Friday, April 16, 2004

A big publicity stunt?

Maybe not, but there's no denying that Air America has received some free publicity thanks to the recent problems.

Thursday, April 15, 2004

Take your medicine

Some people don't like Ann Coulter. Tough - she's good for you, especially in this column.

If I don't publish this, who will?

Ya know, we men have been under fire by feminists for a long time as oppressors. And there are biologists who suggest that the male of the species is nothing but an adaptation toward warding off parasites - we exist to protect women genetically. Gosh, I sure feel special.

Even the Bible talks about using us guys for spare parts. You know, that rib thing (ouch! - didn't Adam have any zits or moles or hemorrhoids to work with instead?)

But wait a minute - men and women have the same number of ribs. Hmm, how to square this with Genesis? I've got it! - human males don't have a baculum, so that must be what was used!

What's a baculum? Beth, my source for biological esoterica, shows us an example here.

Scale this up to the size of the bull and entirely new products become practical. Consider the canes offered here - as noted, "the bulls don't give these up without a fight". Or if you prefer, there's a "pizzle putter", or "saco de toro", or this whip.

Fortunately we humans (even Skoptzies) are largely exempt from supplying raw materials for such products. Not even for circumcision trimmings. (Although I have heard it alleged that that's why rabbis are wealthier than priests - the rabbis get to keep the tips. But to my knowledge no one has turned these into commercial products, notwithstanding a story about a wallet made of foreskins which turned into a suitcase when you rubbed it).

Not that circumcision should be taken that lightly. It's possible to foul it up, and the results are horrible as documented here. Other related issues are discussed here.

Back to that baculum thing. Do other primates have them? Why or why not? Does this tell us anything about evolution?

Yes, I have a day job. No, I'm not a writer.

It's the bomb!

Forget about French toast - how about Jew waffles?

Alright, that's too obscure even for bloggers. It's just two Googlebombs tied together, partly inspired by Emily. The first part helps to displace an anti-Semitic site from being the first site retrieved for "Jew", and the second is given in hopes the reference to John Kerry will come up each time someone searches for "waffles".

And it's not as if Kerry isn't part Jewish.

Monday, April 12, 2004

Fisk it yourself

Andy Rooney tells us that "Our soldiers in Iraq aren't heroes".

I won't publish what I want to tell Andy Rooney.

Sunday, April 11, 2004

EXTRA - JFK responsible for his own assassination - EXTRA

How do we know that? Well, if we think like Jim Pinkerton it's easy. Presidents are threatened all the time, and according to Pinkerton we get to pick out which threats are credible and specific after the fact. QED.

He has a unique interpretation of specificity. He thinks that the title of the recently released PDB, "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States", is specific. Just what would it take to be vague?

Here's some more wisdom:
Kerrey was bound by the same strict rules of classification as Ben-Veniste, but he's a free-spirited war hero and so didn't care that he was breaking those rules. "In the spirit of further declassification," he announced, "this is what the August 6th memo said to the president: that the FBI indicates patterns of suspicious activity in the United States consistent with preparations for hijacking. That's the language of the memo that was briefed to the president on the 6th of August."

Ouch again. "Hijacking" is pretty darn specific - which seems to contradict Rice's assertion that the intelligence was "frustratingly vague" as to the "manner of attack."
And weren't hijackings already against the law? Or do we only worry about the ones that might be an "attack inside the United States"?

And as long as I'm cussing him there's this too:
If you knew that President Franklin D. Roosevelt had received a memo a month before Pearl Harbor entitled, "Japanese Determined to Attack the United States in the Pacific," and that he had done nothing about that information, would that knowledge change your perception of FDR as a wise war leader?

Roosevelt received no such memo, of course, but President George W. Bush got a blunt warning five weeks before 9/11 and he did little or nothing. He even presided over a stand- down in preparations, concentrating on other concerns.
Of all people, he brings up Roosevelt. Problem #1 - who says FDR was such a wise war leader? Problem #2 - who says he didn't see such a memo? I wonder what Pinkerton would have had to say about it if Republicans had subjected Roosevelt to the kind of political harassment that Bush has been receiving since he took on Afghanistan, but the Republicans had some class:
At some point, private character and public duty will converge. If the false dichotomy is accepted and nurtured among our people, the results of such a convergence could be disastrous to our nation.

And so, a final story. In 1944, in the last year of W.W.II, Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York was the nominee for president running against Franklin Roosevelt. Roosevelt was seeking a fourth term and, even though he was very popular, he was vulnerable because of his age and apparent personal illness.

