Sunday, March 30, 2008
Friday, March 28, 2008
Do you dislike the huge taxes in Cook County?
Board member Tony Peraica wants to do something about it. Apparently the Board's ability to raise taxes as it pleases comes from a special status the state legislature granted Cook that no other county in the state has. Here's the kicker:
Rescinding Cook County’s home rule authority would require voter approval for future tax increases. In the recently passed FY 2008 budget, the Cook County Board passed a massive half-billion tax increase to shore up an alleged $280 million deficit. On the same day this tax increase was enacted, a federal court monitor’s report lambasted the county for continued rampant illegal patronage hiring.
Go for it, Tony!
Rescinding Cook County’s home rule authority would require voter approval for future tax increases. In the recently passed FY 2008 budget, the Cook County Board passed a massive half-billion tax increase to shore up an alleged $280 million deficit. On the same day this tax increase was enacted, a federal court monitor’s report lambasted the county for continued rampant illegal patronage hiring.
Go for it, Tony!
Attention Brown Line riders UPDATED
This weekend a big shift is occurring, as two of the best drinking stops are re-opening (Diversey and Southport) and two of the lame ones are closing (Wellington and Paulina). Rejoice in your own way.
UPDATE: Commenter "Fubar" forgets about the Armitage stop, which I always thought was like a daily beauty pageant. I await his response.
UPDATE: Commenter "Fubar" forgets about the Armitage stop, which I always thought was like a daily beauty pageant. I await his response.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Houston as the next great American city
I wouldn't have guessed at first glance, but Joel Kotkin makes a good case for Houston as the next big city in the US. It's mainly driven by the entrepeneurial spirit of the city's residents, like a perpetual boomtown.
Kotkin also challenges those who say that the best cities are those that are "liveable" and have lots of cultural crap, which I always like.
Kotkin also challenges those who say that the best cities are those that are "liveable" and have lots of cultural crap, which I always like.
Too much money for college
I am fascinated by the way our post-secondary education system works, and have been ever since I read Thomas Sowell's Inside American Education in college (for fun, of course, not for a class assignment). Adam Creighton has a column on The American Spectator's website making a very convincing case that too many people go to college and government funds too much of it.
One point he hits is that far too many people go there not as serious students, but to waste time before moving on to the labor force. Liberal arts majors, avert your eyes:
BUT DOES THE OLD public benefit argument apply equally to college education? In my experience, university students fall into two broad camps, the studious and the typical. The former go to increase their own earning potential and study diligently, often in vocational fields like law, medicine, engineering, or accounting. They don't need any subsidy. The latter go to enjoy themselves and delay finding a job, often stumbling through alcohol-fueled semesters in search of the next party or conquest, and reading the occasional book on the side.
Maybe the studious deserve a subsidy for their determined efforts and higher future tax payments. But frankly, where is the public benefit of middle and upper-class children writing their desultory, unoriginal thoughts down twice a term, and drinking themselves silly for four years (and let's not kid ourselves about the demographic whose children make up the bulk of typical college enrollments)? The only public dividend these students provide flows directly from alcohol and nightclub companies to private stockholders. Yet public money is poured into the education and maintenance of both...
ACADEMIC TRADITIONALISTS might take issue with my apparent disdain for non-vocational fields, such as classics, history and philosophy. But far from heralding their demise, a withdrawal of public subsidies would reduce enrollment in these fields, leaving only the keen and bright. Academic standards would recover, and their pejorative, public dismissal as "soft-options" would fade.
That final point is exactly right, I think. There's all kinds of good stuff in this column, so if this interests you I recommend it heartily.
One point he hits is that far too many people go there not as serious students, but to waste time before moving on to the labor force. Liberal arts majors, avert your eyes:
BUT DOES THE OLD public benefit argument apply equally to college education? In my experience, university students fall into two broad camps, the studious and the typical. The former go to increase their own earning potential and study diligently, often in vocational fields like law, medicine, engineering, or accounting. They don't need any subsidy. The latter go to enjoy themselves and delay finding a job, often stumbling through alcohol-fueled semesters in search of the next party or conquest, and reading the occasional book on the side.
