Army of Dog

Okay, now he’s just starting to feel like a stalker.  I got another email from Barack this morning.  It’s the same intro where he flatters me with all of the bullshit about how important I am, and how he can’t do this without me, but now he’s trying to buy my affection on the cheap. 

Brett –

Next week, we have the opportunity to close out this race and secure the nomination for Barack — but there’s another deadline coming up even sooner.

Financial reports for April will be filed this Wednesday at midnight. The media pundits and Washington insiders will be watching the results and judging the strength of our campaign by the money we raise.

But what’s most impressive about our movement is that our funding has come from grassroots supporters like you. We’ve never accepted donations from Washington lobbyists or special interest PACs. Instead, more than 1,500,000 ordinary people have stepped up to own a piece of this campaign.

To meet this deadline and celebrate our grassroots donors, we’ve created a special gift.

Make a donation of $15 or more before midnight on Wednesday, April 30th, and receive a limited edition Vote for Change car magnet:

https://donate.barackobama.com/magnet

The crucial North Carolina and Indiana primaries will require unprecedented resources. But we also need to start preparing for the general election.

We’re building a powerful grassroots movement in all 50 states — organizing communities, registering voters, and bringing new voices into the political process.

We have accomplished so much, but we need your support today — to finish this contest, and to get ready to take on Senator McCain.

Yesterday, he was trying to give me t-shirts with his name on them and a DVD of him giving some speech, but today it’s car magnets.  Is that what our friendship comes down to?  “Hey Brett, give me a few bucks, I gotta go win North Carolina.  Oh, and here, have a car magnet buddy.”  Yeah, how’d that $50 for the contest in Pennsylvania work out?  He keeps begging me for money, meanwhile he doesn’t show up for his job, he sends his wife out to drum up money for him, and he jet-sets around the country partying with people he don’t even know and wants me to fund it.  This is getting really old, I mean I’m willing to help out a friend here and there, but this constant demand for money is really damaging my trust.

So it seems that Hannah Montana did a photo shoot with Annie Leibovitz for Vanity Fair and at least one picture contained implied nudity. Yes, I think that photographs involving 15-year-olds should avoid even implied nudity, yes I think that goes double when the 15-year-old is a near demi-goddess to tweeners everywhere, but please forgive me if I can’t manufacture outrage. Really, the idea that any parent of a preteen girl has the right to be surprised at this is laughable.

Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, Lindsay Lohan, is any of this starting to seem familiar. Frankly, Miley Cyrus will be doing well by those standards if she isn’t appearing three times a night at the Spearmint Rhino in five years. We’ve turned teen stardom into a proving ground for oversexed, alcoholic, twenty-something disasters. I don’t want to be the bearer of bad news here, but that seemingly innocent teenage girl that your 11-year-old daughter wants to emulate is going to be naked on film somewhere in the next three to five years. It’s pretty much a certainty. She’s going to reach an age where being pigeonholed as an innocent teenage girl is going to interfere with her plans for her future career. When that happens, someone is going to convince her that getting naked on screen or in a photo session will break her out of that mold. One day Anne Hathaway is doing Ella Enchanted and The Princess Diaries, the next she’s topless in the backseat of a convertible blowing some douchebag. You have no right to be surprised at this by now. I’ve seen dogs figure out a pattern with less repetition.

Just in case you need a more visual demonstration of the express lane to whoredom that is the modern teen pop superstar, follow me below the fold for a pictorial journey through time.

*** Fair Warning, the pictures below are Not Safe for Work.***

(more…)

Senator Obama, or Barry as I call him when we talk, sent me another email this morning asking me to travel to North Carolina and campaign for him.  It’s asking a lot, but he was pretty cool about it.

Brett —

I’ve just landed in North Carolina, and I wanted to let you know about where we stand in this battleground state.

All across North Carolina, I’ve spoken to veterans, students, and factory workers about the challenges small-town America is facing — and about how we’re going to start solving them.

I see the excitement on the ground, and I truly believe North Carolina is ready to stand up for a different kind of politics. But only if people like you get involved and take ownership of this effort.

In the coming days, supporters across the country will be coming to North Carolina to knock on doors, make phone calls, and Get Out The Vote for Primary Day on May 6th — and they need your help.

I know this is a big decision. But what’s brought our campaign where we are today is that so many people — including many who never thought they’d get involved in politics in their lifetime — have taken that leap to help us succeed.

We need to finish strong in the Tar Heel State, so I hope you’ll sign up to take the trip this weekend.

I’m trying to imagine what will be descending on the good people of North Carolina in the coming days.  The influx of Trans-gender Unionized Healthcare Workers for Obama alone will make Sherman’s March seem like the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade by comparison.

