Thursday, June 24, 2004
Bill Clinton in a nutshell
From Best of the Web Today:: "I last saw Clinton near my own house in the celebrated Notting Hill district of London in 2002. He decided to do a walkabout, and plunged into the crowd, an activity he enormously and palpably enjoyed, and which delighted everybody. No one ever matched him as a simple campaigner. It was the thing he did best--perhaps the only thing he did well. It might be said, indeed, that he never did anything else. In Notting Hill he was not running for office. The locals were not his voters. But he behaved as if they were and they loved it. The old con master was in his element. He found himself in a pub and ordered drinks all round. All cheered. The news spread to the vast crowd outside, and it cheered too. Adrenaline racing, fists thumping chests, hugging and handshaking, wisecracking and slogan swapping, Clinton worked that crowd for twenty minutes, leaving it hoarse and exhausted, delighted and deeply impressed when he swept off in his limo. The only unhappy man was the bartender, who was never paid for ol' Bill's round."
Trust me...
A lot of people probably have greenhorns working for them for the summer. Many of them are spoiled kids, boss's family or other unworthies good only for hazing. So get them good.
First you prime them. Send them after the prop wash, or the left-handed crescent wrenches, or send them back to the warehouse for screws with heads on the other end ("These go on the other side, stupid!"). After hours, take them on a snipe hunt.
Then when it looks like they start to suspect an inkling of a shadow of a clue, send them to the store to get you a DVD rewinder.
Yep, someone is selling them. Thanks to Gizmodo for telling us, I think.
First you prime them. Send them after the prop wash, or the left-handed crescent wrenches, or send them back to the warehouse for screws with heads on the other end ("These go on the other side, stupid!"). After hours, take them on a snipe hunt.
Then when it looks like they start to suspect an inkling of a shadow of a clue, send them to the store to get you a DVD rewinder.
Yep, someone is selling them. Thanks to Gizmodo for telling us, I think.
You be the judge
What is the appropriate penalty for someone who sells 30 million AOL customers to spammers?
I propose that he should stay in prison until he has transcribed each of the spams longhand, then written a separate letter of apology to each recipient for each spam in longhand.
I propose that he should stay in prison until he has transcribed each of the spams longhand, then written a separate letter of apology to each recipient for each spam in longhand.
Monday, June 21, 2004
Second chance....
Just in case you didn't follow Glenn Reynolds' link to Rand Simberg, you get another chance here. Now read it all, especially if you are a journalist.
Sunday, June 20, 2004
Eat Your Fugu and Die of Cancer Like the Rest Of Us
It appears that the famously poisonous puffer fish aren't poisonous themselves - it comes from what they eat.
Title and link stolen from Steven Saporito over at SashaCastel.com: Fugu? Hai!
Title and link stolen from Steven Saporito over at SashaCastel.com: Fugu? Hai!
Just desserts
Bill Clinton couldn't disappear with decency for a few years like Richard Nixon - he has to keep sticking his his head back out. That would be OK if he had learned a few things since then, but no. His book got a review in the NY Times which said in part "sloppy, self-indulgent and often eye-crossingly dull-the sound of one man prattling away, not for the reader, but for himself and some distant recording angel of history". He rages in a BBC interview because the interviewer brought up the most memorable occurrence in his Presidency. And he speaks of his impeachment fight as a "badge of honor"..
Bill Clinton was not just a lawyer, but a former law professor. He lied under oath. The subject of the lie was immaterial - he was legally compelled to answer the questions truthfully and he didn't. He knew he needed to tell the truth, or ought to have, and he didn't. Case closed. That he was also a slut (where are the medical records?), and grossly irresponsible (were there no *discreet* Dem women who'd have him?) is just gravy.
But suppose we did, as the Democrats insisted, assume that this "did not rise to the level of impeachment" (an awkward phrase that became popular through Dem choreography). There's a case for that, but not for his subsequent behavior. That solipsistic jackass had his minions attack the fundamental morality of the US, and it's still going on today (if they didn't do it at his command, then the decent thing would have been for Clinton to call them off. But that would have taken some class). "It's just lying about sex". "It was just a blow job!", ad infinitum, just to save him from well-deserved ignominy. It's as if current charges against a certain celebrity were proven and he started a national campaign with a slogan "Boys - the other white meat".
