get to listen to Mr. Viers threatening to sodomize his estranged spouse's paramour's mother (at least, that is what the estranged spouse's paramour said Mr. Viers did, as reported by the Sun News - I myself have not heard the tapes).

If my name was "Atrios," I'd put this blog entry under the heading "Bobo's world." But I digress.

Perhaps you have read this far and are thinking, "Even if Mr. Viers DID do all these things, shouldn't we let bygones be bygones? It was a youthful indiscretion; should Mr. Viers have to endure taunting for the rest of his life for this?"

To which I say, yes, eventually, and no. However. I think there should be an informal statute of limitations, so to speak, on the taunting of public officials for their youthful indiscretions. After they've done their penance and enough time has passed, we should all just move on, in your humble correspondent's opinion. However, the length of the taunting period may vary according to the subject's age and position at the time of the infraction, the subject's subsequent's accomplishments, and the amount of time that has passed since the infraction.

My personal calculator of the taunting period is idiosyncratic, subjective, and biased. I would say that the period for taunting Dubya for his "youthful" DUI has expired. Imho. The period for taunting him for his failure to disclose said DUI is still open however. Arguably. Imho, again. Clinton still has a few legitimate taunting years left to endure on Monica. Imho, of course.

With respect to Mr. Viers, he was an elected public official when the [alleged] misconduct occurred, he's a jerk, and the misconduct (threatening to sodomize his estranged wife's paramour's mother, allegedly} is both severe and funny in an extremely sick way. Imho. It's only funny 'cause no one actually got hurt, of course. In a physical way. Also, Mr. Viers takes money from SunCruz Casinos, which runs a casino boat out of Little River, SC, to lobby local officials. This while Mr. Viers is an elected rep. to the state government.

So, all things considered, it is my opinion, Mr. Viers should be prepared to deal with a little taunting for his (alleged) cell phone indiscretions for at least the next five years. At least.

2006-12-23T13:40:00.000-05:00

Shorter Pat Conroy*

"I regret my failure to fight in a flawed, stupid, and corrupt war."

Even Shorter Pat Conroy:

"I wish I had killed some gooks when I had the chance."

Seriously, this Pat Conroy essay makes me glad that I never got around to reading any of his novels (let's say I had "other priorities").

But I can't argue with this:

"I now revere words like democracy, freedom, the right to vote, and the grandeur of the extraordinary vision of the founding fathers."

I too revere words like "the" and "to." Imagine if they didn't exist. We'd all be talking like Tarzan: "I go store now."

*"Shorter" concept stolen from busybusybusy.

2006-12-23T13:16:00.000-05:00

Take your "happy holidays" and SHOVE'EM!

I'm sorry, did you just say "happy holidays?" To ME? Were you talking to ME? Well, you must be talkin' to me 'cause I'm the only one here.

"Happy holidays," you say? "Happy FUCKIN' holidays?" Well, I just have one question for you, Mr. Anal-Sex-loving-secular-Jew-atheist-lieberal: Why do you hate the baby Jesus?

I'm talkin' about the War for Christmas, bitch. It's ON, baby. It is so ON.

My schedule does not permit me to fight War for Civilization in Iraq, but fortunately I DO have time to fight the War for Christmas, by loudly taking offense at people who do not use the proper words when extending seasonal good wishes to me.

A few days ago, I naively purchased a CD of Christmas standards. Imagine my disgust when I played the CD only to learn it contained a song called "Happy Holidays," recorded by one "Bing Crosby." If Mr. Crosby didn't hate Christ, would he have recorded a "Christmas" song that didn't even mention Christ in the title? I think the answer is obvious. I don't know much about Mr. Crosby, other than that he's a dead singer, but it's clear from this song that Bing Crosby was an early insurgent, if you will, in the War on Christmas. So I invite all right-minded people, including Mr. C.B. Berry of North Myrtle Beach, Mr. Dan Riehl, and Mr. Bill O'Reilly to join me on Christmas day in a ceremonial smashing of Bing Crosby CD's.

If you love the baby Jesus, meet me at the corner of Gervais and Main, in Columbia, South Carolina, at 12:00 noon on Christmas Day. If you don't show . . . well, I'll understand. I'll understand that you hate Jesus.

2006-12-14T23:56:00.000-05:00

Bejus

Fix yourself a drink before you read this:

A Socastee man accused of attacking his wife with an ax was found guilty Tuesday of criminal domestic violence in a jury trial which proceeded against the victim's wishes, reported the office of 15th Circuit Solicitor J. Gregory Hembree on Wednesday.

A prepared statement from Hembree's office indicates Steven Rollinson was convicted of continuously striking his wife of 11 years with an axe during a June 5th domestic dispute.

Court records show two witnesses saw the victim staggering down the front steps of the crime scene.

She suffered the following injuries, records show: A gapping wound from the left eye socket through the lip and into the chin, a broken lower jaw bone, loss of lower teeth, deafness in left ear, loss of sight in left eye, left side of face paralyzed, permanent scarring to left side of face, three gapping wounds to left arm and left arm paralyzed.

Reports state she was flown to the Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston, where she remained on life support for two days and spent 12 days total.

Despite her extensive injuries, Hembree's office reports, the victim refused to testify against her husband and maintained the argument which predicated the attack was her fault.

I mean, Be-JUS:

Court records state Rollinson testified the victim's wounds were self-inflicted; that the victim sliced her face with the ax and had fallen on it several times.

2006-12-12T21:30:00.000-05:00

Separated at birth?

Jeff Greenfield:

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:

I'm. Just. Sayin'.

2006-11-17T13:38:00.001-05:00

I am the LORD, motherfucker!

Samuel L. Jackson is doing the voice of the Lord in a new audio version of the Bible.

From Genesis, Chapter 3:

Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the LORD God among the trees of the garden. But the LORD God called to the man, "Where the fuck are you?"

He answered, "I heard you in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid."

And he said, "Nigger, who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the motherfucking tree that I commanded you not to eat from?"

The man said, "The woman you put here with me—she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it."

Then the LORD God said to the woman, "Bitch, what is this shit you have done?"

The woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate."

So the LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this shit, CURSED are you above all the livestock and all the wild animals! You will crawl on your motherfucking belly and you will eat SHIT all the days of your motherfucking LIFE!"

2006-10-25T18:22:00.000-04:00

Sorry!

[clears cobwebs] Been busy with some personal stuff. Hope to be back soon. Maybe tomorrow, even.

2006-10-12T18:45:00.000-04:00

Feh

The Pavilion, a Myrtle Beach landmark, has closed and will soon be razed by its asshole owner, Burroughs and Chapin, the 500 pound gorilla company that practically runs Myrtle Beach and is trying to transform it from an endearing modestly tacky beach town to a grotesquely pseudo-classy, monstrously tacky resort. A place for people with lots of money but zero taste.

Yet more condo towers, like we need them, and some "attraction" yet to be named (but which I guarantee you will be shitty) will replace the Pavilion.

Imagine Miami without the good-looking people, sizzle, and tropical foliage, but with the overdevelopment, traffic, and sprawl, and you have some idea of where B&C is taking us.

Nice going, B&C, and nice going, Myrtle Beach, for letting it happen.

2006-10-03T18:26:00.000-04:00

Cell phone sock puppetry?

Since all the famous bloggers are talking about Rep. Foley and the GOP coverup of his teenage page proclivities, I think I'll talk about some local wankery.

A warrant for the arrest of South Carolina legislator Thad Viers, R-Myrtle Beach, was issued in connection with some threatening phone messages received by a man who was dating Viers's estranged wife. In an unusual procedure, a Richland County magistrate then recalled the warrant and issued a "courtesy summons" (the magistrate says he didn't know Viers was a legislator).

Anyway, Viers is accused of calling the man and threatening to assault the man, his parents, and - this is really low - to assault the man's car. Viers says he didn't do it . . . but maybe some zealous acquaintance using Viers's cell phone did make a few calls:

Viers, R-Myrtle Beach, called James Zeigler six times, saying he would assault him, sexually assault his mother and father, and damage the man's vehicle, according to an incident report filed by the Columbia resident.

Viers, 28, a business consultant who was elected to the state legislature in 2002, denied the allegations Monday.

"This incident report is nothing more than a political hit job. I did not make the comments asserted in this incident report and did not threaten Mr. Zeigler, his family or his car," Viers wrote in an e-mail statement to The Sun News.

The incident report filed Sept. 11 by Zeigler claims there were nine phone calls from unindentified people threatening to hurt him on Viers' behalf.
Zeigler declined comment Monday.

Zeigler "could not identify the other people calling but has saved the recordings for investigators from his voicemail," the sheriff's office wrote. "Zeigler does wish to prosecute."

The unindentified callers may have been acquaintances of Viers, according to the state lawmaker.

"A number of overzealous acquaintances, sometimes using my cell phone, may have placed lewd, lascivious or threatening calls but I deny these blatantly false accusations," Viers wrote in the e-mail statement.

Don't you hate it when your overzealous acquaintances use your cell phone to make lewd, lascivious, or threatening phone calls to people who are dating your estranged spouse? Couldn't they at least use their own cell phones to do that shit?

