Lately

Watched some of that dem debate last night on CNN. It was lovely. Lots of jabs . . . and lots of Obama looking like an amateur. Not that I think the daily job of the President is to be able to quickly respond to jabs off the cuff. But it's fun seeing candidates get flustered, something Obama usually avoids during his campaign revival speeches. Huckabee might be the former Baptist preacher, but Obama is the healer that speaks in tongues that the youth of America seem to understand.

Al Gore tried to tap into a similar language with his save the planet concerts. Lots and lots of energetic rock stars motivated us to save ourselves by saving energy. Or at least that was the goal. As we speak, my closet light is on, my kitchen light is on, my lamp is on next to my bed, I'm using an LCD tv as a wonderfully large computer monitor, and I have my speakers blaring some dance radio channel that is streaming on iTunes. So really the only thing Al Gore achieved in this house is a few Tivo'd viewings of Madonna's appearance at his concert. She was awesome . . . especially on an energy hogging HD tv.

When I watch Obama's speeches, I get the same feeling as I did while watching Al Gore's concerts. Yay! We can change the world! Superfun! The world is one big commune! Hold me! Perhaps Obama will be a bit more successful in following thru with his big vague crusade, because if he wins the presidency, he actually has some responsibilities to complete upon winning. Once Al Gore won the Nobel Prize and the Oscar, he just went back to his mansion in Tennessee to write his memoir, now complete with the public redemption he needs to make it a best seller.

Maybe I should compare Obama to someone still in the political arena, a recent Democrat elected to fulfill the promise of bringing about a tidal wave of change: Nancy Pelosi. If you don't remember, the People voted for change in the last round of elections . . . it is not a new mantra. In return, the People received a Democratic congress, new congressional drapes, an increase in the frequency of congressional meetings to plan other congressional meetings, and a decrease in the blinks per minute by the Speaker of the House. Sure, there are plenty of excuses for why that round of change didn't happen as planned. Sure, Nancy ain't no president. I'm just saying . . . past is prologue.

Remember when Bush #1 wasn't going to raise taxes? (1998) Remember when Clinton wasn't going to throw gays under the bus? (1992) Remember when Clinton did not have sex with that woman? (ok, so that's not a campaign promise, but I had to throw it in) Remember when Bush was going to unite everyone in Washington? (2000) Remember when Bush was going to do away with gay marriage forever? (2004) Remember when Obama was going to make change? (2008)

Perhaps it is the realistic bent I have when it comes to politics, but I appreciate forward-looking optimism tempered with honest assessment. An elevated heartrate as our future is painted like a hippie's VW bus? I'll pass.

Warm and All Wet

Remember when having clean air and clean water was enough? Apparently now everything positive we do for the environment must be tied to our impending broiling by Global Warming. It's become a religion. Some do things in the name or their god, and if the things they do are without reason we call them crazy zealots. Some do things in the name of Global Warming, and we just call them Oscar winners. Their script/scripture is simple: we are absolutely, undeniably frying ourselves.

Some of us never read that in the book of Revelation, and plenty of scientists haven't read it in their tea leaves either, but that doesn't stop some people from forgetting to keep their church and their state separate.

Case in point: the mile high city. The city government (and the resident hippies/retirees) have decided to become martyrs by raising taxes on consumers and generally denying themselves some modern "conveniences" with their Climate Action Plan to save the world from Global Warming. I applaud the effort and the good it may bring about but not the rationale. Clean up your city, Denver, clean up your water, be better stewards of your city's resources. But don't make your citizens pay a tax/tithe to Global Warming so you can achieve sainthood. It's all a bit, well, crazy zealot.

Instead, join my church, and start praying we don't get hit by an Asteroid!!! It's gonna happen people and we have no way to stop it! Don't believe me? There are 10 documentaries coming out about it next year, all hosted by people who created the internet who know a lot about Asteroids and the danger they present. All 10 documentaries reach the same conclusion: we need to start taxing people everytime they engage in activites that take their eyes away from the sky. Why? Because we need as many people as possible keeping watch for that killer Asteroid, that's why you idiot!!! Are you that stupid that you can't figure out how to drink the Kool-Aid? You can't keep your head in the sand forever!!! Everytime a star twinkles it could be because an Asteroid passed in front of the star just at that moment and you have to warn everyone about it!!! Or it could be because of astronomical scintillation (google it if you must), but it MIGHT not be!!! Furthermore, the money we raise from those taxes can then be spent on a giant super laser capable of destroying any incoming Asteroid . . . and while we wait for that Asteroid we can aim the super laser at the Moon, just to make sure it isn't seduced by those shifty Asteroids into joining their team.

At least those of us in the fight against Asteroids can still turn on a light bulb without thinking that was the one watt of energy, from the one coal burning power plant, that released the one carbon emission that sent us all to our doom. Cuz you know CNN would track that shit down like it was a hanging chad and you would have one really bad day for being "that guy". On the other hand, perhaps I do like the self-righteousness that comes with thinking that turning off my lights saved everyone on the planet . . .