But lying about sex was trivial?. Right. If it's so trivial, then why lie about it? "So I got a BJ, big deal - what's the problem?" Some even tried to get us to believe that in the same act, Ms. Lewinski had had sex but he had not.
The fact is that lying about sex was critical to his election hopes. That's what inspired him and Hillary to appear on "60 Minutes" for their little show of solidarity after the Gennifer Flowers situation. That's why he regularly had his little photo ops in front of left-wing churches with a Bible in his hand, while truly religious men like Ronald Reagan quit going to avoid burdening the churches with the security issues. He knew very well that his pluralities against two of the least charismatic men the Republicans had ever run might not have held had more voters known what kind of man he really was, and thought that Monica's behavior was more than an essential social skill.
Then there was that "sheet-sniffer" Kenneth W. Starr. What were Starr's offenses? He *published* what Clinton *did*, in accordance with his mandate. Now tell me again, who's the perv? By Clinton's standards, we should have let the "In Cold Blood" killers go and locked up Truman Capote instead.
Well, let's try this one - lying about sex was heroic! He did it to save his family! He was Tom Sawyer, lying to save Becky Thatcher's delicate behind from old man Dobbins ("Oh Tom, how could you be so noble!"). Sorry pal, but you don't save your family by lying about being a slut, you save it by not being a slut in the first place.
But hey, maybe he and Hillary had an "understanding", and her reported reactions were for show. There's still something to object to. I'd think that even a cursory look at this woman's background would have screamed "Indiscreet!" But as Gary Aldrich had already informed us in a book the Clintons tried hard to suppress, he had abandoned normal FBI screening practices for his staffers. So he didn't even have access to an FBI file about her.
Saddest of all was watching the Democratic Party play along with it. What a !@#$!@ disgrace to see them lined up defending him, which should have demonstrated to even the most naive of us that the Democratic Party abandoned all pretense that it was about anything but its own propagation.
Look, I'm no Hillary fan. I could feel sorry for her husband whoever he was, and if he had taken his medicine like a man I could have mellowed out on this. But if he made a deal with the devil let him pay the price just like she does.
Likewise I'm no Al Gore fan, dating back well before his haunting of the White House. Since then things have only gotten worse. I could give Clinton and the cynical yet sane Dems who supported him some points for doing what they could to keep Gore out of the White House if they hadn't supported him in the subsequent election.
But the day a President's private affairs get in the way of discharging their duties as President, and he hijacks the mechanisms of govt to defend himself to the detriment of such things as national defense ("Bin Laden? Save it in case we need to push Monica off the front page") is the day the President should resign. Bill Clinton did not do that. He failed to live up to the standards set by Richard Nixon, and thus must be judged as a failure.
Bill Clinton was not just a lawyer, but a former law professor. He lied under oath. The subject of the lie was immaterial - he was legally compelled to answer the questions truthfully and he didn't. He knew he needed to tell the truth, or ought to have, and he didn't. Case closed. That he was also a slut (where are the medical records?), and grossly irresponsible (were there no *discreet* Dem women who'd have him?) is just gravy.
But suppose we did, as the Democrats insisted, assume that this "did not rise to the level of impeachment" (an awkward phrase that became popular through Dem choreography). There's a case for that, but not for his subsequent behavior. That solipsistic jackass had his minions attack the fundamental morality of the US, and it's still going on today (if they didn't do it at his command, then the decent thing would have been for Clinton to call them off. But that would have taken some class). "It's just lying about sex". "It was just a blow job!", ad infinitum, just to save him from well-deserved ignominy. It's as if current charges against a certain celebrity were proven and he started a national campaign with a slogan "Boys - the other white meat".
But lying about sex was trivial?. Right. If it's so trivial, then why lie about it? "So I got a BJ, big deal - what's the problem?" Some even tried to get us to believe that in the same act, Ms. Lewinski had had sex but he had not.