One of the most entertaining things about the website version of the newspaper article about the voicemails is some of the comments from Viers's Taliban-like supporters: As of yet, no one's called for the soon-to-be-ex Mrs. Viers to be stoned, but give them time.

A little more about Viers:

Before this voicemail news broke, Viers was most recently in the local news for lobbying the Horry County legislature for favorable tax treatment for casino boats owned and operated by SunCruz. Viers is a state legislator. Doesn't it look pretty sleazy, you ask, for him to take money from gambling interests to lobby the local legislature in his own county? The answer is, yes, it looks extremely sleazy, but apparently doesn't violate any state laws.

From the opinion page of The Sun News:

Viers' lobbying looks bad

How swell that the S.C. Ethics Commission says S.C. Rep. Thad Viers, R-Myrtle Beach, was within the law in lobbying Horry County officials this week to accept SunCruz's $5 per person boarding fee offer. Viers' appearance Wednesday at a negotiating session as a gambling boat representative may have been legal.

But state law speaks only to impropriety, not the appearance of impropriety. In this instance, the appearance of impropriety is powerful.

Viers fought passage of the casino boat law last year, on the ground that local taxation undermined boat owners' property rights. At one point during the S.C. House debate, he even claimed that the boats already pay the county $3 million in property taxes - a wild exaggeration. Fortunately, the House passed the bill anyway.

Now Viers is fighting that same battle as a paid shill for SunCruz. He says that's a coincidence - that a Columbia firm assigned him to the case. But we're likely not alone in wondering whether there is more to his appearance on SunCruz's behalf than that. County Council members would be wise to ponder the question, too.

A few years ago, Rep. Viers didn't seem to care too much about business owners' property rights, as he objected to the Horry County Zoning Board's approval of a methadone clinic. But then again, back then he wasn't getting paid to care about that.

2006-10-02T18:49:00.000-04:00

RoguePlanet exclusive: GOP House leadership ignored memo entitled "Foley Determined to Nail Teenage Page Inside the U.S."

I didn't think I'd miss much, being away from TV and computers for a couple of days, but obviously I was wrong.

The biggest news is not really Foley's hitting on teenage pages, it's the fact that the GOP leadership knew about it for years.

House Leader Boehner says he told Speaker Hastert. Wonder how that conversation went?

BOEHNER: "Denny, we've got a big problem with Foley. Potential dynamite. He's been hitting on the pages, the boys, and a bunch of them are pretty creeped out. In fact, I had a private investigator look into this, and he prepared this memo. It's called 'Foley Determined to Nail Teenage Page Inside the U.S.' [hands memo to Hastert]

Maybe we should, um, do something?"

HASTERT [spewing doughnut crumbs]: "All right, you've covered your ass now."

Plenty more on this in general at Talking Points Memo.

2006-09-28T19:22:00.000-04:00

Out of town for a couple of days

I'll leave you with this portrait of some of the world's most powerful men:

Graphic by the handsome and talented MD.

Being fair and balanced, I offer an alternate image from Velociman (though your imagination will have to supply the visual. V-Man could use a talented graphic artist like MD)

2006-09-28T18:23:00.000-04:00

You're either against torture, or you're for it

Or, your name is "Brad Warthen" and you see the words "Lindsey Graham," "John McCain," and "compromise" in a story about pending legislation and your heart flutters, 'cause McCain and Graham are such bold non-partisan mavericks, and you realize you don't have to trouble your beautiful mind about this issue ever again.

Warthen says McCain and Graham won "an apparent victory in favor of the American Way." "Apparent" being journalese for "I can't be bothered to comprehend what this bill actually says."

There's plenty wrong with this bill, as even the New York Times and the WaPo finally got around to noticing. Some fine bloggers have been hammering on this for days. Some of the best: Hilzoy at Obsidian Wings; the Balkinization bloggers, and Firedoglake. Please go read these excellent blogs.

By the way, Lindsey Graham's had it in for the writ of Habeas Corpus for a long time. I hate to break it to Brad Warthen, but that's part of the American Way. If Brad's depending on glory-hounds McCain and Graham to protect the American Way, he's in for a big disappointment.

UPDATE: More on Graham from Digby.

2006-09-27T18:58:00.000-04:00

Just some pockets of dead-enders

Sept. 27, 2006 — The Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) at the University of Maryland has conducted a poll on the war in Iraq.

Here are a few of the poll's findings:

Six in 10 Iraqis approve of attacks on U.S.-led forces, up from fewer than half in an earlier PIPA poll in January.

2006-09-27T18:40:00.000-04:00

Not good

Exclusive: U.S. Troops Abandoned Me, Says Convoy Driver
September 27, 2006 11:16 AM

Brian Ross and Rhonda Schwartz Report:

A dramatic home video obtained by ABC News shows U.S. troops apparently abandoned a truck convoy after it came under insurgent attack in Iraq last year.

Three unarmed Halliburton truck drivers were executed at point-blank range once the troops left, according to a surviving driver, Preston Wheeler, of Mena, Ark., who taped the scene.

"They was murdered. To me, they was murdered," Wheeler told ABC News in an exclusive interview to be broadcast Wednesday on World News and Nightline.

Once insurgents opened fire and disabled four trucks, the personnel carrier can be seen racing ahead.

"They left. They, I don't know where they went, they're nowhere to be seen," Wheeler said.

Wheeler says it was 45 minutes before a U.S. military force returned. By then, Wheeler says, he had seen two drivers shot at point-blank range. He identified them as Keven Dagit, of Jefferson, Iowa, and Sascha Greener-Case, of Sierra Vista, Ariz.

2006-09-27T18:17:00.000-04:00

Joe Lieberman takes a bold and courageous stance

er, straddle:

Leading Democrats Wednesday, like U.S. Sen. Edward Kennedy, called on Bush to release the entire document in order to give the public "the full story." The Bush administration refused, saying that to release the full report would endanger lives by revealing classified secrets.

Asked during the conference call where he stood, Lieberman declined to join the Democrats' call.

"Look, it's a shame that this was leaked," he said. "But I think in the context of this being leaked [to the press], it was important that the essence of it be" released.

Via Atrios.

2006-09-26T18:49:00.000-04:00

Tuesday cat-blogging (for MrsMG)

Meet Beavis:

Look at his stumpy little tail. Isn't he cute?

2006-09-26T18:44:00.000-04:00

Only in South Carolina

Hog-wrasslin' juror subdues rampaging convict:

Hog wrestler used talents in line of duty
Juror No. 1 knew it was up to him to subdue defendant
By Kelly Marshall Fuller
The Sun News
GEORGETOWN - A juror who took a flying leap out of a jury box had one thought in mind as he prepared to tackle an angry defendant who was about to choke a prosecutor: Hit him low.

Jon Cottingham, 56, known as juror No. 1, said he locked eyes with Shannon McGee, 39, who had just been sentenced to life in prison for a sex crime against a minor, as McGee crossed the room toward the prosecution Wednesday.

A former high school football player and longtime hog wrestler, Cottingham went into a crouch and prepared to lunge at a man who was bigger and taller than him.

"I knew what to do: Hit him low," Cottingham said. "He's got to come down. I was just trying to block him from interfering with anybody. I was thinking it was something that had to be done."

OK, I admit it: I was born and raised in South Carolina, and I've never heard of hog-wrestling. Gator-wrestling, yes. But not hog-wrestling.

2006-09-20T18:27:00.000-04:00

Al Qaeda says it doesn't know you

Bill O'Reilly says he's on an Al Qaeda "death list."

Rrrriiiight.

2006-09-20T18:01:00.000-04:00

Teh sad

Think good thoughts for The Editors' sweet kitty,Waffles.

2006-09-20T17:59:00.000-04:00

Uh oh. Has Hitchens heard

about this?:

Minneapolis-St. Paul is concerned that its taxi service is deteriorating. Citing their religious beliefs, some Muslim taxi drivers from Somalia are refusing to transport customers carrying or suspected of carrying alcohol. It started with one driver a few years ago, but the average number of fare refusals has grown to about three a day, says airport spokesman Patrick Hogan.

2006-09-19T18:20:00.000-04:00

Bill Clinton on The Daily Show

Did y'all see that last night? Is he cool or what?

I've obtained a partial transcript:

JON STEWART: Ladies and gentlemen, FORMER PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON!

[wild applause and cheering]

B. CLINTON [strolls suavely up to STEWART]: Hey, Jon, it's great to see ya. You're lookin' good. [CLINTON eyes STEWART seductively, then gives him a lingering kiss on the mouth. When the passionate kiss is finally over the flustered STEWART blushes, giggles, and fluffs his hair nervously.]

Um, that's all I have for now. I'll try to transcribe the rest of the interview and post it later, 'K?

Also, a source has provided me with a transcript of last week's off-the-record meeting between Clinton and some prominent liberal bloggers. Here's a portion:

PETER DAOU: Mr. President, I'd like to introduce you to Christy Hardin Smith, of Firedoglake.

