(Whoops, an earlier version of this somehow got published before I was through with it. Let's try this again.)
It's a shame that blogs weren't as popular back in the early 90's as they are now. There are tons of stories from Clinton's day that IMO got bum's rush coverage. And probably the worst case was the Middle Eastern ties to the OKC bombings.
I recall the early coverage, in which we suspected Middle Eastern involvement and we were looking for a John Doe who looked suspiciously Middle Eastern. Then that stopped abruptly and we wound up with a couple of white guys supposedly with right-wing ties.
Wasn't that convenient for Bill Clinton? He was in trouble. He didn't want to have to deal with foreign affairs, yet he might be forced into it if this were associated with Muslims. Far better that the perps should be "right-wingers" - he'd attempt to associate these with his political opponents. Next thing we know he's accusing Rush Limbaugh et al of inspiring the event.
Of course he had no evidence of this. But what evidence *did* he have?
Now I'm reading "The Third Terrorist", by Jayna Davis. I haven't read too much of it yet. But from what I've seen, Bill Clinton knew very well that he was lying when he was blaming "hate radio" for the terrorism.
Saturday, August 07, 2004
Thursday, August 05, 2004
Alabama Executes 74-Year-Old Man (washingtonpost.com)
So reads the headline, anyway. Down in the body we see this:
All told, I'm thinking that this one might have been a good one for the anti-execution types to sit out. Yet the usual suspects, having arbitrarily decided that "a civilized society" does not execute even slimeballs like that, had to show up and get their ration of free uncritical publicity.
And of course the WaPo gave it to them.
J.B. Hubbard's failing body kept him lying in bed -- a bunk on Alabama's death row -- most of the last days of his life. Other inmates say they walked his wobbly frame to the showers and listened to him complain about the pain: the cancer in his colon and prostate, the hypertension, the aching back. They combed his hair because he couldn't. They washed him.So how did it come to this?
When spasms of dementia made him forget who he was -- what he was -- they told him: a 74-year-old, small-town Alabama man gone bad, a twice-convicted murderer, the oldest inmate on "the row." He left them behind, these most unlikely of caretakers, one month ago and was transported south to a drab, gray prison set back in the cotton fields of lower Alabama. As the sun was tipping toward the horizon, Hubbard was put to death there Thursday, becoming the oldest inmate executed in the United States in more than six decades.
Hubbard first killed in 1957, teaming with his uncle to rob and murder a Tuscaloosa man. He was sentenced to 50 years in prison but was released in October 1976, in part because a widow agreed to give him a job and help ease him back into society.So someone sponsored him. How could you ever repay someone for that? Here's how:
on a winter evening in 1977, police say Hubbard shot his benefactor three times in the face.Poor guy - losing his benefactor like that must have been devastating.
All told, I'm thinking that this one might have been a good one for the anti-execution types to sit out. Yet the usual suspects, having arbitrarily decided that "a civilized society" does not execute even slimeballs like that, had to show up and get their ration of free uncritical publicity.
And of course the WaPo gave it to them.
Oh Veronica!
Not you too! Yep, even the Archies are loosening up according to this.
Further down the page you are invited to vote for the sexiest cartoon babes of all time. I correctly picked the winner of the last contest, but competition is heating up. Kim Possible won't be jailbait forever, and then a few years behind her there's the PowerPuff Girls.
I need to get out more often.
Tuesday, August 03, 2004
Alternate History
The French would love a veto over our military activity, as noted again in this.
I can't help but think of 1940, when the Wehrmacht went through the French like Ex-Lax through a skeleton. Quickly the French formed their Vichy government to get along with Hitler.
What would the French govt have said if we had asked them if we could get involved to beat Hitler?
I can't help but think of 1940, when the Wehrmacht went through the French like Ex-Lax through a skeleton. Quickly the French formed their Vichy government to get along with Hitler.
What would the French govt have said if we had asked them if we could get involved to beat Hitler?
Monday, August 02, 2004
Bunny suits?
Tasteless joke time!
A couple of guys were swapping stories about embarrassing moments. One said he had been caught while hiding in the closet watching his parents have sex. The other one said "kids do the craziest things, don't they?" The other said, "Yeah, but this was just last week".