The fact is that lying about sex was critical to his election hopes. That's what inspired him and Hillary to appear on "60 Minutes" for their little show of solidarity after the Gennifer Flowers situation. That's why he regularly had his little photo ops in front of left-wing churches with a Bible in his hand, while truly religious men like Ronald Reagan quit going to avoid burdening the churches with the security issues. He knew very well that his pluralities against two of the least charismatic men the Republicans had ever run might not have held had more voters known what kind of man he really was, and thought that Monica's behavior was more than an essential social skill.
Then there was that "sheet-sniffer" Kenneth W. Starr. What were Starr's offenses? He *published* what Clinton *did*, in accordance with his mandate. Now tell me again, who's the perv? By Clinton's standards, we should have let the "In Cold Blood" killers go and locked up Truman Capote instead.
Well, let's try this one - lying about sex was heroic! He did it to save his family! He was Tom Sawyer, lying to save Becky Thatcher's delicate behind from old man Dobbins ("Oh Tom, how could you be so noble!"). Sorry pal, but you don't save your family by lying about being a slut, you save it by not being a slut in the first place.
But hey, maybe he and Hillary had an "understanding", and her reported reactions were for show. There's still something to object to. I'd think that even a cursory look at this woman's background would have screamed "Indiscreet!" But as Gary Aldrich had already informed us in a book the Clintons tried hard to suppress, he had abandoned normal FBI screening practices for his staffers. So he didn't even have access to an FBI file about her.
Saddest of all was watching the Democratic Party play along with it. What a !@#$!@ disgrace to see them lined up defending him, which should have demonstrated to even the most naive of us that the Democratic Party abandoned all pretense that it was about anything but its own propagation.
Look, I'm no Hillary fan. I could feel sorry for her husband whoever he was, and if he had taken his medicine like a man I could have mellowed out on this. But if he made a deal with the devil let him pay the price just like she does.
Likewise I'm no Al Gore fan, dating back well before his haunting of the White House. Since then things have only gotten worse. I could give Clinton and the cynical yet sane Dems who supported him some points for doing what they could to keep Gore out of the White House if they hadn't supported him in the subsequent election.
But the day a President's private affairs get in the way of discharging their duties as President, and he hijacks the mechanisms of govt to defend himself to the detriment of such things as national defense ("Bin Laden? Save it in case we need to push Monica off the front page") is the day the President should resign. Bill Clinton did not do that. He failed to live up to the standards set by Richard Nixon, and thus must be judged as a failure.
Eat like a Filipino
See what you're missing?
More here.
BALUT, for those still blissfully ignorant non-Pinoys out there, is a fertilized duck egg. It is commonly sold with salt in a piece of newspaper, much like English fish and chips, by street vendors usually after dark, presumably so you can't see how gross it is. It's meant to be an aphrodisiac, although I can't imagine anything more likely to dispel sexual desire than crunching on a partially-formed baby duck swimming in noxious fluid. The embryo in the egg comes in varying stages of development, but basically it is not considered macho to eat oneSorry about that wanton culture-centric editorializing - I'm just quoting the post.
without fully discernable feathers, beak, and claws. Some say these crunchy bits are the best. Others prefer just to drink the so-called 'soup', the vile,pungent liquid that surrounds the aforementioned feathery fetus... excuse me, I have to go and throw up
now. I'll be back in a minute.
More here.
Thursday, June 17, 2004
Another reason to support nuclear power
Because it's our inalienable right, and we must not fall into the hands of the Zionists.
Stolen from Celluloid/Protein/Goldstein Wisdom, which offers another take here.
Stolen from Celluloid/Protein/Goldstein Wisdom, which offers another take here.
Thus spake Nietzsche
"Behold the superflous. They are always sick. They vomit their gall and call it a newspaper." - Twilight of the Idols
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." - Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Part II, On Those Who Are Sublime
We should consider every day lost on which we have not danced at least once. And we should call every truth false which was not accompanied by at least one laugh.
As ripped off from Somewhere Over the Rainbough.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." - Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Part II, On Those Who Are Sublime
We should consider every day lost on which we have not danced at least once. And we should call every truth false which was not accompanied by at least one laugh.