Go for it Global Warming zealots. Turn off your light bulbs. What? You already have? Well maybe that explains a lot more than I thought.

Detainees

A refreshing perspective on how politics run amok has left us devoid of common sense.

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/a_deadly_kindness_opedcolumnists_richard_miniter.htm

Beat them, strip them, stack them in pyramids. Leave them in a dark room with no idea which direction to kneel when they pray. Their rights died when they decided to make us their enemy. Why there is so much indecision on how to treat these guys boggles my mind. Guns and knives should be in their faces, not burgers and fish filets.

My Super Power

There is a new show debuting on NBC this month called "Heroes". It looks promising because it does for X-Men-The Movie what M*A*S*H the tv show did for the movie M*A*S*H. "Heroes", however, has a refreshing twist: no costumes. The everyday individuals with superpowers haven't bought stock in the world's spandex manufacturers. At least in the previews they haven't. I hope it continues that way because I prefer believable storylines. Spandex clad superheroes are way less believable than Banana Republic clad ones.

By a stroke of luck, today I discovered my own superpower. While surfing YouTube, I stumbled across a news/propoganda clip produced by that crazy cult leader Fred Phelps. I listened to his diatribe against America and its people until I noticed one of the signs he holds up at his protests. It simply said "Fags Doom Nations". Funny stuff huh? Or is it . . . I know my sexuality is viewed by some as being a threat. But I had no idea I had the power to disrupt the very foundations of national sovereignty.

If, as Fred Phelps says, I have the power to doom nations, I feel that I must use my power for good. Even though it is cooler to be the bad guy, and I'm sure that being a bad guy would let me wear a cooler costume, I don't think I could use my powers of doom for anything but good. I freely volunteer to enlist in the Army, or the Secret Service, or the CIA . . . whatever it takes to help America defeat its enemies. Just get my ass to North Korea, or to Iran, or to Syria. Let me doom them. Let my dooming power bring them to their knees. Better yet, form a legion of doom-capable men like me. Let's make sure we get the job done right the first time. Charter a 747 and ship 500 of us super humans to North Korea. After a few cocktails on the flight over, surely our combined powers of doom will bring about said doom more quickly. We promise to stay focused on the task and not to doom all over each other.

Unfortunately, those that publicly embrace their doom aren't allowed to fight for this nation with guns, much less something as powerful as doom. Nonetheless, I encourage all my friends to embrace their inner-doom. I also want to remind Freddy Phelps that everyone is doomed; stressing about it just makes it happen faster.

Problem Solved

The middle east conflict is starting to annoy me, in the same way a long movie annoys me when I have to take a piss. Here’s how to end this never ending drama known as the Star of David versus the 77 virgins:

Force someone to win. A “v”, “VS”, or the long hand VERSUS stuck between two entities does not mean a perpetual stalemate. There are few exceptions to this (see the MLB All-Star game as ruined by Bud Selig). The middle east needs to be recognized as being one match that has gone on way too long, and it’s time to take penalty kicks so that we can turn it off.

Peace is the result of a clear winner establishing themselves as such. Unfortunately for the mideast, no clear winner has been established. And the result is the continual bleeding of each side for no reason, no benefit, no advancement of peace; instead people die on such a regular basis we only notice when the number spikes or when Americans' vacations are interrupted.

Soledad O’Brien, co-anchor of CNN’s American Morning, brought up the anthem of the idiots yet again: “If Israel isn't careful not to hurt civilians in Lebanon, it will cause more hatred and anger and therefore cause more terrorism.” Someone needs to remind her that she does not channel the spirit of Solomon every time she opens her mouth. If Soledad had actually done the math, civilian casualties will create less terrorism because a dead civilian cannot be a terrorist. Furthermore, Soledad forgot what the entire hippie generation taught us: it is a lot easier to be steadfast in your dogma when you don’t have to worry about the basics in life. A hippie with a tshirt, a VW van, a joint, and Mom and Dad’s bank account will preach against the man, the jobs he offers, and the possessions his jobs may afford. But that same hippie, when penniless, will turn into who many of us call Mom and Dad – people working for the man. Just like the hippie, it is easy to be a radical when the terrorist organization, Hezbollah, is providing your shelter, water, education, and protection.

But what happens when all of it is bombed into oblivion? You get a bunch of “terrorists” thinking that without shelter, water, and protection they better find some fast. There is no more free time to sing the praises of Iran. The focus turns to the more immediate need of survival. Not every Lebanese citizen is a potential terrorist, Soledad. The Hezbollah are not the every-man in Lebanon. Lebanese citizens are not irrational people. Nor are they a Hezbollah commercial away from shooting roman candles at Israelis. If they aren’t a terrorist now, I’m thinking they aren’t going to be any time soon. It’s the crazies here at home that we should be worried about. The people that have shelter, food, water, and education are the people who have time to ingest what Soledad reports and reach conclusions based on her skewed perspective. Civilians haven't died in Lebanon due to the carelessness of Israel. They died because Hezbollah operated among them. Get it right, Soledad.