Maybe the studious deserve a subsidy for their determined efforts and higher future tax payments. But frankly, where is the public benefit of middle and upper-class children writing their desultory, unoriginal thoughts down twice a term, and drinking themselves silly for four years (and let's not kid ourselves about the demographic whose children make up the bulk of typical college enrollments)? The only public dividend these students provide flows directly from alcohol and nightclub companies to private stockholders. Yet public money is poured into the education and maintenance of both...
ACADEMIC TRADITIONALISTS might take issue with my apparent disdain for non-vocational fields, such as classics, history and philosophy. But far from heralding their demise, a withdrawal of public subsidies would reduce enrollment in these fields, leaving only the keen and bright. Academic standards would recover, and their pejorative, public dismissal as "soft-options" would fade.
That final point is exactly right, I think. There's all kinds of good stuff in this column, so if this interests you I recommend it heartily.
See what a little enforcement can do?
The Washington Post has an article today about how Prince William County's new illegal immigration law is affecting "the Latino community" (i.e. illegal aliens). It's a bunch of supposed sob stories that are actually a great way to show what some enforcement could do.
Now only if John McCain would stop working behind the scenes to kill the SAVE Act in the House...
UPDATE: Hmmm, maybe I was a bit too quick to believe Shuler's story.
Now only if John McCain would stop working behind the scenes to kill the SAVE Act in the House...
UPDATE: Hmmm, maybe I was a bit too quick to believe Shuler's story.
Nice!
A blog post.
Insert obligatory Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigalo jokes here. Hey, she's still a lot smaller than me!
Insert obligatory Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigalo jokes here. Hey, she's still a lot smaller than me!
McCain's daughter has a blog UPDATED
It's pretty cool.
I'd like to note that Meghan has a post on 3/10 (for some reason she doesn't have any permalinks, so you'll have to look for it to read it) about how people are being critical of her appearance:
As you may have noticed, I seldom use the Blogette as a medium to discuss social or political issues unless I feel particularly compelled to do so. This is one of those times. One of the unintended consequences of my dad becoming the presumptive Republican nominee is the increased level of public scrutiny on him and our family. Of course I expected more than my fair share when I decided to put myself out there and write a blog on the campaign; however, I've been surprised by critical comments regarding my weight and body shape. It recently reached a ridiculous level when someone handed me a business card for a plastic surgeon and suggested I needed liposuction. I am proud of my curves and have always loved my fuller figure, as should every woman who is not a size "0".
She goes on to some stuff about being a positive role model and whatnot.
OK, I know that as I get older my standards drop, but I think she is very attractive. Just poke around the site for pictures to see that. (It's not unexpected, as her mom is a former beauty queen.) I guess I never fail to be surprised about people from LA or Miami or whatnot who think a woman has to be near-anorexic to be good-looking.
As a final note, from what I can tell she is, um, exactly what Fubar is looking for in a girl.
UPDATE: There is a dopey (as is the magazine's style) profile of Meghan in QG. It has an excellent picture.
I'd like to note that Meghan has a post on 3/10 (for some reason she doesn't have any permalinks, so you'll have to look for it to read it) about how people are being critical of her appearance:
As you may have noticed, I seldom use the Blogette as a medium to discuss social or political issues unless I feel particularly compelled to do so. This is one of those times. One of the unintended consequences of my dad becoming the presumptive Republican nominee is the increased level of public scrutiny on him and our family. Of course I expected more than my fair share when I decided to put myself out there and write a blog on the campaign; however, I've been surprised by critical comments regarding my weight and body shape. It recently reached a ridiculous level when someone handed me a business card for a plastic surgeon and suggested I needed liposuction. I am proud of my curves and have always loved my fuller figure, as should every woman who is not a size "0".
She goes on to some stuff about being a positive role model and whatnot.
OK, I know that as I get older my standards drop, but I think she is very attractive. Just poke around the site for pictures to see that. (It's not unexpected, as her mom is a former beauty queen.) I guess I never fail to be surprised about people from LA or Miami or whatnot who think a woman has to be near-anorexic to be good-looking.