Okay, I admit it, I’ve been lurking on HuffPo again.  I know, but I can’t help it.  David Sirota is whining about the fact that Congressional Democrats are coming to the reality that the socialist pipe dream of universal, government-run healthcare won’t be happening anytime soon.  It’s the usual bullshit about how there’s really a massive swell of popular support for pseudo-communist state-run "healthcare."  The post itself is pretty damn boring, but the comments are a real hoot.  Evidently, the fact that Democrat politicians are putting their political aspirations ahead of fealty to left-wing ideology is just a shock.

One portion of a comment stood out among all of the whining, however.  In a sea of misinformed stupidity Phoenixfire089 managed to distinguish himself.  Here’s the first paragraph of his comment (emphasis is mine):

Schumer’s quotes illustrate the gap between politicians and regular people. This morning I woke up to a guest on a tv program speaking about how American’s average lifespan has stagnated and that 20% of women will not make it to that average. Further, the United States is 24th in a ranking of infant mortality…lower than Cuba. According to recent studies, there is a statistically significant relationship between wealth and life expectancy.

I’m pretty sure that it doesn’t take a college-level understanding of statistics to grasp the idea that a certain percentage of any data set will fall short of the average.  Hence the term average.  So we’ve established that Phoenixfire089 is an idiot, but the statistics cited in that paragraph present an interesting, and common, argument for universal healthcare.

Virtually every discussion with a left-wing nationalized healthcare advocate will eventually lead to a lecture about America’s dismal performances in the areas of infant mortality and life expectancy.  Naturally, they’ve picked two of the worst possible indicators of the quality of a healthcare system.  Why are they such bad indicators?  Because the results are contaminated by too many factors that are outside the control of any healthcare system, much less a government-run one.

But don’t take my word for it.  David Hogberg has an article on this issue that gives a number of reasons why these two statistics are poor indicators of the quality of a healthcare system.  It’s a couple of years old, but I found it particularly informative.  If you find yourself having this debate with someone and need to respond to those statistics, this article is an excellent resource. 

Don’t ask why or how, but as I was surfing the supporter blogs on the Obama campaign website I came across this post by someone named "Abigail."  It’s a self-aggrandizing, incoherent diatribe by someone with a serious martyr complex, but it’s funny, so I share.  If you want to skip the actual reading, I’ll summarize.  Girl who loves the Obamessiah is out on a Friday night wearing her "HUGE" Obama pin.  Some evil, white, misogynistic bastard walks past her and mutters "racist" when he sees the pin on her coat.  Personally, I call bullshit on that story, but I guess it’s possible that random white guys are so exorcised by the Jeremiah Wright controversy that they go around muttering "racist" at Obama supporters.

Where it gets really funny is when our poor supporter uses this anecdote as an excuse to go on an anti-war tear.  Here’s the good part.

Ultimately this man’s response simply reminded me of my twin Brother’s arrogant and mis informed reuplican view point about OBAMA.   Isn’t it amazing that with all the crap with this war- we have seen how this adminstration is LYING to us and how the MSM feeds on this and just perpetuates these lies out of laziness and for a sensationalism that will produce ratings and something to talk about around the water cooler- generating gossip that is empty and false.  It also made me realize- these people who are misinformed- are the ones who still think we should stay in Iraq, who don’t see ALL of the bad things about the war, and instead only a few… So this is what we are up against essentially… But there are more of us who are informed than those who are not (HOPE)!

Now, aside from the indecipherable fucking grammar, I got more than a little tickled by the idea that this idiot actually walks around believing that she’s part of some uber-informed elite because she reads the Obama campaign talking points.  This illustrates perfectly what I’ve said before, there is nothing about the weakness of Obama’s policy positions that will convince empty-headed zombies like Abigail here that he isn’t the Second Coming.  He could get caught tomorrow humping a chicken while writing love poems to Osama bin Laden and they would start claiming that the chicken was asking for it.

As bad as dear Abigail is, she’s a fucking Rhodes Scholar compared to one of her commenters.

By Alyce Rocco Apr 5th 2008 at 1:15 pm EDT

Nice thought but I have a bit of trouble liking people who are haters. I have tried for years to educate people without success. Ku Klux Klan people are firm in their beliefs and do not budge or respond to love and reason. For me it has always been like talking to a brick wall. I have found the only thing that works for me is to walk away from the type who’s minds and hearts are closed. I would not make a good Mother Teresa.

Yep, Alyce must be getting awfully tired from dragging her cross around all day.  If only all the Klan members that she tries to "educate" would just put away their hate and open their hearts to her message.

Here’s your little ray of sunshine for today.  People like Alyce and Abigail get to vote, and you have to get at least one of your intelligent friends or family members to go with you to the polls just to cancel them out.  Yeah, my other nickname is Pollyanna.

