March 25, 2009
Seriously, though, I'm a huge fan of Bruce's and wish the happy couple the best, and I'm not just saying that because he could totally kick my ass.
March 24, 2009
March 19, 2009
Anyone who knows anything about these things ["flashbang" grenades] knows they can't [kill, injure, or maim]
Watch from about 3:45-5:45
I have loathed Chuck Schumer ever since. I'm embarrassed to say that he's a senator for my state. "Flashbangs" are explosives. I don't know if anyone's ever died from one, but there have been numerous injuries from them (just do a Google search). If you think they're harmless, watch these two videos. You'll note that the "flashbang" that Schumer thinks is so harmless sets off the alarm in the car across the street.
And the second one:
At one point during the hearings, I believe that Schumer maintained that he could hold a "flashbang" in his hand with no problem (which is why they ask the fellow in the first video above if he would feel comfortable holding it). Clearly, you wouldn't want to do that.
1) Liddy was not the CEO when the bonuses were drafted. He made that clear to the committee, and added that he would not have done them this way. Despite this, Lynch still went after him personally, so much so that Liddy took offense. "Offense was meant, Sir," replied Lynch.
2) Liddy was there voluntarily, because he was asked, much like he was asked to take over the failing AIG, by the government. His salary as CEO? One dollar.
3) One committe member said (condescendingly, I thought) that Liddy should just not pay the bonuses, pointing out that the bonuses amount to only about a tenth of one percent of the bailout money AIG received. I guess the idea is that because it's not that much, it's not worth causing all this trouble. The trouble is, you could argue that same point the other way: since it's only a fraction of the bailout money, and is contractually required, it's not worth causing all this trouble. Just pay it and move on. Institute measures to prevent it in the future, if you want, but this is done. Seriously, how much is it costing in time and money just to hold the hearings, not to mention the probable resulting lawsuits should either AIG or congress try to renege on the contracts. I'm no happier than anyone else that some of these people are getting bonuses, but a contract is a contract. I think it's a dangerous precedent to let congress decide what contracts should or should not be upheld.
4) So...Democratic congressmen are going after the current CEO of AIG, even though he wasn't presiding over the company at the time everything happened? The same group of congressmen who keep insisting that the current crisis isn't the fault of the current administration, and keep reminding people that they inherited it? Really? Pot...kettle...you know the drill.
5) I can't say this enough: these bonuses are contractual. Not only are they contractual, but the legislation, written by Congress, that provided the bailout monies to AIG had language in it to preserve the bonuses!! Chris Dodd and Barack Obama were the top two recepients of AIG contributions from 2000-2008, so one might wonder how that language got in there...but I digress. All that is happening here is that Congress is trying to deflect their own incompetence in passing this bill (obviously without having read it) by going after Liddy, who frankly is the only innocent in the whole shebang.
6) This didn't happen today, but I just wanted to say that Chuck Schumer is a miserable fuckin' lowlife for a lot of reasons, but lately it's because of his statement that if the bonuses weren't returned voluntarily, "we will do it for you." Frankly, I'm surprised we even heard the statement, considering that his head was, as usual, up his ass. Someone should remind this assdart, who recently remarked that the American people didn't care about "porky" amendments, that like AIG after receiving bailout money, he also is responsible to the American people! I wonder how he would respond if he was asked to give back his salary because of Congress's miserable approval numbers and track record, including failure to prevent this economic crisis. It would actually be easier to influence that money, I think--let's just not vote him back to office. I just can't express strongly enough my dislike for Chuck Schemer.
March 18, 2009
Wasn't that a punchline in Anchorman: The Ron Burgandy Story?
Pssst...you're the president now...take off the training wheels.
Remind me again why Bush, McCain, Palin, et. al were considered to be so dumb?
Hat tip: Infidels are Cool
March 14, 2009
March 12, 2009
So why on earth should I have to pay taxes to help bail out those people who didn't take the same care that I did?
I've denied myself one of the most basic aspects of the American dream--one's own house--to avoid overreaching and making a costly financial mistake, and now with the administration's decision to bail out homeowners, many of whom spent beyond their means, I find myself literally paying for someone else's.