As a final note, from what I can tell she is, um, exactly what Fubar is looking for in a girl.
UPDATE: There is a dopey (as is the magazine's style) profile of Meghan in QG. It has an excellent picture.
Just don't question their patriotism Part 3
This sums it up:
WASHINGTON (AP) - Saddam Hussein's intelligence agency secretly financed a trip to Iraq for three U.S. lawmakers during the run-up to the U.S.-led invasion, federal prosecutors said Wednesday.
The three anti-war Democrats made the trip in October 2002, while the Bush administration was trying to persuade Congress to authorize military action against Iraq.
Of course, if it were Republicans who did this, it would be front page news, blared in the headline, and mentioned in the first paragraph, not second.
WASHINGTON (AP) - Saddam Hussein's intelligence agency secretly financed a trip to Iraq for three U.S. lawmakers during the run-up to the U.S.-led invasion, federal prosecutors said Wednesday.
The three anti-war Democrats made the trip in October 2002, while the Bush administration was trying to persuade Congress to authorize military action against Iraq.
Of course, if it were Republicans who did this, it would be front page news, blared in the headline, and mentioned in the first paragraph, not second.
Celebrity birthday - Mariah Carey UPDATED
On a lighter note, today is Mariah Carey's 39th birthday. She is very well-preserved and still looking as good as ever.
UPDATE: Yes, I know she's crazy. I don't care. To quote a character from the short-lived Fox sitcom Hardball (I remember very distincly because I was in college and my roommates and I watched it religiously), "Psycho chicks are the best!"
By the way, if memory serves, I think that line was uttered by a character played by a young Joe Rogan.
UPDATE: Yes, I know she's crazy. I don't care. To quote a character from the short-lived Fox sitcom Hardball (I remember very distincly because I was in college and my roommates and I watched it religiously), "Psycho chicks are the best!"
By the way, if memory serves, I think that line was uttered by a character played by a young Joe Rogan.
They tricked me because I'm old and stupid
That's the theme of this article claiming that some mortgage broker schooled some geezers out of their house.
First, the article is being deceptive. It's starts with this:
Retirees Ozell and J.W. McBee are in disbelief. They never expected to be forced out of the home where they have lived with their three teen grandchildren for years, and they're left clinging to hope that an Illinois attorney general office's lawsuit will help restore their shattered world.
For years? My first thought was why a couple of old people needed to refinance the house they've owned forever. Of course, here comes the only really tricky thing in the article (buried at the end by the liberal reporter Francine Knowles), not anything done by the mortgage broker:
The couple said they had to use money from their credit cards to make the two payments on their 4½-bedroom, two-bath home, where they had lived since 1999.
1999? Oh my, they go way back. The woman moved in as a youngster at the age of 77. Such an emotional attachment they must have.
Second, the type of loan they got is so common I wonder how these two ever fell for it. From what I understand, everybody and their brother was getting ARM's (except me) to "save money". I could have too, but I knew those rates were eventually go up. These two don't have anyone they could talk to about this? You'd think people who have lived this long would have built up a certain amount of skepticism about things.
Anyway, it's too bad they couldn't pay for their house. One other thing is bothering me, though. They live with multiple teen grandchildren, none of whom apparently work to help pay for things. Um, why not? There are jobs out there if they want them. My guess is they are too busy playing XBox 360 and telling their grandparents they are soooooo busy with schoolwork that they can't. Either that or they are social rejects who are unhirable (to invent a term).
As for me, I've been busy drinking and studying lately, thus the weak posting. One of those things is ending, but the other is increasing. I can't guarantee how much will be coming, but as you can read here, my misanthropy only builds like a volcano between postings.
First, the article is being deceptive. It's starts with this:
Retirees Ozell and J.W. McBee are in disbelief. They never expected to be forced out of the home where they have lived with their three teen grandchildren for years, and they're left clinging to hope that an Illinois attorney general office's lawsuit will help restore their shattered world.