CLINTON [eying SMITH seductively]: I'm delahted to meet ya. [CLINTON gives SMITH a lingering kiss on the mouth. When the passionate kiss is finally over the flustered SMITH blushes, giggles, and fluffs her hair.]

DAOU: And Mr. President, this is Jane Hamsher, also of Firedoglake.

CLINTON: Hello, Jane, it's an honor to meet you. Ah've heard a lot of good things about you . . . a lot of good things. [CLINTON gives HAMSHER an especially long, lascivious glance, then gives her an extra-long, lingering kiss on the mouth.]

DAOU [uncomfortably]: Um . . . Mr. President.

CLINTON [finally breaking away from passionate kiss]: Whew! Sorry, Peter, Ah got a little carried away. [CLINTON grins at HAMSHER, who flushes, giggles, and fluffs her hair].

DAOU: Now, Mr. President, this is Duncan Black, of Atrios.

CLINTON [eying BLACK seductively]: Hey, Duncan, nice ta meet ya. Thanks for comin'. [CLINTON gives BLACK a lingering kiss on the mouth. When the kiss is finally over, BLACK blushes, giggles, and fluffs his hair.]

There's more, but I think you get the picture.

2006-09-18T18:53:00.000-04:00

White people su . . .

KIDDING! I love white people, really. In fact, I have "white blood." In fact, it's entirely white. But still, white people kill me.

The first thing I noticed when I saw the picture of Clinton with the bloggers wasn't anyone's boobs - it was the fact that there wasn't a single black person in the picture. OK, I admit, that was the second thing . . . the first thing I did was pick out the bloggers I recognized and wonder who the others were. That led to me thinking gee, they're all white, aren't they? Not that I have anything against white people, much. But where's Gilliard . . . isn't he in New York City? Why isn't he there?

As it turns out, Gilliard wasn't invited. The Clinton/blogger meet was arranged by Peter Daou, a former blogger now working on Hillary C's campaign for whatever it is she's running for. Gilliard says Daou told him that Daou didn't bother inviting him because he knew Gilliard wouldn't attend, which, Gilliard says, he wouldn't have (good on him - though I myself wouldn't have been able to resist). Oliver Willis was invited, but couldn't make it.

Anyhoo, I had half a mind to post some mild snark about that, and about the lack of substantive blogging about the whole thing, and then along come Ann Althouse and Dr. Helen with their nasty posts about Jessica and her wanton posing in the group pic. That distracted me, I admit, and wound up posting about that instead of the other thing.

I don't know why I'm even posting about now (better bloggers than I am have been all over it already).

Oh, re Clinton: When he was president I recollect that even though I liked him, on those occasions when I paid attention to what he was doing I was mostly exasperated with him or outright disgusted by him. Then as time went on I got even more disgusted by the GOP's crotch crusade. And now? After six years of Bush? Clinton seems like a GOD.

So I confess: I would totally pose for a picture with him.

2006-09-18T18:21:00.000-04:00

Well, it seemed funny at the time . . .

[sigh] In the fuss over Althouse and Dr. Helen's egregious comments about Jessica of Feministing, and in my ensuing Google search for pics of Atlas Shrugs posing in an enthusiastic manner with Mr. Dr. Helen (Instahack to you), I was reminded of . . . um . . . this. I really feel rather guilty about that now. In my defense, no one reads this blog (that's always my defense) but still, if it's wrong for Althouse and Dr. Helen it's wrong for me.

I just hope that if someone ever calls me on something like I don't react as badly as Althouse and Reynolds did - that is, I hope I don't start digging myself an even deeper hole.

2006-09-18T18:10:00.000-04:00

At long last, Madame Althouse, have you no decency?

The woman does not know when to shut up. Commenting on her own blog, she says,

Whether Jessica deliberately presented herself sexually at the lunch may be open to question

Well, she IS a law professor. Maybe she's just experimenting with the boundaries of defamation law.

2006-09-16T18:27:00.000-04:00

Shorter Dr. Helen Part Deux

"Some female bloggers criticized one of my posts; therefore I am fully justified in talking about this other female blogger's trampy pose with a known rapist, Bill Clinton."

She's not kidding.

("Shorter" concept stolen from busybusybusy)

2006-09-16T17:30:00.000-04:00

Shorter Ann Althouse and Dr. Mrs. Instahack

"Look, this female blogger posed for a picture - and she's not even wearing a burka. STONE HER."

The picture in question is one of Bill Clinton and some liberal bloggers (I was invited, but I had to work day shift at the Waffle House that day). According to Althouse, the blogger in question "wears a tight knit top that draws attention to her breasts and stands right in front of him and positions herself to make her breasts as obvious as possible". Dr. Helen accuses the blogger of "posing in a rather provocative stance." I certainly don't think it's a "provocative stance" - in fact, I'll bet most people's grandmothers wouldn't find it a provocative stance.

But you be the judge - the picture is here; the blogger who attracted Althouse's and Dr. Helen's attention is the young woman in front in the gray top. It's Jessica, from Feministing. She's standing in what looks to ME like a fairly natural, relaxed stance, arms to her side, shoulders not thrown back, breasts not thrust out. Nonetheless, Althouse and Dr. Helen found her stance, and top, to be unduly alluring. I think the mullahs of Iran would certainly agree with them on that.

I don't think Jessica's got anything to be embarrassed about.

Now here's someone who could really show Althouse and Dr. Helen a thing or two about, um, posing provocatively:

Say, who's that doughy-looking guy with her?

Via Pandagon, via Atrios in turn.

UPDATE: D'oh. And I thought I was so clever. Julia totally beat me to that Atlas pic . I should stick to blogging about stuff after the rest of the blogosphere's moved on . . .

2006-09-14T08:53:00.000-04:00

The Path to Iraq - Part Two

As promised, here are a few key scenes from Part Two of ABC's upcoming miniseries, "The Path to Iraq," a revealing look at the events leading up to America's disastrous decision to invade Iraq. If Part One seemed hard on Bill Clinton, Part Two promises to anger Republicans with its unsparing account of how George W. Bush and the Republican Party failed to do all that they could to resist the Democrats' push for war.

[SCENE: A large ballroom, full of glittering Hollywood celebrities dressed to the nines. The camera pans around the room, revealing at one point a large banner which reads "Hollywood Loves Hillary." The camera comes to rest on BILL and SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON, who are standing side by side, smiling. Or rather, BILL CLINTON is leering as his gaze follows various nubile young starlets; HILLARY wears a tight, fixed, rigid smile. HILLARY is speaking in an urgent whisper]

H. CLINTON: [in furious whisper] You IDIOT! You did WHAT!?

B. CLINTON: Aw, Hon, it was just a quick li'l drop-in. Ah hadn't seen ol' Osama in a long tahm.

H. CLINTON: I cannot BELIEVE you parachuted into Tora Bora and WARNED him! Are you trying to get me thrown out of the Senate on my ASS?

B. CLINTON: Aww, Babe, we owed Osama one. After all that cash money he gave for our Whahtwater defense fund . . . all under the table, of course . . .

H. CLINTON: You know the one thing I care about more than money is POWER. And if it gets out that you helped Bin Laden escape AGAIN my [BLEEEEP]ing political career is OVER.

[A familiar-looking couple approaches BILL and HILL]

B. CLINTON: Hon, keep it down, now, somebody maht hear ya. Look, here come Sean and Barbra.

H. CLINTON: [swiftly turns to face BILL and knees him in the nuts, hard, while hissing -] -- I'll deal with you LATER, you [BLEEEP]hole.

[Sean Penn and Barbra Streisand walk up to the Clintons. Hillary's fierce scowl at Bill changes instantly to a smile of feigned warmth]

H. CLINTON: Barbra! Sean! It's SO good to see you! Thank you SO much for holding this fundraiser for me.

BARBRA: Oy, it's nothing.

B. CLINTON: Hey, y'all. Barbra, baby, you're looking mighty fine. [BILL eyes Barbra lasciviously, then gives her a lingering kiss on the mouth. When the passionate kiss is finally over the flustered Barbra blushes, giggles, and pats her hair.]

[Quick close-up of Hillary's face, scowling]

B. CLINTON: Sean! Hey, dawg. [BILL eyes SEAN lasciviously, then gives him a lingering kiss on the mouth. When the passionate kiss is over the flustered Sean blushes, giggles, and pats his hair].

BARBRA: So listen, you two kids, Natalie brought some fanTAStic blow. Ya wanna go into the back room and do a few lines?

B. CLINTON [starting to move, presumably towards back room.]: When in Rome . . .

H. CLINTON [seizing BILL's arm in steely grip]: Thank you SO much, Barbra, but not tonight. Too many photographers around. [everyone laughs]

[the next scene is set in HILLARY's Senate office. HILLARY is behind her desk. Another woman, who is apparently an aide - she's holding a stack of files - is standing in front of HILLARY's desk. The aide is a stocky middle-aged woman with close-cropped hair, wearing a pantsuit and sensible flat shoes]

AIDE: Jesus, Hill, I cannot believe he did that. What if someone finds out he actually warned Bin Laden - America's Public Enemy Number 1?