Wow, talk about your rapid response teams.  Maybe Barry O does have a plan for a "strike force" to keep Iraq from descending into chaos.  Within a few hours of his loss in the Pennsylvania primary, an email arrived in my inbox from the Obama campaign.  It was pretty brief and to the point.  The gist of it is that we shouldn’t worry about the results, because after all the Obamessiah didn’t lose as badly as he once thought he might.  Or something like that.

Brett –

Votes are still being counted in Pennsylvania, but one thing is already clear.

In a state where we trailed by more than 25 points just a couple weeks ago, you helped close the gap to a slimmer margin than most thought possible.

Thanks to your support, with just 9 contests remaining, we’ve won more delegates, more votes, and twice as many contests.

We hold a commanding position, but there are two crucial contests coming up — voters will head to the polls in North Carolina and Indiana in exactly two weeks. And we’re already building our organization in the other remaining states.

But it’s clear the attacks are going to continue, and we’re going to continue fighting a two-front battle against John McCain and Hillary Clinton.

I need your support right now. Please make a donation of $25:

https://donate.barackobama.com/whatthismeans

Thank you for all that you’re doing to change our country.

Barack

I thought it was nice that he took time out from his concession speech and busy campaign schedule to reassure me like that.  We’re pretty tight, but sometimes it hard for candidates to make time for the people closest to them.  It’s just nice to know that the tireless work I’m doing for the cause of change is appreciated by the man himself.  It’s okay that you’re not as cool as me, I’ll still let you read my blog.

I’m sitting in the living room watching television and this travesty appears on my screen:

Newt Gingrich, leader of the Republican Revolution in 1994, is sitting on a couch with Nancy Pelosi blabbering at me about global warming. After I picked myself up off the floor, I felt a sense of validation for the misgivings I’ve had about Gingrich since he left office. I never could shake the idea that, when it became clear that his political career was over, Gingrich subtly sabotaged the Republican caucus in the House by giving his blessing to leaders who were not capable of continuing his success. I may be off on that, but it’s an impression that has nagged me for years.

There is nothing subtle at all about this betrayal. What Gingrich is doing in this ad is providing a hammer that will be used against every conservative that argues against the imposition of leftist government policy under the guise of “climate change.” The phrase “well, Newt Gingrich disagrees with you!” or some variation thereof will greet those who are unwilling to submit to a radical socialist “solution” to environmental “crises.”

(more…)

This post on Rachel’s site generated a lot of discussion about women, men, and their respective needs in relationships. As I read through the comment thread, one commenter’s question stood out to me:

Erin_Coda Says:

That being said– for you guys in the group, is there any way for a woman to reassure her guy that she has no plans to chop off her hair or trade her little black dress for elastic-waist “mommy” jeans?

I’ve heard a similar question from female friends or acquaintances. Men seem to be accustomed to paying for the mistakes of other men when it comes to women’s expectations, but I’ve come across more and more women who feel like they are paying for the sins of their sisters lately. I’m far from a relationship expert, but, since I constantly seek to provide the kind of quality of insight that you’ve come to expect from free advice on the internet, I’d like to offer my humble answer to the above question. So ladies, grab a comfy chair and follow me for a deep and penetrating insight into the male psyche.

The point has been made many times that men are emotionally simple creatures. I use the word simple very deliberately, and you will notice that simple is not a synonym for stupid . The spectrum of male emotional needs is not a broad one, especially in comparison with the female spectrum. It is, however, every bit as critical to the success of relationships.

I want to begin with a disclaimer. Everything I’m about to say is a gross generalization. There are women who tend to be more masculine and men who tend to be less so. I understand this, but I don’t feel like qualifying every statement I make with an acknowledgment of the exceptions to every rule. If what I’m saying doesn’t apply to you, then I apologize in advance.

What are those few simple needs you ask? First is the need for respect. I don’t mean the kind of “obey me, for I am Man” caricature that feminists use to paint men as patriarchal oppressors. I mean a simple respect for the fact that your partner’s nature is a fundamentally male one. It comes as a surprise to no one with an ounce of sense that men and women are different. He is not going to like the same things you like, he won’t react to events the same way you do, and things that seem to be of enormous consequence to you may not be to him. If you treat these differences with respect, you will almost certainly get the same in return.

Secondly, men have a need to feel useful. More specifically, we need to feel useful in certain ways. No matter how put out we act, we love the fact that you call us in from another room to kill a spider. We want to know that you need us, even if you think you don’t. If you want to kill the desire a man has to be with you, make him feel useless and then make fun of his desire to be otherwise.