For years? My first thought was why a couple of old people needed to refinance the house they've owned forever. Of course, here comes the only really tricky thing in the article (buried at the end by the liberal reporter Francine Knowles), not anything done by the mortgage broker:
The couple said they had to use money from their credit cards to make the two payments on their 4½-bedroom, two-bath home, where they had lived since 1999.
1999? Oh my, they go way back. The woman moved in as a youngster at the age of 77. Such an emotional attachment they must have.
Second, the type of loan they got is so common I wonder how these two ever fell for it. From what I understand, everybody and their brother was getting ARM's (except me) to "save money". I could have too, but I knew those rates were eventually go up. These two don't have anyone they could talk to about this? You'd think people who have lived this long would have built up a certain amount of skepticism about things.
Anyway, it's too bad they couldn't pay for their house. One other thing is bothering me, though. They live with multiple teen grandchildren, none of whom apparently work to help pay for things. Um, why not? There are jobs out there if they want them. My guess is they are too busy playing XBox 360 and telling their grandparents they are soooooo busy with schoolwork that they can't. Either that or they are social rejects who are unhirable (to invent a term).
As for me, I've been busy drinking and studying lately, thus the weak posting. One of those things is ending, but the other is increasing. I can't guarantee how much will be coming, but as you can read here, my misanthropy only builds like a volcano between postings.
Friday, March 21, 2008
NCAA Friday
Not a liveblog today, just notes of certain things that occur as I am home. I'll attempt to chronicle important things that occur, such as first beer, first shot, and the arrival of guests.
10:50 Arrival of Andy Reuter, who is sick today.
1:45 First Jagerbomb to celebrate a double-digit seed victory when Davidson (10) beat Gonzaga (7).
2:10 Second Jagerbomb to celebrate Western Kentucky's (12) win over Drake (5). Reuter sent celebratory text messages to his wife's cousin, who is the only Hilltopper (or "Top") alumnus we know.
Also, we cleared a layer of snow for the first time today. There will be more the way it's coming down.
3:30 Plothow shows up. He also christened the PBR 30-pack. Plothow = champion (except that he missed the Duke game last night due to a fancy dinner).
10:50 Arrival of Andy Reuter, who is sick today.
1:45 First Jagerbomb to celebrate a double-digit seed victory when Davidson (10) beat Gonzaga (7).
2:10 Second Jagerbomb to celebrate Western Kentucky's (12) win over Drake (5). Reuter sent celebratory text messages to his wife's cousin, who is the only Hilltopper (or "Top") alumnus we know.
Also, we cleared a layer of snow for the first time today. There will be more the way it's coming down.
3:30 Plothow shows up. He also christened the PBR 30-pack. Plothow = champion (except that he missed the Duke game last night due to a fancy dinner).
Thursday, March 20, 2008
How early is Easter this year?
I thought it was earlier than I could remember, and by far so. I was right.
Daily Obama post
Abigail Thernstrom, whose opinions on racial matters I greatly respect, agrees with the commenters around here (and not me). Hmmm:
Rev. Wright, as Obama says, is the product of a certain era — thankfully gone. (As are Jesse Jackson, John Lewis, and most civil-rights icons, he could have added.) Do I wish Senator Obama had walked away from Trinity Church? Sure. I suspect the reasons he did not do so are psychologically complex. In any case, Wright’s Afrocentric, hate-America views, are clearly not those of Obama himself, who lives, as he says, in the only country on Earth in which his story is even possible.
Rev. Wright, as Obama says, is the product of a certain era — thankfully gone. (As are Jesse Jackson, John Lewis, and most civil-rights icons, he could have added.) Do I wish Senator Obama had walked away from Trinity Church? Sure. I suspect the reasons he did not do so are psychologically complex. In any case, Wright’s Afrocentric, hate-America views, are clearly not those of Obama himself, who lives, as he says, in the only country on Earth in which his story is even possible.
NCAA Tournament vacation
So what have I been doing besides antagonizing Barack Obama fans, you ask?
Why, I'm on a four-day weekend to watch basketball. After realizing a few years ago that when I was at work for the first round of the NCAA tournament I didn't do anything, I decided to just take these two days off and get DirecTV's package to watch any game I want. With my usual 3-TV setup, I've been watching games today.