SEN. CLINTON: It's gonna KILL my career, that's what. We can't afford to have the press digging around into Bill's whereabouts . . . especially not that Terry Moran or that Charlie Gibson. Or Barbara Walters. Those guys are real relentless investigative journalists.

AIDE: We need to do damage control.

SEN. CLINTON: No [BLEEEEP], Sherlock. Get the whole staff in here. Let's brainstorm this.

[In the next scene HILLARY's entire staff is assembled in her office. All of HILLARY's staffers are stout middle-aged women with close-cropped hair, wearing pantsuits and sensible shoes]

SEN. CLINTON: . . . so that's where we stand right now. We cannot afford to let this get out, or my career is TOAST. And so are your phony baloney careers. Suggestions, ladies?

STAFFER ONE: We need to distract the press and the public.

SEN. CLINTON: Yes, but HOW, goddamn-it?

SECOND STAFFER: Maybe we could send out some anthrax in the mail to some prominent people . . .

SEN. CLINTON: That's promising. But they almost nailed me on that Foster thing. I'd probably be under suspicion immediately. Too risky.

THIRD STAFFER: Hey . . . how about another war?

[general murmuring of approval among all staffers]

SEN. CLINTON: Say, Gertrude, that has real promise. But war with who?

BERTHA: North Korea?

SEN. CLINTON: Naah. That Kim guy, he's no threat. No one will buy it.

GERTRUDE: Iran?

SEN. CLINTON: Nah, they're no threat either. Lame.

ORIGINAL AIDE: . . . Iraq?

SEN. CLINTON: Hey, that's IT! Beautiful, Alice. Iraq is perfect. Nobody likes that Saddam bastard, we could make HIM Public Enemy Number One. But . . . the Republicans will insist on a causus belli. What reason can we give for invading Iraq?

GERTRUDE: Didn't Saddam, like, gas his own people?

ALICE: Yeah, but that was years ago.

SEN. CLINTON: Who gives a [BLEEEP] if it was twenty years ago or yesterday. We'll just say he's a monster who GASSED HIS OWN PEOPLE, nobody will care about the details.

BERTHA: I think it would be an easier sell if we painted Saddam as an imminent threat to America. We could say he has WMD's.

SEN. CLINTON: Hell, yeah. Bill said that for years. That's how we'll get Bush on board . . . that and the humanitarian [BLEEEP]. You know how much Bush cares about brown people.

[A later scene shows the Oval Office; President Bush, in his customary spirit of bipartisanship, has convened a meeting with a few prominent Congressional Democrats and Republicans to discuss the risks of invading Iraq]

BUSH [with troubled look on face]: Look, y'all all know that I care about the safety of the American people more than I care about my OWN safety. And I weep myself to sleep every night thinking about the plight of the poor Iraqi people. But . . . I'm just worried that we're being a little hasty on this. For one thing, Afghanistan isn't truly secure yet.

Besides, I think we need to spend more time planning for the aftermath, the reconstruction. If we do this, we can't afford to do it wrong. I'm just worried that if we don't do the hard planning work, and just go barging in there, we'll wind up mired in a quagmire of sectarian violence, a nightmarish situation which will result turning the entire region into a powderkeg . . .

SEN. CLINTON: Don't be such a goddamn pussy, George.

SENATOR KENNEDY: Yeah, stop worrying. It'll be easy. Hell, those Iraqis will be throwing flowers and candy at our troops. You'll be a hero . . . I wouldn't be surprised if they put up statues in your honor.

SENATOR GEORGE ALLEN: Well, I think we all need to devote some time to considering the real possibility of strife between the Shiites and the Sunnis if we depose Saddam . . .

SENATOR KERRY: Whoa, whoa, whoa . . . what's this "Sunni" and "Shiite" stuff? I thought the Iraqis were Muslims!

SEN. ALLEN: They are two different sects of Islam.

SEN. KENNEDY: Well, I'll be damned. I did not know that. Well, it doesn't matter. Freedom is God's gift to all men. I know that some people don't think brown people are capable of self-governance [KENNEDY pauses, stares significantly at ALLEN, who fidgets, eyes darting about nervously] but I don't happen to be one of those people. We just need to liberate the Iraqi people from Saddam - the rest will take care of itself.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Look, I'm all for freedom. Nobody loves freedom more than I do. But I'm concerned that one consequence of the invasion will be to drive the Shiites into the arms of Iran . . . to strengthen Iran in the region. That would be extremely deleterious to American interests.

SEN. KERRY: Nah. Never happen.

SEN. KENNEDY: Absurd.

SEN. KERRY: It's win-win for us. Once we get, uh, a democratic Iraq I'll bet gas prices will go below a dollar . . .

SEN. CLINTON [adjusts her crotch, belches before speaking]: Look, enough of this goddamn jawing. We need to invade that mother[BLEEEEP]er and we need to invade it NOW. That crazy bastard Saddam is armed to the TEETH with weapons of mass destruction. What if he gives WMD to Al Qaeda and they use them to attack America?

PRESIDENT BUSH: But there's no evidence of any cooperation between Saddam and Al Qaeda. In fact, most of the intelligence shows the opposite.

SEN. KERRY: Maybe you're just looking at the wrong intelligence.

SEN. KENNEDY: Yeah. Maybe you just need different intelligence. What if you're wrong and Saddam does have WMD and is cooperating with Al Qaeda? Do you want the smoking gun to be in the form of a mushroom cloud?

PRESIDENT BUSH: No, of course not. I just think we can afford to take more time to plan this, and if we're going to to do it, to work in good faith with America's allies around the world to build a true international coalition.

SEN. CLINTON [spits]: Enough of this horse[BLEEEP]. [BLEEEP] Saddam. We're taking him out.

2006-09-13T19:22:00.000-04:00

The Path to Iraq

Being a big-time right-wing blogger, I just received promotional materials and a preview video of ABC's next blockbuster miniseries, "The Path to Iraq."

According to some very fine print in its promotional materials, "The Path to Iraq" is a dramatization that is drawn from a variety of sources. It is not a documentary, but a fact-based docudrama. For dramatic and narrative purposes, the series contains fictionalized scenes, composite and representative characters and dialogue, as well as time compression.

The promotional materials state, and I agree, having watched it in its enirety, that "The Path to Iraq" is a devastating, critical account of the lead-up to the Iraq War; it will spare neither political party in its critical, hard-hitting look at the events leading to America's disastrous decision to invade Iraq.

Here's a description of the opening scenes from the first installment:

[Wide shot of rugged, mountainous terrain. Complete stillness, no humans or animals in sight. Total silence. On the screen, the words: "Tora Bora, Afghanistan. Late November, 2001)

Then a droning sound is heard. The sound grows louder. A plane flies into the shot, flying as low as possible. A figure parachutes out.

The next shot is a closer one of the figure landing, rolling; then standing up and removing the parachute harness. The person is wearing a helmet, which he slowly removes.

Close-up: It's Bill Clinton.

CLINTON's hair blows in the wind. He looks around, surveying the terrain, then breaks into a broad smile.

In the next shot, a small caravan of men in Arab dress is shown approaching CLINTON. The men reach Clinton. A tall, slender man emerges from the group; CLINTON and the tall man embrace warmly, then draw apart. The camera closes in on the tall man: It's Osama Bin Laden.]

CLINTON: Osama! How ya doin', good buddy!

BIN LADEN: Bill, my friend. You honor us with your presence.

CLINTON: Phew, it's been a long time. Ah haven't seen you since we planned that aspirin factory thing. 'Member that?

BIN LADEN: I sure do. [both men chuckle]

CLINTON: Lemme tell ya, Ah caught some heat for that one, boy.

BIN LADEN: So I heard, so I heard. Those Republican politicians in your country, they are not very sympathetic to my cause.

CLINTON: And then there was that other tahm, when some of our boys had you all cornered and then Ah gave the order to let you get away.

BIN LADEN: Yes, yes. We are eternally in your debt.

CLINTON: Well, hey, what's a few favors between friends, raht? Hey, it's been crazy coupla months, huh?

BIN LADEN: Yes, and it will get even crazier, Allah willing.

Come, my brother, let us go to my cave and talk.

[Long shot of Clinton donning Arab headdress and then walking away with the group of men.

The next shots are inside of a cave. The camera pans around inside the cave. Against one wall is a bank of sophisticated-looking electronic equipment. In one corner of the cave several straw mats lie, with copies of the Koran arranged respectfully on a low table. Yet another corner of the cave is lavishly appointed with plush carpets, draperies of fine cloth.]

BIN LADEN: My friend, make yourself at home. [BIN LADEN gestures to large comfortable armchair. Clinton sits. BIN LADEN then sits cross-legged on a small mat on the cave floor. BIN LADEN claps his hands, and a man rushes up and gives Clinton a cup of tea, which Clinton sips].

CLINTON: Aww, this hits the spot. Lemme tell ya, Osama, it's gettin' kinda hairy out there. Our boys are droppin' some big ol' bombs up in here. Ah barely made it here.