As ripped off from Somewhere Over the Rainbough.
Moonbat for a day
Aw, who needs proof? - let's just start making accusations, then keep repeating them until they become true.
For instance, let's try this one. Michael Moore paid the jailers at Abu Ghraib to act up on videotape and then send him the tapes so he could use them against George W. Bush and the war. That's how he came up with the tapes he has and apparently included in his crockumentary "Fahrenheit 9/11".
Then the Pentagon found out about them, reprimanded the bad guys and released the tapes to steal Moore's thunder.
Crazy, eh? Maybe, but not totally unprecedented - the left fights dirty and always has. For instance, when the UFCW was trying to unionize Food Lion a few years ago, they had a man get employed there for the express purpose of setting up unhealthful situations in hopes of catching Food Lion employes mishandling them.
And I seem to recall that back when the Democrats controlled Congress, certain allegations against Republicans were so incredibly serious that they demanded investigation despite a lack of evidence to justify it.
Oh lookie here, from Drudge:
For instance, let's try this one. Michael Moore paid the jailers at Abu Ghraib to act up on videotape and then send him the tapes so he could use them against George W. Bush and the war. That's how he came up with the tapes he has and apparently included in his crockumentary "Fahrenheit 9/11".
Then the Pentagon found out about them, reprimanded the bad guys and released the tapes to steal Moore's thunder.
Crazy, eh? Maybe, but not totally unprecedented - the left fights dirty and always has. For instance, when the UFCW was trying to unionize Food Lion a few years ago, they had a man get employed there for the express purpose of setting up unhealthful situations in hopes of catching Food Lion employes mishandling them.
And I seem to recall that back when the Democrats controlled Congress, certain allegations against Republicans were so incredibly serious that they demanded investigation despite a lack of evidence to justify it.
Oh lookie here, from Drudge:
Re: How Moore obtained his footage from the war in Iraq:Hmm - so he had film crews working over there. Maybe this is less crazy than I thought...
LAUER: There's a disturbing sequence in the film that shows-- US soldiers, casualties. It has interviews with US soldiers in battles. How did you get that footage?
MOORE: From a variety of sources...
Lauer: ...Do you think that the soldiers thought they were talking to a film crew that was working with Michael Moore?
Moore: Some of them did and some of them didn't...
Lauer: ...Do you think that's fair?
Moore: Well, I think it's fair that the American people know what's going on. These soldiers are certainly presented in the film with the deepest respect...
Tuesday, June 15, 2004
A question for everyone who's making a fuss about Abu Ghraib
If you thought it could have saved you or some of your family, would you have permitted torture of captured suspected terrorists?
Those who say Yes are cordially invited to STFU.
UPDATE: Alright, let's clarify this. As Glenn Reynolds put it, I'm asking the Dukakis Question. And I say that if you'd permit the use of torture in the situation proposed, I don't want to hear any prissiness about Abu Ghraib, especially when we see the stuff they *really* were subjected to.
Let's give Darwin a hand. Everybody who's for "gun control", wants to coddle criminals, or doesn't think he should fight back against criminals or terrorists in a way they'll understand should be required to publish their addresses. Let the crooks pick off the low-hanging fruit at their convenience without disturbing those of us who recognize that, to paraphrase a Supreme Court Justice, morality is not a suicide pact.
Those who say Yes are cordially invited to STFU.
UPDATE: Alright, let's clarify this. As Glenn Reynolds put it, I'm asking the Dukakis Question. And I say that if you'd permit the use of torture in the situation proposed, I don't want to hear any prissiness about Abu Ghraib, especially when we see the stuff they *really* were subjected to.
Let's give Darwin a hand. Everybody who's for "gun control", wants to coddle criminals, or doesn't think he should fight back against criminals or terrorists in a way they'll understand should be required to publish their addresses. Let the crooks pick off the low-hanging fruit at their convenience without disturbing those of us who recognize that, to paraphrase a Supreme Court Justice, morality is not a suicide pact.