The first 8 games today were pretty boring, with only 2 of them having any drama at all. I have high hopes for this evening's games, though, as already Belmont is playing Duke tough and Winthrop is tied with Washington State at the half.
So you think I've been a big slug today, right? On the contrary. I've studied for 3 hours for my actuarial exam. I also cleaned my apartment (including putting away my snow shovel, just in time to have to break it out for tomorrow for the last time). I did 5 loads of laundry. I went to the store to buy an antenna for my TV setup. Finally, I ripped a whole crapload of CD's to my PC.
In your face, people who worked!
Why, I'm on a four-day weekend to watch basketball. After realizing a few years ago that when I was at work for the first round of the NCAA tournament I didn't do anything, I decided to just take these two days off and get DirecTV's package to watch any game I want. With my usual 3-TV setup, I've been watching games today.
The first 8 games today were pretty boring, with only 2 of them having any drama at all. I have high hopes for this evening's games, though, as already Belmont is playing Duke tough and Winthrop is tied with Washington State at the half.
So you think I've been a big slug today, right? On the contrary. I've studied for 3 hours for my actuarial exam. I also cleaned my apartment (including putting away my snow shovel, just in time to have to break it out for tomorrow for the last time). I did 5 loads of laundry. I went to the store to buy an antenna for my TV setup. Finally, I ripped a whole crapload of CD's to my PC.
In your face, people who worked!
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
More on my Obama post
I appreciate commenter "Lauren" adding her $0.02. I wasn't going to respond because I don't want to get into a tit-for-tat about this, but Jonathon Last over at the Weekly Standard Blog linked to an article by Jay Cost that asks a very good question of Obama. It's a good way to look at it other than "I don't like guilt-by-association":
My concern with the speech is the following. I am not sure what I think about Obama's claim that he never heard Wright make incendiary comments. I think that hinges on the definition of "incendiary." More importantly, I have always thought this was a moot point. Incendiary comments make for great television--but the bigger concern, especially for somebody as smart as Obama, is the philosophy that undergirds them. . . . .
This philosophy is divisive, and Obama was aware of it even if he had not heard its most extreme articulations. At the same time, this philosophy is clearly not the core mission of Trinity United Church of Christ. Jeremiah Wright does not wake up every morning dedicated to dividing people. However, the antipode of this divisiveness is the core mission of Barack Obama. . . .
Accordingly, this inclines me to ask what Obama did about this profound philosophical error. . . . I must ask whether he worked to persuade Wright and the parishioners who applauded so jubilantly at his divisive words that they were wrong on a matter of existential importance. If he did, what was the consequence of those efforts? Did he succeed in bringing about change at Trinity?
When Obama moved to Chicago some 20 years ago, he could have chosen from any of hundreds of churches in his neighborhood. He chose this one. He then became close to Wright. It's not as though he was raised in the church and thus feels an obligation to stay with it.
So why did he choose this church to begin with? The obvious answer is that he agreed with the pastor. After all, he's the face of the church and the first guy he with know a lot about.
My concern with the speech is the following. I am not sure what I think about Obama's claim that he never heard Wright make incendiary comments. I think that hinges on the definition of "incendiary." More importantly, I have always thought this was a moot point. Incendiary comments make for great television--but the bigger concern, especially for somebody as smart as Obama, is the philosophy that undergirds them. . . . .
This philosophy is divisive, and Obama was aware of it even if he had not heard its most extreme articulations. At the same time, this philosophy is clearly not the core mission of Trinity United Church of Christ. Jeremiah Wright does not wake up every morning dedicated to dividing people. However, the antipode of this divisiveness is the core mission of Barack Obama. . . .
Accordingly, this inclines me to ask what Obama did about this profound philosophical error. . . . I must ask whether he worked to persuade Wright and the parishioners who applauded so jubilantly at his divisive words that they were wrong on a matter of existential importance. If he did, what was the consequence of those efforts? Did he succeed in bringing about change at Trinity?