BIN LADEN: We are glad you came. You have done so much for us already. But, Bill . . . I am guessing this is not just a social visit.

CLINTON: You got that right. Osama, buddy, Ah came to tell ya that you and your boys best be makin' tracks away from Tora Bora. Time's a-wastin', buddy, they're comin' for ya.

BIN LADEN: The Americans are coming? Here, to this place?

CLINTON: Naw, not the Americans. They're sendin' in some local fellas after ya. But Ah got mah people workin' on some lubricant, ya know, greasin' a few palms, scratchin' a few backs, to slow the locals down. So what Ah'm tellin' ya is there's a window of opportunity for y'all to get on outta here.

OSAMA: I see, I see . . . it will be as you say. We will depart tomorrow, if Allah is willing, and thanks to you we will evade the infidels once again. Bill, you have done so many services for us. So many, many services. It would be impossible to repay you in full, but there is one thing . . . you will stay the night, my friend?

CLINTON: Yeah, they're pickin' me up tomorrow. Hope I can sneak on outta here then.

BIN LADEN: Then, please accept this gift for the night. [BIN LADEN claps his hands again]

[A shapely, young dark-haired woman emerges from behind one of the draperies. She is dressed in harem pants and a form-fitting top; the lower part of her face is hidden behind a diaphonous veil. She crosses the cave and stands before Clinton, head slightly bowed. Her large, dark liquid eyes gaze at Clinton over the veil. Her posture is obedient and respectful]

CLINTON [perking up]: Well, say, Osama! I didn't know you went in for this kinda thing!

BIN LADEN: Normally I don't, but for a true friend such as yourself, Bill, I'm making this exception.

CLINTON [addressing the young woman]: Well, hey there, pretty lady! How old are you, honey?

YOUNG WOMAN [in low soft voice]: Seventeen.

CLINTON: Perfect! Osama, good buddy, thank you kindly. If you don't mind, I think I'll just retire for the night. [Clinton takes the young woman's arm and the two of them walk behind the draperies].

I'll give you a scene from the second installment tomorrow. I promise you, it will be equally raw, hard-hitting, and truthy.

On behalf of ABC, I just ask you not to pre-judge "The Path to Iraq" until you've seen the entire show.

2006-09-13T18:25:00.000-04:00

Local wingnuttery

Via the excellent Cursor, I see that Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-Colorado) observed 9/11 by attending a barbecue hosted for him by the League of the South. Maybe some enterprising reporter in Tancredo's district will ask him why he saw fit to observe the anniversary of 9/11 by addressing a group that's founded upon - how to put it - an ideology of hate. A group that is devoted to the destruction of the United States as a nation.

The Southern Poverty Law Center characterizes the League of the South as a "neo-Confederate hate group." Judging from the South Carolina website of the League, they're kinda sensitive about being labelled a "hate group"; last year the SC League (warning: Embedded link goes to a HATE GROUP website)took great umbrage at being characterized as such on a local television station:

Last Sunday on a WIS TV program called "Awareness" the South Carolina League of the South was viciously attacked as a "hate group" by a panel of blacks.

A panel of blacks! How dreadful! I'll bet they were uppity, too.

So apparently it's not just the SPLC that thinks the League of the South is a hate group. I wonder where people would get such an idea, anyway? I dunno, maybe from reading stuff like this:

Finally, after one hundred forty-one years, with the aid of the South Carolina League of the South, justice for the citizens of the Republic of South Carolina has been served. In Columbia, on the steps of our State House, the tyrant, Abraham Lincoln, and the war-criminal, William T. Sherman, were both hung by the neck until dead.

- which appeared immediately above the sentence complaining about the injustice of being attacked as a hate group. By a panel of blacks.

Anyway, the SC League of the South wasn't going to take being labelled a hate group lying down, so they got representatives of WIS-TV (Columbia, SC's local NBC affiliate) to meet with some SC LoS representatives. As recounted by Laura C. Tesh, who says she's legal counsel to the board of the SC LoS in a piece entitled WIS-TV: Defending Our Name & Building Bridges in the Fire:

On Monday, 8 August 2005, Larry Salley, Dr. Clyde Wilson, and I met with Mel Stebbins, General Manager and Vice President for Operations for WIS-TV and his legal counsel from Nexsen Pruet about the recent article on the WIS website citing SPLC’s assertion that South Carolina leads the nation in “hate groups” due in large part to the number of LoS chapters.

[snip]

The meeting was not what I expected. Idealist that I am, I really thought that once we explained what we were really about—states’ rights, restoring individual liberty, historical literacy, preserving Southern culture—they would want to join or at least be very receptive. Good thing I forgot to bring membership applications.

[snip]

Just meeting us face to face as real, reasonable people gave them some pause. While they did not listen, perhaps they heard and will review the material we left. Initially, they seemed to have written us off as lunatics who had to be humored.

Heh. As would all sane people. But hey . . . at least they still have Republican Congressman Tom Tancredo.

Okay, so the meeting didn't exactly swell the League's membership rolls, nor did it lead to an apology by WIS-TV, nor did it persuade WIS-TV to give the SC chapter of the League its own television show. But Ms Tesh goes on to counsel against further, um, action by the League against WIS-TV:

At this point, flagging is premature. Although this meeting may not have accomplished much, we have at least initiated relations. The story is over; the blurb on the website is off. If we flag them, it will confirm their suspicion that we are nuts and a hate group for attacking such “nice” people as themselves, all evidence to the contrary. If we let it go at that and try to maintain good relations, we neutralize the attacks. If it happens again, then would be the time to call out the Red Shirts.

Which led me to wonder, what is this "flagging" stuff? And who are these "Red Shirts?" It sounds vaguely familiar, like something one might have read about in one's South Carolina history class . . .:

In 1876, many upstate rebels traded their white hoods for red shirts, becoming part of the "red shirt rebellion" that elected Democrat Wade Hampton governor, forcefully stripped white and black Republicans of their political power and precipitated a withdrawal of Union troops from South Carolina. The first Red Shirt rally was held in Anderson, the next county north of Abbeville.

Oh, those guys. So now the Red Shirts are back:

Just this past year, the Red Shirt tradition was revived by the League of the South, which conducted "red-shirt pickets" outside both of South Carolina's Democratic presidential debates, holding signs that named each candidate and demanded: "Yankee Go Home."

Well, things have certainly changed in the last 130 years, haven't they? Instead of driving Republicans out of South Carolina, the local Red Shirts are inviting the most extreme ones in, and hosting barbecues for them.

Let's get back to what Ms. Tesh said the LoS is "really about": "states’ rights, restoring individual liberty, historical literacy, preserving Southern culture" - gee, it doesn't sound all that bad when you put it that way, does it? Unfortunately, if that wasn't a crock of shit when Ms. Tesh wrote it, it sure is now. A little over a month after she wrote her piece, the League let everyone who didn't already know in on what it is really, really about:

The League of the South unveiled its new strategy at the 2005 national conference in Jekyll Island, Georgia, on 30 September-1 October. Below is a summary of that strategy.

First, the League’s new strategy must be implemented from the bottom up—locally--and not from the top down. If we don’t succeed on the local chapter level, then we will not succeed at all.

Second, we cannot emphasize too often or too strongly that the League is a Southern nationalist organization and not a heritage defense group. Our goal is Southern independence, complete, full, and total. This is our chief principle of action. All efforts must be tested against this question: Does it aid our quest for independence? If not, then don’t do it. It’s as simple as that. If your agenda does not have Southern independence at its core, then you’re in the wrong organization. [emphasis supplied]

So much for that "preserving Southern culture" shit.

I guess, according to this second principle, the barbecue for Tom Tancredo would have to have been done "in aid of" the League's quest for Southern independence, right? I can only hope someone asks Rep. Tancredo about this.

More on the League's "new strategy":

Let’s briefly examine these seven parts. (1) We will never reach our goal of Southern independence if we don’t persuade our people that it’s both desirable and possible. We are thus waging a war to win the minds and hearts of the Southern people.

War? Wouldn't that war ultimately be against, you know, America itself?

I believe our gubmint has thrown people in GITMO for less provocation than that. But then, those people weren't white Christians.

2006-09-11T17:50:00.000-04:00

9/11 anniversary haikus

I hope I don't go to Hell for this:

The memos warned him
To keep a vigilant eye
The drunk went fishing.

That hot Crawford sun
Blinding, can't really focus
on that PDB.

It's been five whole years
Since Osama attacked us
Why can't Bush catch him?

Used planes as missiles
Condi no anticipate
Dub let him get 'way.

On that fateful day
Bush displayed a newfound zeal
For reading a book.

It was 9/14
When Bush stood astride the dead
With a big bullhorn.

Bush launched his campaign
For re-election astride
A pile of the dead.

"Can you hear me now?"
The miscreant bellowed out.
Please sign this release.

When the country reel'd
And all needed a leader
He just flew away.

Aboard Air Force One
Bush watched in-flight movies and
Smacked on hard candies.

Flying aimlessly
Safely aboard Air Force One
Dubya soiled his pants.