John Kerry isn't happy about his "bunny suit" costume picture, which makes him look like one of the sperm from Woody Allen's classic "Everything You Always Wanted to Know about Sex (But were Afraid to Ask)". Of course his thoroughly professional campaign team is calling its release a dirty trick by the Republicans. Aww -
Now we hear that there's a similar picture of W. But his dates back to 1981, long predating his political career. OK, so there is. But why would anyone bother to keep it that long? Has J. Edgar Hoover been reincarnated and hired by NASA?
IMO it's no big deal for Bush or Kerry. Kerry doesn't exactly look like the massively phony image he'd like to project, but he could hardly rank lower in my eyes anyway.
A couple of guys were swapping stories about embarrassing moments. One said he had been caught while hiding in the closet watching his parents have sex. The other one said "kids do the craziest things, don't they?" The other said, "Yeah, but this was just last week".
John Kerry isn't happy about his "bunny suit" costume picture, which makes him look like one of the sperm from Woody Allen's classic "Everything You Always Wanted to Know about Sex (But were Afraid to Ask)". Of course his thoroughly professional campaign team is calling its release a dirty trick by the Republicans. Aww -
Now we hear that there's a similar picture of W. But his dates back to 1981, long predating his political career. OK, so there is. But why would anyone bother to keep it that long? Has J. Edgar Hoover been reincarnated and hired by NASA?
IMO it's no big deal for Bush or Kerry. Kerry doesn't exactly look like the massively phony image he'd like to project, but he could hardly rank lower in my eyes anyway.
Sunday, August 01, 2004
Dark Light
Here is an interesting review of a book about people's reactions to electricity. "Dark Light - Electricity and Anxiety From the Telegraph to the X-ray", by Linda Simon, is "fact an utterly idiosyncratic romp, a poetical humanist's inquiry, a chronicle not so much of gizmos and inventors but of their effects on the public imagination."
I had heard of Luigi Galvani's experiments applying electricity to frogs' legs to make them twitch, but the book speaks of another Italian's work with freshly guillotined human heads - by electrifying them, he could make them blink or grind their teeth. Ewwww. It made an impression on Mary Shelley too - she later wrote "Frankenstein".
In the early days people didn't know what to make of electricity, and even those like Edison had their moments - '"When Edison first heard his own phonograph talk back to him, he told a reporter he was 'actually frightened and for a moment dropped the crank he was turning,'" Simon writes'.
I think I'll have to have a look at this one. Maybe it'll provide some insight into contemporary reactions to the Internet.
I had heard of Luigi Galvani's experiments applying electricity to frogs' legs to make them twitch, but the book speaks of another Italian's work with freshly guillotined human heads - by electrifying them, he could make them blink or grind their teeth. Ewwww. It made an impression on Mary Shelley too - she later wrote "Frankenstein".
In the early days people didn't know what to make of electricity, and even those like Edison had their moments - '"When Edison first heard his own phonograph talk back to him, he told a reporter he was 'actually frightened and for a moment dropped the crank he was turning,'" Simon writes'.
I think I'll have to have a look at this one. Maybe it'll provide some insight into contemporary reactions to the Internet.
Saturday, July 31, 2004
What people with lower standards might post
Or in this case, forward through email. Yes, the picture to the left is unacceptable for a respectable blog, and is posted only so you might know how this blog's careful and discriminating editing process protects you from lower forms of political discourse while edifying you on countless other subjects.
If you checked out this blog on Sunday before noon, you no doubt noticed that the gods of irony deliberately fouled up this post - I've corrected it since then.
Incidentally, I am told that the sign in question is to be found somewhere near Green Bay, Wisconsin. And notice the lower right hand corner - apparently the guy even sprung for a spotlight so you could see it at night. Not bad for a state whose best known citizens are Ed Gein and Jeffrey Dahmer...
Explain this one to me
I grew up with the legend of JFK and PT 109. Or the movie, anyway. It was long, but I liked it when I was little.
I don't recall seeing it playing on TV for a while now, so I suppose it's possible that twenty- and possibly thirty-somethings don't know the story. It seems that JFK's craft was rammed broadside by the Japanese destroyer Amagiri, which cut it in two.
What happened later was tough on JFK and the crew, but all but two of them survived. But how did they wind up in that situation in the first place?