When Obama moved to Chicago some 20 years ago, he could have chosen from any of hundreds of churches in his neighborhood. He chose this one. He then became close to Wright. It's not as though he was raised in the church and thus feels an obligation to stay with it.
So why did he choose this church to begin with? The obvious answer is that he agreed with the pastor. After all, he's the face of the church and the first guy he with know a lot about.
Obama's speech yesterday
The mainstream media is falling all over themselves to praise Barack Obama's speech yesterday on race in America (or so the media says it was about). And that's sort of true, in that Obama talked mostly about that.
However, everyone seems to be trying to forget that his recent problems stem from the racist and anti-American pastor at his church, Jeremiah Wright. Saying that he made a few goofy statements that he doesn't agree with, then seguing into blaming white people for making blacks think like that, doesn't cut it. Obama knowingly joined that church and has been a member for over 20 years. Obama calls Wright his "spiritual mentor". Wright married the Obamas and baptized their children. There's no doubt that Obama knew about Wright's insane views and did nothing about it.
In the speech he could have denounced Wright, but he clearly did not, regardless of the sugar-coating being done by the mainstream media. Michelle Malkin has lots of actual speech excerpts you can read on your own and decide. In addition, Investors Business Daily has a good editorial on the speech:
But Obama's recent troubles, which this much-hyped speech was supposed to put past him, are not about race relations. They're about one churchman who happens to be black, whose views from the pulpit are repugnant and from whom Obama doesn't seem to have the guts to distance himself.
Reacting to being linked with a bigoted conspiracy theorist by lecturing the nation on race is like disgraced ex-New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer responding to his getting caught patronizing an international prostitution ring by giving a speech on the female physique.
The supposed divide between black and white is not the issue here; Obama's longtime association with Jeremiah Wright is.
This is a man who believes the U.S. government formulated the HIV virus to commit genocide against blacks and that it is also responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
Yes, Obama claimed in his speech to have "condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy." But he quickly proceeded to equivocate regarding them.
Do you think I am making too much of this? Here's a thought exercise: what if a white Republican attended for 20 years a church where the preacher, during service, regularly said that black people caused all kinds of problems in the world. Don't you think the media would do everything in their power to destroy him? Does Obama get a break because not only he's a Democrat, not only because he's black, but maybe also because the media is so condescending of blacks that they think it's OK for them have these insane ideas (rather than rational ones)?
I'm not bringing up a hypothetical. Let Peter Wehner take you back to the 2000 presidential race:
We actually have an example of how the MSM plays the “guilt by association” card when it comes to certain political and religious figures. In the 2000 campaign George W. Bush spoke once at Bob Jones University; it was an event used to bludgeon Bush with for the rest of the campaign and into his presidency. And, of course, Bush did not attend Bob Jones University, financially support it, or consider Bob Jones to be his spiritual mentor or close friend for 25 years. Yet these things mattered not at all. Bush spoke at Bob Jones University — and so to many in the press, he was joined at the hip with it. The association between Reverend Wright and Senator Obama is far deeper in every respect.
If Obama were truly the post-racial presidential candidate, shouldn't we hold him to the same standards as any other candidate?
UPDATE: I had written earlier about Obama that while I agreed with him on very little, he'd be preferable to Hillary because at least he's a good person. After the last week or so, I no longer think that. I'm not the only one.
However, everyone seems to be trying to forget that his recent problems stem from the racist and anti-American pastor at his church, Jeremiah Wright. Saying that he made a few goofy statements that he doesn't agree with, then seguing into blaming white people for making blacks think like that, doesn't cut it. Obama knowingly joined that church and has been a member for over 20 years. Obama calls Wright his "spiritual mentor". Wright married the Obamas and baptized their children. There's no doubt that Obama knew about Wright's insane views and did nothing about it.
In the speech he could have denounced Wright, but he clearly did not, regardless of the sugar-coating being done by the mainstream media. Michelle Malkin has lots of actual speech excerpts you can read on your own and decide. In addition, Investors Business Daily has a good editorial on the speech:
But Obama's recent troubles, which this much-hyped speech was supposed to put past him, are not about race relations. They're about one churchman who happens to be black, whose views from the pulpit are repugnant and from whom Obama doesn't seem to have the guts to distance himself.