MildlyDisturbed and berg wrote some of these haikus, which I have used without the authors' permission.

2006-09-11T17:43:00.000-04:00

Shorter Brad Warthen

On the anniversary of 9/11 I am greatly disappointed by the failure of all Americans to unite around my vision of unending war.

Even shorter Brad Warthen: You don't deserve your freedom, America!

("Shorter" concept stolen from busybusybusy)

2006-09-08T18:36:00.000-04:00

Steve Gilliard wishes he wrote this

Here's Annti on Steve Irwin's death:

I'll tell you why I like people like Steve Irwin and Jack Hanna: Because they spend their whole lives WORKING THEIR ASSES OFF TO SAVE ANIMALS AND TEACHING OTHER PEOPLE TO LOVE AND APPRECIATE AND TO WANT TO HELP ANIMALS.

Annti goes on to explain why she hates PETA. Does anyone NOT hate PETA? PETA is truly a uniter, not a divider.

By contrast, here's John Cole's prissy take on Irwin:

It will seem shitty of me to say this, but anyone who didn’t see something like this coming is blind.

You know, it does seem shitty of you to say that.

Well, maybe not seeing him die from a stingray tail to the chest, but something along the lines of an animal attack. I always loved the show, but in the back of my mind during episodewas that I felt doing this sort of thing with a wife and children was supremely irresponsible.

Not to go all Ayn Rand-ish on y'all, but not a lot of bridges or high-rises would get built if everyone felt the way Cole does.

2006-09-08T18:19:00.000-04:00

Mystery meat of the day

Please go to 3Bulls and look at this and then come back here and tell me what it is.

I'm guessing whole fried rooster. Comb and everything.

2006-09-08T17:58:00.000-04:00

Answer to Wednesday's pop quiz

What do Jeff Goldstein and Marco Materazzi have in common? They both prefer your sister.

2006-09-08T17:42:00.000-04:00

Is it my deodorant?

I've noticed this blog gets more comments when I don't post regularly than when I do . . .

2006-09-06T17:58:00.000-04:00

Everything is broken

Blogging will continue to be sparse for a while - still having 'puter problems at home. That's OK, though, I don't have much to say right now anyway.

Except . . . here's a pop quiz: What do Jeff Goldstein and Marco Materazzi have in common?

Also, in re ABC: I frankly thought ABC had hit its lowest point ever when Diane Sawyer tried to blow Marky Mark on GMA, live. But I was wrong.

Go tell ABC how hard it sucks!

2006-09-01T18:14:00.000-04:00

Shorter Brad Warthen

"Just 'cause you're old enough to fight and die in one of the many wars I advocate doesn't mean I think you're old enough to have a beer. Whippersnapper."

Speaking of Brad, how is his civility-for-thee-but-not-for-me campaign going, you ask? Just like you might expect.

Incidentally, I am totally into civility. In fact a while back I started a whole blog dedicated to the promotion of civil discourse. Here it is.

2006-08-30T17:57:00.000-04:00

Blogging has been sparse

because my home 'puter is messed up since last week. Should have it back by this weekend, I hope.

While you breathlessly await my next post, check out these fine blogs:

Our (that's the royal "our") old friend Anntichrist S. Coulter has her own place: Mark of the Beast. She's also still blogging at Blondesense.

Go see Velociman's adorable new PUPPY here. I tried to praise the pup on V-man's blog comments, but the pinko filter blocked me.

Also, geo3rge has finally resumed blogging. 'Bout time!

UPDATE: I stand corrected! Annti is departing Blondesense and will be blogging exclusively at Mark of the Beast. Blondesense is terrif and so is Annti, so read them both, I say. Or else.

2006-08-24T18:25:00.000-04:00

Who wrote it?

Match the excerpts quote below with their respective authors:

1)

I had the opportunity this afternoon to be part of a relatively small group who heard President Bush talk, extemporaneously, for around forty minutes. It was an absolutely riveting experience. It was the best I’ve ever seen him. Not only that; it may have been the best I’ve ever seen any politician. If I summarized what he said, it would all sound familiar: the difficult times we live in; the threat from Islamic fascism–the phrase drew an enthusiastic round of applause–the universal yearning for freedom; the need to confront evil now, with all the tools at our disposal, so that our children and grandchildren can live in a better and safer world. As he often does, the President structured his comments loosely around a tour of the Oval Office. But the digressions and interpolations were priceless.

WASHINGTON, DC—President Bush delighted an intimate gathering of White House dinner guests Monday, regaling the coterie of dignitaries, artists, and friends with a spirited, off-the-cuff discussion of the Roman poet Virgil's lesser-known works.

"Ah, W. was in top form tonight," Spanish foreign minister Josep Pique Camps said. "We were all held captive by his erudition and charm. First, a brief history of the opium trade, then a bit of Brahms on the piano, then a rousing discussion of Virgil. That boy is a wonder, isn't he?"

According to guests, the subject of Virgil arose serendipitously, when a servant opened a window in the Red Room, to which the group had retired for after-dinner drinks. Noticing the breeze, Bush raised his glass and delivered a toast to the changing of the seasons. He then apologized to "lovely Winter," explaining that he "meant no slight against her."

"The first blush of Spring always reminds me of Virgil's words," Bush said. "In early spring-tide, when the icy drip / Melts from the mountains hoar, and Zephyr's breath / Unbinds the crumbling clod, even then 'tis time / Press deep your plough behind the groaning ox / And teach the furrow-burnished share to shine."

"Book One of The Georgics, of course," Bush added.

Fund said that Bush is not dumb, just inarticulate, while O'Donnell suggested that Bush is out of his league. They both may be right, but I'd like to submit an alternative explanation for Bush's linguistic deficit.

Language barrier.

This theory occurred to me not long ago at an off-the-record luncheon with Bush and a hundred or so of his supporters. I was the guest of a guest, and welcomed the opportunity to observe the president in his natural habitat.

What I witnessed was revealing. Not only was the man fluent in the English language and intellectually agile, he was knowledgeable on a wide range of subjects raised during a 90-minute Q&A. Someone apparently had been slipping intellectual-curiosity tablets into Bush's cola.

Toward the end, one of the guests said, "Mr. President, I think if Americans could hear you speak the way you have today, you'd have a 95 percent approval rating.''

Authors:

A) Kathleen Parker; B) Hindsocket; C) The Onion

First to guess correctly gets a free glass of Rogue Planet water.

2006-08-23T18:52:00.000-04:00

Shorter Buttrocket

President Bush's boots are so shiny. And tasty, too!

2006-08-22T19:17:00.000-04:00

STILL not ready for prime time

Michael Graham. (Via Hecate).

Something about Hillary Clinton seems to send Mr. Graham into a frothing rage: The last time I recall him making the news, he was expressing his desire to bludgeon Senator Clinton with a tire iron. Oh, well, as long he's expressing his violent fantasies under his real name, we needn't worry about his lack of civility . . .

2006-08-22T18:47:00.000-04:00

Oh, so THAT was the plan

Via TPMCafe by way of Atrios, here's Joe Lieberman and right-wing radio host Glenn Beck talking about the REAL reason we invaded Iraq:

BECK: I've been saying this before we even went into Iraq, that we're trying to change the face of the Middle East. The weapons of mass destruction was a nice side benefit. We were trying to go and pop the head of the snake in Iran. That's what we were trying to do. And I don't think anybody had the courage or could actually come out and say that with world politics the way they are.

LIEBERMAN: Well, you're right. And I think if I fault the administration for anything before the war -- 'cause I think we did the right thing in going in to overthrow Saddam -- it's that they oversold the WMD part of the argument....

"Oversold?" The "WMD part of the argument??" Funny, I don't remember there being ANY other part to the argument in favor of invading Iraq. Well, other than the Bush administration's careful attempt to link Hussein to 9/11 in a such a fashion that they could later deny having attempted to link Hussein to 9/11.

I've seen other pro-Iraq invasion fanatics advance similar after-the-fact justifications for invading Iraq. Brad Warthen, for example, fancifully informed us that the invasion was about "knocking over the oil barrel." Perhaps Bush conveyed that to Warthen and others in the know by a series of coded blinks, 'cause I sure don't recall him saying anything about upsetting the oil barrel. To the contrary, I seem to recall something about how the invasion would result in cheap gas. But then, what do I know. I'm no Middle East expert. In fact, I'm so clueless about the Middle East that if someone HAD stated the purpose of the invasion was to "pop the head of the snake in Iran," I would have probably said something really dopey like, "How do you expect that deposing Iran's enemy will accomplish that?"

But, hey, that's just me. I will say this: If Joe manages to get re-elected, then I hope in the future he will be so good as to let the rest of the country in on the rationale for any invasions we may undertake in the future.

2006-08-21T19:03:00.000-04:00

South Carolina doesn't like his stance on abortion, but the cousin-marrying thing should be a plus

According to South Carolina political journalist Lee Bandy, "some say" the South Carolina Republican Party is softening its Taliban-like (that's my locution, not Bandy's) attitude on social issues, as evidenced by the enthusiastic reception Rudy Giuiliani got in Charleston.