In particular, how did a small craft that could go at 45 knots get hit broadside by a comparatively monstrous destroyer? They were operating in Blackett Strait, which is narrow by ocean standards but still left plenty of room to maneuver. It's as if a human being were hit by a semi traveling at walking pace - it wouldn't be too hard to stay out of the way. It's hard to see how PT 109 could have suffered such a fate without gross failure by the commanding officer - IMO they would have done better with Joseph Hazelwood.
But I know jack squat about issues nautical and thought maybe some of you naval types might have comments.
I don't recall seeing it playing on TV for a while now, so I suppose it's possible that twenty- and possibly thirty-somethings don't know the story. It seems that JFK's craft was rammed broadside by the Japanese destroyer Amagiri, which cut it in two.
What happened later was tough on JFK and the crew, but all but two of them survived. But how did they wind up in that situation in the first place?
In particular, how did a small craft that could go at 45 knots get hit broadside by a comparatively monstrous destroyer? They were operating in Blackett Strait, which is narrow by ocean standards but still left plenty of room to maneuver. It's as if a human being were hit by a semi traveling at walking pace - it wouldn't be too hard to stay out of the way. It's hard to see how PT 109 could have suffered such a fate without gross failure by the commanding officer - IMO they would have done better with Joseph Hazelwood.
But I know jack squat about issues nautical and thought maybe some of you naval types might have comments.
Happy Birthday Milton Friedman!
He's 92 today. And he's one of the best arguments for cloning I can think of.
Not that I care
Glenn Reynolds is having some fun with the Alabama dildo sales ban again today. Of course no such blog item would be complete without references to junior-high taunts at judges and legislators who support such bills, suggesting that their position resulted from their personal inadequacies.
Oh, so it's acceptable to argue that way now? OK, no more unemployment insurance - whatsamatter, you're not man enough to earn a living? No more health insurance, Medicare or Medicaid, ya wimps, or if we do keep them we certainly won't be covering Viagra. Yeah yeah, it was tongue in cheek, but still...
And there's a flip side to the argument. Maybe the men of AL have enough ideas and energy already and it's their partners who are lobbying for relief. Maybe they simply doesn't need these things, while those from other states need all the help they can get.
Personally I couldn't care less about it. I'd insist on a fairly compelling reason for banning the sale of a product, and I can't think of one for banning dildos and vibrators. Maybe I'd see things differently if I raised cucumbers, or manufactured candles or arthritis products.
How did this ban come about? I don't know, but AL politics can be bizarre. I lived there for a while in a dry county, which also happened to have one of the highest alcoholism rates in the state. The largest town in the county had long sought to become wet, but the county always outvoted it to keep it dry thanks to an unholy alliance of bootleggers and Baptists.
Then by some miracle, a bill passed to permit towns above a certain size to become wet independently of their counties, and IIRC this bill somehow passed without any votes from legislators in the dry counties. How the dry county delegation managed to pull that one off without leaving any fingerprints has to be a terrific story, but I've never heard the details. Anyway, my town was eligible and the locals were excited at the prospect.
Well, others were less thrilled - you should have heard the outcry. For instance, the town had one of those picturesque town squares where they still held markets every First Monday of the month (your lost baggage may be there too). But the drys circulated an illustration of the square after legalizing liquor sales, complete with strip joints and gay bars, and...well, you can't fully appreciate just how absurd that was unless you'd lived in the area at the time. Anyway, the town went wet, and although I left no more than a year later I don't recall any particular ill effects.
But I'm not living in AL nowadays, so (assuming that they don't vote for gay marriage...) their laws are none of my business. As for Glenn Reynolds, who lives in neighboring TN, I'd think he'd be for the ban. Now Tennesseeans can build a bunch of sex toy stores on the TN/AL border alongside all the fireworks places (and liquor stores, in case there are still some dry counties nearby). Border towns like South Pittsburg will make out like bandits, and the state will suck down tax dollars from Alabamians.
And let's not forget the service industries - haven't we all heard that old song "Tennessee Stud"? Isn't Tennessee the Volunteer State? (Even Alabamians will vouch for them - they told me nothing sucks like a Big Orange. To which the Tennesseeans would respond by telling you what AL women put behind their ears to attract men - their ankles.)
So if I were GR I'd encourage such bans in AL and in all the other bordering states too.
I'll close by noting that IMO this excessive interest in the sexual options of Alabamians is at least as weird as the sex toy ban. Sheesh, don't these people have anything better to worry about?