Reacting to being linked with a bigoted conspiracy theorist by lecturing the nation on race is like disgraced ex-New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer responding to his getting caught patronizing an international prostitution ring by giving a speech on the female physique.
The supposed divide between black and white is not the issue here; Obama's longtime association with Jeremiah Wright is.
This is a man who believes the U.S. government formulated the HIV virus to commit genocide against blacks and that it is also responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
Yes, Obama claimed in his speech to have "condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy." But he quickly proceeded to equivocate regarding them.
Do you think I am making too much of this? Here's a thought exercise: what if a white Republican attended for 20 years a church where the preacher, during service, regularly said that black people caused all kinds of problems in the world. Don't you think the media would do everything in their power to destroy him? Does Obama get a break because not only he's a Democrat, not only because he's black, but maybe also because the media is so condescending of blacks that they think it's OK for them have these insane ideas (rather than rational ones)?
I'm not bringing up a hypothetical. Let Peter Wehner take you back to the 2000 presidential race:
We actually have an example of how the MSM plays the “guilt by association” card when it comes to certain political and religious figures. In the 2000 campaign George W. Bush spoke once at Bob Jones University; it was an event used to bludgeon Bush with for the rest of the campaign and into his presidency. And, of course, Bush did not attend Bob Jones University, financially support it, or consider Bob Jones to be his spiritual mentor or close friend for 25 years. Yet these things mattered not at all. Bush spoke at Bob Jones University — and so to many in the press, he was joined at the hip with it. The association between Reverend Wright and Senator Obama is far deeper in every respect.
If Obama were truly the post-racial presidential candidate, shouldn't we hold him to the same standards as any other candidate?
UPDATE: I had written earlier about Obama that while I agreed with him on very little, he'd be preferable to Hillary because at least he's a good person. After the last week or so, I no longer think that. I'm not the only one.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
People are dumb
Since I spend most of my life around people who are rational and intelligent (or at least more so than most), I can sometimes forget just how stupid and rude much of the populace is.
Some girl who works for a pizza place answering the phones is reminded every day, however, and gives some suggestions to those people. The rest of us get to read it and be appalled.
Here's number 2, for example, and look how she immediately knows that people like me are not going to believe how dumb some people are (before she says I would do it too):
2. KNOW YOUR ADDRESS! Don't giggle, you overpaid salaried- MBA reading this during your lunch-hour. YOU are the IDIOT that calls and says "We just moved. It's by the store on the corner." Really? Thank goodness there is only one store on a corner in all of Washington State. For a moment, I thought I might actually have to look on a map to see where you live or verifiy the northeastern part of this town or the west side of the next city. Oh, and when I politely mention that I need an exact address, don't huff and act like I'M the one making things difficult. Find a piece of mail. Look on your lease or morgage papers. Go outside. You DO have an address, contrary to the nameless customer who insisted "they" took his address away (but he's got other problems).
Some girl who works for a pizza place answering the phones is reminded every day, however, and gives some suggestions to those people. The rest of us get to read it and be appalled.
Here's number 2, for example, and look how she immediately knows that people like me are not going to believe how dumb some people are (before she says I would do it too):
2. KNOW YOUR ADDRESS! Don't giggle, you overpaid salaried- MBA reading this during your lunch-hour. YOU are the IDIOT that calls and says "We just moved. It's by the store on the corner." Really? Thank goodness there is only one store on a corner in all of Washington State. For a moment, I thought I might actually have to look on a map to see where you live or verifiy the northeastern part of this town or the west side of the next city. Oh, and when I politely mention that I need an exact address, don't huff and act like I'M the one making things difficult. Find a piece of mail. Look on your lease or morgage papers. Go outside. You DO have an address, contrary to the nameless customer who insisted "they" took his address away (but he's got other problems).