Pilgrimage
I might have been on TV on Thursday. Yes, I was one of the thousands in line to pay respects to Ronald Reagan at the Capitol rotunda.
I figured it might take an hour to get there, an hour in line, and an hour to get back. Yeah right - I was there from about 2:15 PM and didn't make it out of the rotunda until about 6:30. That was plenty long for me, but for others it was far longer. Then finally around 2AM on Friday the stragglers were shooed off because it was clear that they wouldn't have time to make the rotunda.
I don't know what kind of crowds they were expecting, but they had all sorts of support people around. Huge fans were all over, as was complementary ice water. Fortunately it wasn't really hot.
A Reagan crowd, especially one to honor his memory, wasn't likely to go too crazy with dress (imagine a Clinton crowd...). Even so, it wasn't quite up to the standards of a man who insisted on wearing a jacket in the Oval Office. Having come from work, I was in "business casual". WaPo has more here.
When I got there the line was doubled back on itself several times on the west side of the Capitol reflecting pool. From there it ran around the south side of the pool, just to the inside of the statue of James Garfield, then around the south side of the Capitol.
Eventually there was a frisker shack on the south end of the Capitol grounds, beyond which about everything inorganic was contraband. The line moved rapidly though, and whatever was not permitted to pass was tracked and forwarded ahead to a point past the Capitol for later recovery.
From there it was up to the outside of the Capitol, then up a flight of stairs to the rotunda. We were split into two semicircular groups - I chose the line with backs to the press because if I was going to lose composure it didn't have to be published.
There was profound silence but for press cameras, despite probably 100 or so of us being lined up behind the velvet ropes. That couldn't have lasted for more than a minute or so before we were herded out. Even more silent were the representatives from all of the armed services who stood at attention around the catafalque - they were so still that they almost appeared stuffed.
Finally we were sent back down another flight of steps and back outside. Conversation started again, and people with feet so sore they could barely walk and several blocks of walking yet to go swore they'd do it again.
Bryan Preston went also - his account is here.
I figured it might take an hour to get there, an hour in line, and an hour to get back. Yeah right - I was there from about 2:15 PM and didn't make it out of the rotunda until about 6:30. That was plenty long for me, but for others it was far longer. Then finally around 2AM on Friday the stragglers were shooed off because it was clear that they wouldn't have time to make the rotunda.
I don't know what kind of crowds they were expecting, but they had all sorts of support people around. Huge fans were all over, as was complementary ice water. Fortunately it wasn't really hot.
A Reagan crowd, especially one to honor his memory, wasn't likely to go too crazy with dress (imagine a Clinton crowd...). Even so, it wasn't quite up to the standards of a man who insisted on wearing a jacket in the Oval Office. Having come from work, I was in "business casual". WaPo has more here.
When I got there the line was doubled back on itself several times on the west side of the Capitol reflecting pool. From there it ran around the south side of the pool, just to the inside of the statue of James Garfield, then around the south side of the Capitol.
Eventually there was a frisker shack on the south end of the Capitol grounds, beyond which about everything inorganic was contraband. The line moved rapidly though, and whatever was not permitted to pass was tracked and forwarded ahead to a point past the Capitol for later recovery.
From there it was up to the outside of the Capitol, then up a flight of stairs to the rotunda. We were split into two semicircular groups - I chose the line with backs to the press because if I was going to lose composure it didn't have to be published.
There was profound silence but for press cameras, despite probably 100 or so of us being lined up behind the velvet ropes. That couldn't have lasted for more than a minute or so before we were herded out. Even more silent were the representatives from all of the armed services who stood at attention around the catafalque - they were so still that they almost appeared stuffed.
Finally we were sent back down another flight of steps and back outside. Conversation started again, and people with feet so sore they could barely walk and several blocks of walking yet to go swore they'd do it again.
Bryan Preston went also - his account is here.
Monday, June 14, 2004
What do you do with a kid like this?
A sex offender I happen to know is about to go to jail shortly for a parole violation. He failed to register with local authorities as a sexual predator when he changed his address. (Changing addresses in this case meant spending a few nights at his latest bimbette's place).