Oh, so it's acceptable to argue that way now? OK, no more unemployment insurance - whatsamatter, you're not man enough to earn a living? No more health insurance, Medicare or Medicaid, ya wimps, or if we do keep them we certainly won't be covering Viagra. Yeah yeah, it was tongue in cheek, but still...
And there's a flip side to the argument. Maybe the men of AL have enough ideas and energy already and it's their partners who are lobbying for relief. Maybe they simply doesn't need these things, while those from other states need all the help they can get.
Personally I couldn't care less about it. I'd insist on a fairly compelling reason for banning the sale of a product, and I can't think of one for banning dildos and vibrators. Maybe I'd see things differently if I raised cucumbers, or manufactured candles or arthritis products.
How did this ban come about? I don't know, but AL politics can be bizarre. I lived there for a while in a dry county, which also happened to have one of the highest alcoholism rates in the state. The largest town in the county had long sought to become wet, but the county always outvoted it to keep it dry thanks to an unholy alliance of bootleggers and Baptists.
Then by some miracle, a bill passed to permit towns above a certain size to become wet independently of their counties, and IIRC this bill somehow passed without any votes from legislators in the dry counties. How the dry county delegation managed to pull that one off without leaving any fingerprints has to be a terrific story, but I've never heard the details. Anyway, my town was eligible and the locals were excited at the prospect.
Well, others were less thrilled - you should have heard the outcry. For instance, the town had one of those picturesque town squares where they still held markets every First Monday of the month (your lost baggage may be there too). But the drys circulated an illustration of the square after legalizing liquor sales, complete with strip joints and gay bars, and...well, you can't fully appreciate just how absurd that was unless you'd lived in the area at the time. Anyway, the town went wet, and although I left no more than a year later I don't recall any particular ill effects.
But I'm not living in AL nowadays, so (assuming that they don't vote for gay marriage...) their laws are none of my business. As for Glenn Reynolds, who lives in neighboring TN, I'd think he'd be for the ban. Now Tennesseeans can build a bunch of sex toy stores on the TN/AL border alongside all the fireworks places (and liquor stores, in case there are still some dry counties nearby). Border towns like South Pittsburg will make out like bandits, and the state will suck down tax dollars from Alabamians.
And let's not forget the service industries - haven't we all heard that old song "Tennessee Stud"? Isn't Tennessee the Volunteer State? (Even Alabamians will vouch for them - they told me nothing sucks like a Big Orange. To which the Tennesseeans would respond by telling you what AL women put behind their ears to attract men - their ankles.)
So if I were GR I'd encourage such bans in AL and in all the other bordering states too.
I'll close by noting that IMO this excessive interest in the sexual options of Alabamians is at least as weird as the sex toy ban. Sheesh, don't these people have anything better to worry about?
Friday, July 30, 2004
Psst - Susanna's birthday is coming
Yep, another couple of days (8/2) and she'll be, uh, well, I don't exactly know. I'm too much of a gentleman to say anyway even if I knew. But it's for sure that if she were a horse they'd have shot her by now.
Keep going down the lower right side of her page and you'll see the Amazon wish list and tip jars. Give till it hurts so she can continue to spread enlightenment in rural Alabama, post gratuitous niece photos and finish up that Ph. D.
Incidentally, I have no financial ties to our Ms. Susanna and she lives several hundred miles away. But if she wants to pass on some of the spoils that's OK with me.
Keep going down the lower right side of her page and you'll see the Amazon wish list and tip jars. Give till it hurts so she can continue to spread enlightenment in rural Alabama, post gratuitous niece photos and finish up that Ph. D.
Incidentally, I have no financial ties to our Ms. Susanna and she lives several hundred miles away. But if she wants to pass on some of the spoils that's OK with me.
Thursday, July 29, 2004
Should be seen and not heard
Did you know that abortions never happened before Roe v. Wade? Why all, they were illegal!Sure, honey. Women never had abortions before then - those guys on the Supreme Court invented it just as sure as some Italian guy discovered the clitoris in the 1600's. Actually women went for visits with relatives, or to attend to a sick aunt, or something else, and when they came back that little problem had gone away.
Ashley sweetie, you are one fine specimen. Don't ruin it with stupid lines like this. If you want to talk about women's rights, learn some of the history first.