To prevent such a perspective from taking root, let’s allow a clear winner to emerge in this conflict and bring about peace the old reliable way. We in the United States are all too aware of how we obtained our peaceful 50 states. Our leaders fought and killed and fought and killed until there was no one left to fight and kill us. Today we take our peaceful land for granted, while out of the other side of our mouths lamenting the oppression we rained upon others in the pursuit of this land. While there were times our nation’s massacre of countless individuals was unnecessary to win a battle or a war, had the United States not established itself as the clear victor, we would have the same backyard terrorism as Israel does today. Lucky for us, the international community didn’t care what we were doing in our backyard.

So why tie Israel’s hands? Has anyone considered letting the diplomatic methods of the past, all failures, stay in the past? Instead of seeing the entire history of the United States as an embarrassment, perhaps we should see it as an overall model of what it takes to solidify a region in peace. Let’s allow Israel to fight Hezbollah until there is no more Hezbollah. And if Iran officially gets involved, let’s allow nuclear capable Israel to fight it out with not-yet-nuclear Iran. We’ll have Soledad O’Brien to make sure that once one side has officially won, there will be no unnecessary massacres . . . but if there are I am sure she will give us all a front row seat, and then blame us for it somehow.

Enough with playing chicken. Meet out on the playground and finally settle who rules the sandbox. No referees calling fouls. My bet is that one side will eventually blink. And the peace we’ve all been looking for will have been found, instead of just being talked about over and over and over again.

Just a non-newsworthy rant

I don't know how many people read CNN.com, but I do. I read it because it has the layout of the old ABCNEWS.com, with easy to read headlines followed by more targeted categorical headlines below. ABCNEWS.com is now a shit hole of a website, so over-burdened with news quips and video links it makes my eyes hurt. Both CNN.com and ABCNEWS.com post headlines that are really links to video broadcasts, which sucks because if you just want to read the story, you can't. However, CNN.com suffers less from this stupid idea to get us all hooked on webcasted news. The whole reason I go online for news is to get away from the celebutants reading from a teleprompter. Thanks, but I can read on my own, without stuttering.

CNN.com and ABCNEWS.com also use the occasional banner bulletin when important breaking news happens. Taking a page from those newspapers of old, when words like WAR and TITANIC SINKS and VICTORY were the only thing above the fold, both sites flash colored banners above the less-important headlines. Props to the intern who thought it up, but boo-hiss to the executive editors at CNN.com who have ruined it already.

The banners on CNN.com are in different colors - sometimes red, sometimes yellow. Why exactly? Is red more important than yellow news? Does a red banner mean the news relates to blood shed? Or is a yellow banner just a ripened form of a red banner, signifying breaking news an hour ago? I remember when CNN made a good living deriding the Homeland Security color-coded alert scheme. At least that scheme was explained to me.

Did you hear yesterday that prosecutors decided not to charge Rush Limbaugh with a violation of his probation for possessing viagra? I heard about it, because it was a fucking red breaking news banner on CNN.com. If that is the kind of thing that makes a banner headline, then who does CNN.com think are its readers? They might as well start putting up banner headlines every hour on the hour that George Bush is still president, because the same group of people who thought the headline about Rush was a huge news-worthy shock and dissapointment will be waiting and willing to suffer the same dissappointment 24 times a day. The entire Rush Limbaugh non-event could have just as easily been a link under the U.S. News or Politics category. The whole thing makes me think that CNN.com has a pre-made purple banner headline with confetti animation for the day that Rush dies.

It's all very sad really . . . when a news organization, or at least the techie in charge of the banner headlines, telegraphs its ridiculous hatred for one individual so blatantly. And don't think for a moment that CNN.com was celebrating the fact that Rush was not going to be prosecuted further. If that was the case, the banner would have read "CNN.com has been purchased by FoxNews".

Addicted to Fools

No, my boyfriend is not a fool. But the book he brought home, "Conspiracy of Fools", is a true story about the goings-ons behind the doors of Enron. AND I CANNOT PUT IT DOWN!
The decades leading up to the scandal were a scandal in themselves. I am not an accountant, but I can still understand the limited amount of business and accounting lingo. In fact, if you pick up this nearly 700 page thriller, I guarantee that you will be reading and think "well, that's not a good idea for x, y, and z reasons." Then, between 5 and 50 pages later, you will be right!

Of course, the storyline of the book is classic Titanic, so you do have the benefit of hindsight. But the story is captivating no matter how much or how little you know about the Enron scandal. You sympathize with the characters, both the evil idiots and the ethical do-gooders. It is easy to blame those that got caught up in the culture of the company as having tunnel vision. However, you will also begin praying that a career so blindingly attractive never corrupts you.

And remember . . . this book recommendation is coming from a guy who has not picked up a single book to read outside of a classroom or employment situation in 6 years. So either I have no perspective or I finally found something worth reading.

The author is Kurt Eichenwald.