Weekend movie reviews
I'm pretty busy, but here are the three movies I watched this weekend, in order from worst to first (very light on links, sorry). I was surprised at how strong this group was:
American Pie Presents Beta House
This is something like the 3rd movie they have made that went straight to video, and they have all been good. The other two have good stories, but this one was lacking. I'm willing to overlook that, as there were lots of times I laughed out loud during this one. If you are also in a perpetual state of immaturiy and enjoy movies about fraternity rivalries (even though I wasn't in a frat), you should get a kick out of this one.
The Simpsons Movie
I thought this movie was very funny, and it's only not in the top slot due to the other movie's surprising greatness. I went in with moderate expectations, as Simpsons fans I know crapped on it. I could have done without all of the environmental hippie-ness, but they did it in a funny way. Matt Groening and crew had a very difficult job in making this movie, as they wanted it to feel bigger than a TV episode but not over-the-top in silliness. I think they succeeded. Plus, the animation was outstanding.
Kickin It Old Skool
I'm not completely surprised at how funny this was, but I didn't expect it, especially since it started pretty slowly and had some weak moments. It was also very formulaic. The great moments were enough to overcome that, however. Plus, it's a formula for a reason: it works. I loved Malibu's Most Wanted, so I figured Jamie Kennedy wouldn't give me a metaphorical pile of poop. He didn't.
I originally wrote the things I liked about this movie in paragraph format, but it was very poorly written. Here's a list:
1. The cast was excellent, and the female lead was played by the comely Maria Menounos. Also included was Shooter McGavin, Forman's mom, Juwanna Mann, and (very briefly) Cameron.
2. There was tons of great 1980's music, including Herbie Hancock's "Rockit" being played about 10 times and a crapload of old rap.
3. There were lots of references to 1980's toys and other cultural stuff in the dialogue, as might be expected when the movie is about a 32-year-old man who woke up from a 20-year coma in 2006.
4. The breakdancing scenes were quite enjoyable.
Quote of the movie: "They also made jeans washed in acid. Which is AWESOME!" (Maybe you have to see it in context.)
I cannot recommend this movie highly enough if you like some combination of the things I described in the list above. It was one of the best movies I've seen in a long time.
OK, I had to find some pictures:
American Pie Presents Beta House
This is something like the 3rd movie they have made that went straight to video, and they have all been good. The other two have good stories, but this one was lacking. I'm willing to overlook that, as there were lots of times I laughed out loud during this one. If you are also in a perpetual state of immaturiy and enjoy movies about fraternity rivalries (even though I wasn't in a frat), you should get a kick out of this one.
The Simpsons Movie
I thought this movie was very funny, and it's only not in the top slot due to the other movie's surprising greatness. I went in with moderate expectations, as Simpsons fans I know crapped on it. I could have done without all of the environmental hippie-ness, but they did it in a funny way. Matt Groening and crew had a very difficult job in making this movie, as they wanted it to feel bigger than a TV episode but not over-the-top in silliness. I think they succeeded. Plus, the animation was outstanding.
Kickin It Old Skool
I'm not completely surprised at how funny this was, but I didn't expect it, especially since it started pretty slowly and had some weak moments. It was also very formulaic. The great moments were enough to overcome that, however. Plus, it's a formula for a reason: it works. I loved Malibu's Most Wanted, so I figured Jamie Kennedy wouldn't give me a metaphorical pile of poop. He didn't.
I originally wrote the things I liked about this movie in paragraph format, but it was very poorly written. Here's a list:
1. The cast was excellent, and the female lead was played by the comely Maria Menounos. Also included was Shooter McGavin, Forman's mom, Juwanna Mann, and (very briefly) Cameron.
2. There was tons of great 1980's music, including Herbie Hancock's "Rockit" being played about 10 times and a crapload of old rap.
3. There were lots of references to 1980's toys and other cultural stuff in the dialogue, as might be expected when the movie is about a 32-year-old man who woke up from a 20-year coma in 2006.
4. The breakdancing scenes were quite enjoyable.
Quote of the movie: "They also made jeans washed in acid. Which is AWESOME!" (Maybe you have to see it in context.)
I cannot recommend this movie highly enough if you like some combination of the things I described in the list above. It was one of the best movies I've seen in a long time.
OK, I had to find some pictures:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)