March 11, 2009
First of all, most of what's there is just an ad hominem attack. It translates roughly to "against the man." That's when you attack the person rather the view the person holds, generally because it's usually easier to attack the person. The idea is that if you can prove the person unacceptable in some way, people will assume the person's position is unacceptable, too. Fuller here goes after David Brooks of the NY Times, calling him a "sore loser" and speculating that he has "girly-man arms" and is just jealous. Again, it's easy to attack a person. I could, for example point out that Michelle Obama at times looks a little like she might be a guy in drag. Or that at other times, she looks like a younger version of Aunt Esther (LaWanda Page) from "Sanford & Son." ("Barack, you fish-eyed fool!") But I wouldn't do that.
The other thing that irks me about Fuller is that she goes on to talk about Michelle Obama's place as a female hero:
Because if there's one thing this country needs right now besides a strong and principled president instituting change, it's a superhero, and the non-sexist American public will take a female one.
There's a long history of strong female warriors in Western culture, from the goddess Athena who was a wise warrior (how Michelle-like), to the the Brit chick Boadicea, to young French babe, Joan of Arc, to Queen Elizabeth 1 to tough bicepped protector-mom, Sarah Connor in Terminator to Xena, the Princess Warrior to ... WonderWoman.
So...let me get this straight. Fuller is championing the strong, female warrior.
I just have to ask: where was this sentiment when another strong female was running for vice-president? I mean, arguably, Sarah Palin fits the definition of strong female warrior much more than Michelle Obama does. Palin quite literally could bring home the bacon, fry it up in the pan, and never, never let you forget you're a man. (Admit it, you were singing along with that.) And yet, Fuller was one of Palin's most vehement critics (again, mostly ad hominem attacks). She even went so far as to criticize Palin's running for office because--good heavens!--her daughter Bristol might end up in the spotlight. This is supposed to be evidence that Palin running for office proves she is a bad mother. Can you imagine?! A president or vice-president's child in the spotlight?! It's a good thing that never happened to the Bush twins, or Chelsea Clinton, or Patti Davis, or Ron Reagan, Jr., or Amy Carter, or Susan Ford (who had her prom in the White House!), or Tricia Nixon, or Julie Nixon, or Luci Baines Johnson, or Caroline Kennedy, or John John Kennedy, or even Magret Truman. And that's just the presidential children...
I'm always irked by those who swear up and down that they are feminists, damn it, and yet are so willing to lay down those principles when a strong woman comes along with whom they disagree ideologically. Fuller is one of the worst kind of hypocrites--one who, at her core, truly believes she isn't one.
This entire fracas was set off by the president himself, who lowered his office by targeting a private citizen by name.Of course, many people--me included--believe this was a calculated move. Rush is a...polarizing figure. Setting him up as the Voice of the Republican Party only exacerbates the discord currently present. (Witness the reactions of certain party members as examples.) Divide and conquer. And now that it looks like the Fairness Doctrine isn't going to go through, I'm just waiting for The Night of the Long Microphones. (If you don't get the allusion, check here.)
One last thought: heads should roll throughout the administration, but I think I'd start with someone Paglia didn't even mention.--Robert Gibbs. The only reason I might not fire this incompetent is that he might get replaced with Bill Burton, who's even more of a tool.
**Sorry for the title, but the "Rush" jokes have all been done to death, so I didn't even try.
Hat tip to the angelic Petitedov
March 10, 2009
President Barack Obama said Tuesday that American children should go to school longer — either later in the day or into the summer — if they're going to have any chance competing for jobs and paychecks against foreign kids.
Bet those little moppets that sang about how "Obama's gonna change it" never saw that coming.
March 09, 2009
Think what you want about the issue, but I'm getting tired of the tripe that this man throws out there, and which passes for insightful dialogue.
March 07, 2009
Those of us who consider ourselves moderates — moderate-conservative, in my case — are forced to confront the reality that Barack Obama is not who we thought he was.You think?
If only there had been voices of reason that could have warned you...
This is like going on an all-night bender and waking up next to someone you don't quite recognize, and making up an excuse while gathering your clothes together so you don't have to stay.
Except this time you're not leaving for the next four years.
March 06, 2009
My only criticism is that it uses the invention of the auto as an example of "American" ingenuity. (It doesn't specify that this is America, but it obviously is supposed to be.) The auto was invented by a Frenchman (steam-powered) and a German (internal-combustion engine).
It's still a damn good cartoon.