Lastly, men need sex. Yeah, you knew it was coming, good for you. I’m confident that I’m not exactly breaking news to anyone on that front. Much of human civilization has been engineered around our desire to see your boobies. It’s sad, but true. What you may not be as clear on is the fact that we also need to not be made to feel like burdensome perverts for that fact. Our need is not just for sex, it’s also a need to feel like you aren’t doing us some kind of special favor by participating. I don’t care if a couple is having sex ten times a week, if the woman is acting like she’s doing the man a favor they’re headed for trouble.

This is where we get to the specific answer to the question asked in the comment thread. If you want to convince a man early on that you’re not the type to let yourself go or abandon all attempts at femininity, all you have to do is demonstrate your understanding that his need to find you physically appealing is an important one. If it’s obvious from the outset that a woman understands that being attractive is about meeting a need for me, and not just a mechanism for gaining my attention, I won’t spend a single moment worrying about mommy jeans or unflattering haircuts.

That’s it, three simple needs. I’m sure that there are more, but I would contend that those are the biggies. In every successful, long-term relationship I’m familiar with, the woman attends carefully to those three needs without exception.

I know what you’re thinking, “What about my needs, and his responsibility to meet them?” Certainly the man has the same responsibility to discover your needs and attend to them. If you’re in a relationship and that’s not happening, then you’re going to have to go first. Start meeting his needs, and you’ll probably find that his willingness to meet yours skyrockets. No, it’s not fair that you have to make all the effort at first, but that’s the cold, hard reality. Life sucks, get a helmet.

At the risk of turning this blog into a running commentary on the local paper, I found a fascinating dichotomy in the “Letters to the Editor” section of the Sunday edition. The first letter is from James Long of Dallas. I don’t know James at all of course, but now, thanks to the miracle of nineteenth-century technology, I can say with confidence that James is an economic idiot. Here’s his letter:

Re: “Economy needs Bush cuts,” by Alan Walne, Monday Letters.

What we could do is let the Bush tax cuts for those making more than $200,000 per year expire and increase taxes on these individuals. These tax savings could be passed on to those individuals making less than $200,000 per year. That way, there would be no actual overall tax increase and the economy would benefit. This would make the Bush tax cuts permanent, with just different individuals receiving the cuts. This is sound economic policy and necessary to future economic growth.

James Long, Dallas

If you work for a company or do most jobs that pay less than $200,000 per year, there’s a word for people who make more than that amount. “Boss,” from the Latin for “the guy who signs your fucking paycheck.” Economics is complicated, but this aspect of it is painfully damn simple. If the government takes more money away from your boss, he or she will have less money to either pay you or hire more people like you. I realize that throws a serious wrinkle in your whole “I’m jealous, so I’ll vote for the guy who promises to take away their money” theory of economic prosperity, but it’s true. So, I say this out of love and concern, grow the fuck up and stop whining about people who make more money than you.

If you want to be richer, then use your talents, time, creativity, and effort to build something that generates wealth. It’s not as easy as sitting around whining about how much the bastard down the street makes, but I guarantee you that it will get you a lot closer to your goal. And it will save those of us who understand basic fucking economics the time and trouble of working hard to cancel out your vote.

That brings us to our second letter on the same subject. This one comes from Gary Anderson of Anna, Tx. Anna is a small town north of Dallas, and it is home to at least one certified economic genius as far as I’m concerned. Here’s Gary’s letter:

Last weekend, I was reading the annual feature in Parade magazine called “What People Earn.” Now I’m an average guy, with average earnings. Last year, Miley Cyrus made $18.2 million, Tiger Woods made $115 million and Oprah Winfrey made $260 million.

I don’t begrudge these folks for making a lot more in one year than I’ll make in a lifetime. In fact, I applaud it.

What I do begrudge, however, is the fact that we gripe and moan about CEOs making millions of dollars and want to penalize them for it. Why do we have a double standard when it comes to athletes and entertainers?

We worship celebrity, but still want to stick it to the man. Well, the man keeps food on my table, clothes on my back and gas in my tank. Celebrities and politicians do not.

Gary Anderson, Anna

Certified fucking genius. I can’t tell you the warm, fuzzy feeling I got when I first read this letter. Here’s someone who isn’t rich, in fact he probably makes about the same amount of money that our friend James does, but he has grasped the fundamental truism that “the man” not only creates wealth for the economy as a whole, but also creates the jobs that “working people” need.

The problem, ultimately, is that there are a lot more Jameses than there are Garys. And as long as the Jameses are steeped in their ignorance, there will be politicians willing to exploit their sentiments. Hence the appeal of the Obamessiah to “working people.”

I’m bored on Saturday so here’s a little Bob Newhart audio from way back. If you’re not familiar with Newhart’s old stand-up routines, do the search thing on YouTube and set aside a couple hours.

Abe Lincoln vs. Madison Ave