All Dewey needed was a knockout issue to make the race close and, possibly, win. And his aides found him one. Dewey was told that the army had broken the Japanese code before Pearl Harbor and knew, or should have known, of the impending attack. This was a serious issue and would most assuredly weaken Roosevelt. Tom Dewey was an ambitious man. He was a bit vain. He had some character flaws. And he wanted to be president.

While he was deciding how to use the issue, he was visited by George C. Marshall, five-star general and commander of all American forces. Marshall told Dewey that he was right. We had cracked the code. We might very well have made a mistake before Pearl Harbor. But what Dewey did not know, Marshall told him, was that the Japanese were still using the same code. Our enemy did not know we had broken it. Because they were still using it, we were able to plan our attacks with near strategic and logistical perfection. Marshall couldn't stop Dewey from using this issue, but if he did use it, the Japanese would change the code.

This was a moment of convergence for Tom Dewey. He did not hesitate. He did not assume a smug self righteousness about the people's right to know. He assured Gen. Marshall that neither he nor any one on his staff would breathe a word about the code. Tom Dewey kept his word -- and he lost the election. But he showed leadership in a moment of crisis. It was leadership based on character.
Wouldn't it have been fun to go through all of the intercepted Japanese communications to see if some political points could be scored? Yeah, we could have been talking about this in the spring and summer of 1944 - to hell with preparing for D-Day.

I used to think Jim Pinkerton had a clue. No more.

Fun with the FCC

After noting Janet Jackson's "cork soaker" skit below and getting a comment speaking of "fig pluckers" I thought it's time to collect a list of phrases to annoy the FCC. (what do you call someone who works for the FCC? A FCCer? How do you pronounce it?)

Mortar forkers? Them other truckers? (as heard in "Speedball Tucker" by Jim Croce).

Somehow the word "funk" winds up mispronounced a lot. Wild Cherry's "Play that Funky Music" (wma) and Extreme's "Get the Funk Out" are two examples that come to mind.

Then there's Bob and Tom's Dickens Cider.

This wouldn't be complete without Howard Stern's "Sons of the Beach", an even dumber ripoff of "Baywatch".

You can do better - let's hear it!

The most annoying ad on TV

Yeah, I know - I shouldn't be watching it anyway. But until I break the habit I'm subject to seeing truly obnoxious ads, and this one in particular is the corker. Really - what would you do if you saw someone with that stupid expression all the time? Even that whistled song in the background is obnoxious.

"Natural male enhancement"? I thought it was just another Viagra knockoff, but this concoction alleges that it actually enlarges the penis.

Does it? Beats me. It's not a prescription drug and there have been no clinical trials, and I haven't tried it. But according to the company, the most improved men claim improvements of length and circumference totaling 4 inches. Hmm - maybe this is a personal problem, but I'm guessing that most of us would notice that.

How would it work, anyway? "Love muscle" is a figure of speech - exercises might change the angle of attack, but nothing else a partner will notice IMO. Weight loss would help though.

Highly localized fat deposits? I don't know how roadworthy that would be if it worked, and IMO anything could affect fat deposition with such precision would long ago have been adapted to breasts or butts.

Increased elasticity? Not unless you want to make mad love to Gumby. Buckling would become a problem at some point.

But hey, we're still free enough to indulge in such products if it suits us. The ingredients are listed in the article linked above, and don't appear to involve endangered animals. So I guess they're harmless enough.

After that I'm sure you're ready for more pelvic wisdom NWA style. You can start here and follow the links. Hey, at least you're not watching TV and that stupid commercial.

Janet Jackson on SNL

Janet Jackson managed to contain herself last night on Saturday Night Live. The show started with her emulating Condoleezza Rice vs. the inquisitors - when she was asked a question she got all tense and then ripped open her dress to show her right bra cup and hollered "Live from New York, it's Saturday Night!" (When did Ms. Rice testify - Thursday? This must have been a last-minute idea).

Then she showed some "home movies" during her monologue. One showed a little girl playing in a wading pool when suddenly the right side of her bikini top fell down. CNN has been repeating both of these clips, and I'm sure they're all around the web by now.

A later skit had to have been designed to needle the FCC. Jackson and others were touring a winery watching as the workers "soaked corks". They kept it up with about every, um, conjugation of the words and JJ broke character several times trying to make sure she said her lines right.

At one point two of the workers reminisced about the day when they learned they could soak each others' corks at the same time. Was it in 1968? No, it was '70. But it might have been earlier... I'm not sure why they stopped short, but it was clear that they had the FCC's number.

UPDATE: I must have missed part of it - see this.