But you know how decadent those Charlestonians are. Color me skeptical about a statewide change in GOP attitudes. At least until Rudy gets a similar welcome at Bob Jones University in the upstate.

2006-08-21T18:13:00.000-04:00

Yeah, well, I can still trackback your ass!

What is it about some of these authoritarian right-leaning bloggers that anonymous and pseudonymous commenters drive them so apeshit? Why are John Cole, Tacitus [heh], and the weaselly Patterico [double-heh] so obsessed with the identities of people who disagree with them? What difference does it make?

Brad Warthen, the editorial page editor of The State newspaper, has long had a burr under his saddle about anonymous and pseudonymous comments on his blog (he also doesn't seem to comprehend the difference between anonymous and pseudonymous comments). Recently he's been harrumphing around about the dismal quality of comments on his blog and threatening to do something about it; but he kept his 10 or 12 loyal readers (more than I have, I'll admit) in suspense about what the new policy would be. I figured, based on the hints he was dropping, and given his antipathy towards anonymous and pseudonymous commenters, that the new policy might include one or both of two things: 1) deleting ad hominem attacks, and 2) real-name registration. The former at least is arguably reasonably calculated to foster civil discussion. The latter - well, you need only have a passing familiarity with the work of Ann Coulter, Michael Savage, and Bill O'Reilly to realize that lack of anonymity is no guarantee of civility. But I can see how someone like Brad Warthen might think a real-name requirement would keep his commenters in line (or at least keep them from harshing on Brad Warthen too severely).

But the comments policy Mr. Warthen announced consists neither of deleting all personal insults or requiring all commenters to register their real names. Instead, he has come up with the most bizarre, asinine, indefensible comments policy I've ever seen. To wit:

I'm implementing a Double Standard:

The bad news is that one group of people will be free to post pretty much whatever they want. I will maintain the same hands-off policy with them that I've maintained with everyone up to now. With those in the other group, I will delete at will any comments that I deem harmful to good-faith dialogue.

The good news is that you get to choose which group you're in.

To be in the first group, you just have to give up your anonymity.

You read it right - if you tell Big Daddy your real name (and he wants to know your occupation too), he'll let you post whatever you want, no matter how insulting, vile, or "harmful to good-faith dialogue." But if you use a pseudonym, even if you use the same pseudonym every time you comment, he'll arbitrarily and capriciously delete anything you post that he doesn't like.

He claims to want to promote "discussions that move toward real solutions on issues." How this idiotic policy is designed to do that is beyond me. If you truly wanted to foster civil, productive discussions why would you proudly announce a double standard wherein a handful of your commenters are exempt from any requirement to actually be civil?

It's too bad, because although Mr. Warthen is consistently on the wrong side of national issues (his editorial page called on Clinton to resign; it endorsed Bush twice; it endorsed Mark Sanford (then complained when Sanford did what he promised to do); it was and continues to be pro-Iraq invasion and in fact Brad's itching to invade Iran; etc, etc) I've always thought Mr. Warthen deserved some credit for being, as far as I know, the only mainstream media figure (albeit a relatively minor one) to run a blog that permitted relatively unfettered feedback. Now that that's history, I'm hard-pressed to think of anything nice to say about his blog - except that I'm on the blogroll, evidence of at least a smidgen of good taste and judgment.

Oh, and Mr. Warthen? The reason some people give gmail, Hotmail, and Yahoo email addies when posting comments on blogs like yours is to avoid having their "real" friends-and-family and work accounts bombarded with the type of spam you get when you post on a pop-up infested site like The State's.

UPDATE: Thers, who knows whereof he speaks, weighs in. As Thers succinctly puts it: "If something is genuinely offensive, it's offensive whether it comes from a named or an anonymous source." Indeed. The rhetoric of, oh, say, David Duke isn't any less disgusting just because Duke uses his real name . . .

2006-08-16T18:38:00.000-04:00

Democrats play dirty trick on Senator George Allen

[wingnut]
The libs sank to new lows when they sent a brown-skinned man with a camera to cover Senator Allen's public appearances before all-white crowds. The devious libs knew that poor Senator Allen wouldn't be able to resist the temptation to call the colored man a monkey. I guess some of you libs got a big kick out of making Allen look like the kind of man who would single out a dark-skinned man and call him "macaca."

What a despicable trick. It would be just like dangling a big Twinkie in front of Michael Moore and videotaping him as he lunges for it and devours it and then greedily licks the creamy filling from his chubby fingers. I'll bet you libs wouldn't be laughing at that, would you?

Or it would be like parading a cute fifteen-year old girl in front of John Derbyshire and videotaping him as he drools. Of course you sicko libs would probably get a kick out of tormenting a fine conservative like Derbyshire.

Typical morally bankrupt liberals - deliberately exploiting a man's weakness, and then laughing about it.

[/wingnut]

(Inspired by Dan Riehl. Via The Poor Man)

2006-08-15T18:10:00.000-04:00

If you make fun of my Dispoz-o plastic sporks, al Qaeda will have won

Time for some local wingnuttery. Background: South Carolina public education has been under siege lately. The laughably named South Carolinians for Responsible Government (SCRG) is devoted to one goal: Dismantling public education in South Carolina. Well, that and getting government handouts for rich people to send their kids to private school. Aligned with Grover Norquist's equally laughably named "Club for Growth," it has taken dead aim at South Carolina public education and is working to have anti-public education zealots elected to political offices in SC. I imagine the Hair Club for Growth folks figured South Carolina would be sort of a soft target, given the relentlessly libertarian bent of our governor, Mark Sanford, who hates government so much he's spent the past 8 years (at least) drawing a paycheck from it.

Anyway, Sanford appointed one Karen Iacovelli, upstate spork magnate, to serve on South Carolina's Education Oversight Committee. A South Carolina blogger, "Gervais Bridges" (Ross Shealy - son of Rod, evidently, but I won't hold that against him) started Googling Ms. Iacovelli's background, and found some interesting things. Like, for example, Ms. Iacovelli's signature on a pledge favoring the end of public education. The pledge was sponsored by a group calling itself the "Alliance for Separation of School and State." As Gervais Bridges drolly noted, the Alliance for Separation of School and State probably rarely uses its acronym. Anyway, I expect Ms. Iacovelli caught a little heat for that - you can imagine that some people were disturbed that the gov. would appoint a woman who opposes public education to oversee public education. Subsequently, Ms. Iacovelli resigned from the Education Oversight Committee, whereupon the Club for Growth generously appointed her to its board.

Gervais Bridges is now, sadly, retired from blogging (his archives are here). But he wrote an amusing editorial for The State summarizing his findings about Ms. Iacovelli.

Yesterday, Ms. Iacovelli responded indignantly in The State:

Ross Shealy (“On barbecue, politics and what defies parody,” Aug. 1) exemplifies the ignorance and vitriol of the fanatical left.

Mr. Shealy is a coward hiding behind a slippery keyboard. For the record, Mr. Shealy never contacted me and does not know a wit about me, my business or the disease that 20 million people, including me, suffer from. Rather than a doctor’s note, Mr. Shealy needs a lesson in reporting facts. They are:

I have had Lyme disease for 14 years, have been hospitalized on too many occasions to recall (even when appearing pretty in pink). I sit on the Board of Dispoz-o Products Inc., a major manufacturer of plastic disposable products that has done great good for humankind, exceeded only by the greater shame Mr. Shealy brings to journalism.

I had to stop reading right there because I was laughing so hard.

Frankly, I thought bringing shame to journalism in a quantity exceeding the good that plastic disposable utensils bring to humankind was Geraldo Rivera's job. But what do I know, as I sit here behind my slippery keyboard.

In her editorial, Ms. Iacovelli goes on to deny ever signing the ASSS pledge. But thanks to the miracle of Google cache, South Carolina blogger NotVeryBright has uncovered Ms. Iacovelli's name on ASSS's pledge. So, um, maybe someone put her name on that ASSS pledge without her permission. Or maybe she's just full of it.

More here at Laurin Manning's blog.

Via Tim at Crack the Bell, who also uncovered another fun fact about Ms. Iacovelli: She thinks Vince Foster was murdered. Dollars to doughnuts she's one of those nuts who spent the second half of the '90's forwarding chain emails about the 2,378 people the Clintons murdered on their rise to the top.

UPDATE: Still more from Tim at Crack the Bell. Ms. Iacovelli has an interesting Santorum connection via the private bank that gave the Santorums a whopping loan to buy an expensive house in Virginia. You know, the house where the Santorums "cyber-schooled" their children with the help of some $67,000.00 from the taxpayers of Pennsylvania.

2006-08-14T19:39:00.000-04:00

Spinning for al Qaeda

Yesterday morning I caught a bit of John McCain's appearance on This Week with George Stephanopoulos. While I can't find a transcript for that show, I'm pretty sure I remember McCain saying something to the effect that America's withdrawing from Iraq would be a victory for al Qaeda. And it occurred to me that it was pathetic that McCain is so wedded to seeing his own foreign policy vindicated that he'd be doing pre-emptive spinning for al Qaeda. You know, I'm pretty sure that al Qaeda itself will spin anything America does as a victory for al Qaeda. So it really isn't necessary for McCain to do their spinning for them.