And support the man who's freed women by the millions in Afghanistan and Iraq - certainly more than the likes of Gloria Steinem and Betty Fredan have ever done. In case you don't know, I'm talking about George Bush.
Ashley sweetie, you are one fine specimen. Don't ruin it with stupid lines like this. If you want to talk about women's rights, learn some of the history first.
And support the man who's freed women by the millions in Afghanistan and Iraq - certainly more than the likes of Gloria Steinem and Betty Fredan have ever done. In case you don't know, I'm talking about George Bush.
Sunday, July 25, 2004
Wimps
Being a Cub fan by the grace of God, I have some natural sympathy for the Red Sox. And I'm with those who say that rooting for the Yankees is like rooting for General Motors.
But I'm not at all impressed with the Red Sox after the skirmish with the Yankees last night. First we have Jason Varitek in full catcher's gear taking on an unprotected A-Rod after he's just been hit by a pitch. Varitek didn't even take his mask off. Was that enough protection, Varitek? Or should we have given you a gun just to make it fair?
Then we have three Red Sox taking one Yankee off to the side without doing enough damage to him to get him out of the game. I would have expected three Boston sports writers to do better than that. In my old neighborhood we'd have made those three wear skirts, except the girls were tougher than that.
Well, maybe that last part was exaggerated a little. But the Red Sox sure don't have anything to be proud of.
But I'm not at all impressed with the Red Sox after the skirmish with the Yankees last night. First we have Jason Varitek in full catcher's gear taking on an unprotected A-Rod after he's just been hit by a pitch. Varitek didn't even take his mask off. Was that enough protection, Varitek? Or should we have given you a gun just to make it fair?
Then we have three Red Sox taking one Yankee off to the side without doing enough damage to him to get him out of the game. I would have expected three Boston sports writers to do better than that. In my old neighborhood we'd have made those three wear skirts, except the girls were tougher than that.
Well, maybe that last part was exaggerated a little. But the Red Sox sure don't have anything to be proud of.
Curtain call
In case you haven't seen JibJab, here's another link.
Thanks to Punch the Bag from the great state of Indiana for reminding me.
Thanks to Punch the Bag from the great state of Indiana for reminding me.
Saturday, July 24, 2004
Gay Marriage: What's It For?
So Michael Williams asks here. IMO he's basically on target - it's about "we're just as good as you" and wanting to suck up some bennies.
Oh, but they're in Love! Fine - you don't have to be a cynic to ask what that has to do with marriage. Are we now to be permitted to marry anything we love?
If we're going to do it and extend it to same-sex couples, what justification do we have to stop there? If the definition of marriage is just some arbitrary social construct, then why can't it group people more than two at a time? If it needn't be restricted by sex, then why should it respect age, genetic distance or even be limited to pairs? And what about the narcissists - why even require two)? Can gays provide any intellectual or moral justification for limiting marriage only to pairs?
Oh yeah, there's this crap about it being a "civil right". I've never heard any legal justification for that assertion. If the intentions of the legislators or justices is to be given any weight, does anyone really believe that any anti-discrimination legal decisions, laws or amendments were made with the intent of permitting gay marriage?
Enough - this has been addressed here many times. Somehow the fact that I have weighed in on this topic doesn't settle it - imagine that....
Oh, but they're in Love! Fine - you don't have to be a cynic to ask what that has to do with marriage. Are we now to be permitted to marry anything we love?
If we're going to do it and extend it to same-sex couples, what justification do we have to stop there? If the definition of marriage is just some arbitrary social construct, then why can't it group people more than two at a time? If it needn't be restricted by sex, then why should it respect age, genetic distance or even be limited to pairs? And what about the narcissists - why even require two)? Can gays provide any intellectual or moral justification for limiting marriage only to pairs?
Oh yeah, there's this crap about it being a "civil right". I've never heard any legal justification for that assertion. If the intentions of the legislators or justices is to be given any weight, does anyone really believe that any anti-discrimination legal decisions, laws or amendments were made with the intent of permitting gay marriage?
Enough - this has been addressed here many times. Somehow the fact that I have weighed in on this topic doesn't settle it - imagine that....
Public service announcement
Attention you single men: Fred Reed doesn't think you should get married.
But if you won't be dissuaded, at least listen to Ben Franklin.
Above all, don't believe everything you read.
But if you won't be dissuaded, at least listen to Ben Franklin.
Above all, don't believe everything you read.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)