Alright, he violated the law. New Jersey's Megan's Law has specific mandates for active community notification which ensures that the community will be made aware of the presence of convicted sex offenders posing a risk to public safety. The actual case occurred elsewhere, but the issue is the same. What could be wrong with busting the guy?
I guess it depends on what you call a "convicted sex offender posing a risk to public safety". The perp's original offense was for having sex with a 13 year old girl. He was 18 or so at the time.
All of you who have ever had sex with a 13 year old girl, regardless of your own age at the time, please turn yourselves in immediately. You too can have your picture and address posted on the Internet labeled as a sexual predator for the rest of your life. Gulp....I'm guessing that that would catch more men than you think.
He broke the law for sure. And that there's plenty of evidence that this was rape only in the statutory sense is irrelevant - her Lewinskian prose was not admissible. He knew better, or certainly should have. But is this the kind of sex offense Megan's Law was intended to address?
To my knowledge this kid (he's 21 now) is not violent and doesn't have any weapons. In fact, if you knew him only casually you wouldn't suspect a thing - you might even think he was bright and glib and thus had potential. When he showed up for school and actually paid attention he did well, but he could never be as smart as he thinks he is. Nowadays he's learning about PCs, but his brashness and perpetual attraction to lowlives has already cost him a few new Windows reinstallations via viruses et al.
Can he be rehabilitated? Hmm - while he was locked up prior to his probation he did get his GED. But this was out of boredom rather than any change of heart IMO. He's the kind that used to get taken for a ride by persons unknown, beaten senseless and told to straighten up or get to hell out of town. It's ugly, but I have to call them like I see them.
I could be wrong. But one thing is for sure - the fact that he has a felony on his record and is labeled in perpetuity as a sex offender is not going to make it easier.
Alright, he violated the law. New Jersey's Megan's Law has specific mandates for active community notification which ensures that the community will be made aware of the presence of convicted sex offenders posing a risk to public safety. The actual case occurred elsewhere, but the issue is the same. What could be wrong with busting the guy?
I guess it depends on what you call a "convicted sex offender posing a risk to public safety". The perp's original offense was for having sex with a 13 year old girl. He was 18 or so at the time.
All of you who have ever had sex with a 13 year old girl, regardless of your own age at the time, please turn yourselves in immediately. You too can have your picture and address posted on the Internet labeled as a sexual predator for the rest of your life. Gulp....I'm guessing that that would catch more men than you think.
He broke the law for sure. And that there's plenty of evidence that this was rape only in the statutory sense is irrelevant - her Lewinskian prose was not admissible. He knew better, or certainly should have. But is this the kind of sex offense Megan's Law was intended to address?
To my knowledge this kid (he's 21 now) is not violent and doesn't have any weapons. In fact, if you knew him only casually you wouldn't suspect a thing - you might even think he was bright and glib and thus had potential. When he showed up for school and actually paid attention he did well, but he could never be as smart as he thinks he is. Nowadays he's learning about PCs, but his brashness and perpetual attraction to lowlives has already cost him a few new Windows reinstallations via viruses et al.
Can he be rehabilitated? Hmm - while he was locked up prior to his probation he did get his GED. But this was out of boredom rather than any change of heart IMO. He's the kind that used to get taken for a ride by persons unknown, beaten senseless and told to straighten up or get to hell out of town. It's ugly, but I have to call them like I see them.
I could be wrong. But one thing is for sure - the fact that he has a felony on his record and is labeled in perpetuity as a sex offender is not going to make it easier.
Sunday, June 13, 2004
Civilization is a very elastic term
Now that we've seen a week of the coverage of Ronald Reagan's funeral activities, let's recall what happened when the Ayatollah Khomeini died. Wasn't it cool when the legions of swarming jackasses managed to dump Khomeini's corpse onto the ground?
40 years too late...
The press is finally finding out that Ralph Nader has ethical problems. I'm sure the fact that at last he is perceived as being harmful to the interests of the Democrats has nothing to do with this.
Theocrats?
Can we reserve the word "theocrats" for those who really deserve it, such as Moqtada al-Sadr and the like?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)