As it turns out, McCain has a history of that kind of thing: Here he is giving advice to al Qaeda.

Dick Cheney of course also has a history of spinning for al Qaeda:

CHENEY [video clip]: If we follow Congressman [John P.] Murtha's [D-PA] advice and withdraw from Iraq the same way we withdrew from Beirut in 1983 and Somalia in 1993, we will simply validate the Al Qaeda strategy and invite more terrorist attacks in the future.

Naturally, Cheney spun Joe Lieberman's defeat as a victory for al Qaeda:

Cheney suggested Wednesday that Lamont's victory might encourage "the al Qaeda types" who want to "break the will of the American people in terms of our ability to stay in the fight and complete the task."

How do you suppose all those Connecticut voters like being accused of encouraging al Qaeda by the likes of Dick Cheney, who couldn't be more helpful to al Qaeda if they were paying him lobbying fees?

Joe Lieberman has also taken to doing al Qaeda's publicity work:

After British officials disclosed Thursday that they had stopped a terrorist airline bombing plot, Lieberman warned that Lamont's call for a phased withdrawal of troops from Iraq would be "taken as a tremendous victory" by terrorists.

Which is weird 'cause Joe himself, in his desperate last-minute scrabbling for votes, said that he himself "now felt a 'heavy responsibility' to end the war quickly," and said that he opposed an open-ended commitment in Iraq. So if I understand Joe correctly, if Lamont is elected and takes steps to end the war, that will be a "tremendous victory" for al Qaeda, but if Joe is elected and takes steps to end the war . . . not a victory for al Qaeda.

With flacks like John and Dick and Joe, al Qaeda needn't bother releasing any more of those videotaped statements. It can just sit back and let John and Dick and Joe trumpet its "victories."

UPDATE: Glenn Greenwald was evidently thinking along the same lines yesterday (great minds, etc - heh); here's his list of right wing flacks for the Islamofascists.

2006-08-14T18:53:00.000-04:00

Shorter Brad Warthen

Connecticut voters are stoopid.

Seriously, can anyone hazard a guess as to why Warthen is willing to sacrifice unlimited numbers of American soldiers to bring democracy to Iraq, yet pitches a fit when American voters exercise their rights? I just don't get it.

Also, note the way Warthen pretends to despise partisan politics even while he consistently regurgitates Republican talking points.

2006-08-14T18:45:00.000-04:00

Shorter Atlas Jugs interview with John Bolton

"But enough about me. What do YOU think about me?"

tbogg, Sadly, No!, and Digby have more on the nuckin' futz Ms. Jugs.

2006-08-09T18:59:00.000-04:00

BOW before your furry masters!

At first I thought this article was a joke:

Aug. 9, 2006 — Kevin Lafferty is a smart, cautious, thoughtful scientist who doesn't hate cats, but he has put forth a provocative theory that suggests that a clever cat parasite may alter human cultures on a massive scale.

His phone hasn't stopped ringing since he published one of the strangest research papers to come out of the mill in quite awhile.

The parasite, Toxoplasma gondii, has been transmitted indirectly from cats to roughly half the people on the planet, and it has been shown to affect human personalities in different ways.

Research has shown that women who are infected with the parasite tend to be more warm, outgoing and attentive to others, while infected men tend to be less intelligent and probably a bit boring. But both men and women who are infected are more prone to feeling guilty and insecure.

But apparently it's serious. This is really the best part:

Toxoplasma, he notes, is "frighteningly amazing."

It can change the personality of a rat so much that the rat surrenders itself to a cat, just as the parasite wanted.

The parasite's eggs are shed in a cat's feces. A rat comes along, eats the feces, and becomes infected. The behavior of the rat undergoes a dramatic change, making the rat more adventuresome, and more likely to hang out around cats.

The cat eats the rat, and the parasite completes its life cycle

.

Since most humans do not eat cat feces, I'm not clear on how Toxoplasma makes humans do cats' bidding. But I don't really have time to chat about it. I'm feeling kind of guilty and insecure right now. I. Must. Feed. The cats. Now.

2006-08-09T18:35:00.000-04:00

Rove tosses anchor to drowning man

From TPMCafe:

George Stephanopoulos reports:

According to a close Lieberman adviser, the President's political guru, Karl Rove, has reached out to the Lieberman camp with a message straight from the Oval Office: "The boss wants to help. Whatever we can do, we will do."

Just yesterday, I was still saying that even though even though Lieberman's been consistently wrong about Iraq, and he's made some indefensible statements recently, I basically respected him. But not after last night. I agree with what Josh Marshall says here.

What part of "no" does Joe Lieberman not understand?

Btw, check out Brad Warthen's entirely predictable response.

2006-08-05T13:22:00.000-04:00

Bargain basement neoconnery

Brad Warthen, editorial page editor of The (Columbia, SC) State newspaper, on "the coming war with Iran" (the idea of which he seems to relish):

We're going to be at war with Iran sooner or later -- sooner, if we act in the best interests of our own country and civilization as a whole. We can wait until the dark cloud out of Mordor assumes mushroom shape and consumes a few of our cities, courtesy of Hezbollah Delivery Service, or sooner.

Maybe he's angling for a job writing speeches for Condi Rice.

Discussing an incident described in Mark Bowden's Black Hawk Down in which a Somali used civilians as human shields, Mr. W says:

What do you do about someone who is evil enough, craven enough, hateful enough to do something like that? I've come to the conclusion -- and it's a difficult one for me -- that the only solution is to kill him -- and every one of his fellows.

Why's it difficult for Mr. Warthen, I wonder? He's not going to be doing any of the wet work.

But I sure hope killing ALL the bad guys is not the ONLY solution (solution to what, for that matter?). It seems kind of impractical to me. We can't even kill all the cockroaches. Or eradicate the clap. Or win "the war on drugs." So it seems to me that if you actually think terrorism, or any other -ism can be solved by killing each and every one of the -ists, you're delusional. Or you're just setting yourself up for failure. Failure which you can then blame on everyone but yourself.

2006-08-03T23:17:00.000-04:00

Random funny

This made me laugh.

Via Atrios.

2006-08-03T22:11:00.000-04:00

Oops

I can hardly blame the John Coles of the right for enjoying a nice tasty glass of schadenfreudenberry wine (stolen from Balloon Juice commenter Krista) as they savor this news.

I have trouble articulating exactly how I feel about the whole thing, maybe because my feelings are so mixed. Personally I found that photoshopped picture of Joe Lieberman in blackface (reproduced here) to be unfunny, a complete dud as an attempt at satire, and yes, offensive. Offensively over-the-top as a criticism of anything Lieberman has done in his campaign. I wouldn't reject the use of of such caricatures out of hand, but certainly in this instance, it seemed disproportionate and inappropriate under the circumstances, which circumstances should include Lieberman's civil rights record as a whole.

All that said, I think many of the people on the right raising holy hell about this are big fat stinking hypocrites who don't give a rat's ass about civil rights or offending black people (I'm lookin' your way, Michelle Malkin). Moreover, I wholeheartedly support Jane Hamsher's (and Jeff Goldstein's, and and anyone else's) right to be offensive, outrageous, provocative, edgy, profane, etc, on their blogs. More power to'em. But still. When you're that closely associated with a hot Senate campaign, and the race is tight, and you've not hesitated to accuse other people of racism and you know you're under scrutiny . . . well, if that is the climate and you still think it's a good idea to put up a caricature of the other candidate in blackface, you've had a major brain fart. To say the least. Moreover, I know, oh yes I KNOW in my heart, that if the shoe was on the other foot - if a blogger associated with a Republican candidate did the same thing - many of my fave lefty bloggers would be howling with outrage.

Of course, I strongly suspect most right wing bloggers would refuse to acknowledge any wrongdoing. So I give Ms. Hamsher credit for doing the right thing by promptly removing the picture from her post and apologizing.

I don't think it's possible to reconcile being an uninhibited Internet flame-thrower and take-no-prisoners type of blogger with being a very public campaign operative (paid or unpaid). That's why when Hillary Clinton approached ME to be her blog liaison, I said, "no thanks." Because I didn't want to give up my freedom to bring you, my global readership, my uncensored thoughts. So Senator Clinton had to settle for Peter Daou.

Anyway . . . my point is, if you're going to be really offensive to a lot of people, at least try to be funny. Or at least don't do it when you're enmeshed in a tight campaign. That's all I'm sayin'.

Update: Steve at No More Mister Nice Blog has a fun post about the aforementioned big fat stinking hypocrites.

2006-08-03T01:31:00.000-04:00

Not that being drunk is an excuse but . . .

"God Almighty does not hear the prayer of a Jew."- The Reverend Bailey Smith, former head of the Southern Baptist Convention, presumably stone sober.

"The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world." - Mel Gibson, drunk.

(courtesy the Reverend V.I. Bezark)