Mmm, Musicals

Just finished watching Evita (well, kinda watching - did a lot of working whilst watching it).  I has a few observations.

Jonathan Pryce has an outstanding singing voice.

Antonio Banderas may not have the greatest face in the known universe, but for some reason, he is a sexy, sexy man.  And same thing goes for his singing.

I actually like Madonna when she's not singing pop.

Speaking of musical sorta movies, has anyone here seen De-Lovely?  If so, care to venture an opinion?

Dumbfuckery du Jour - Special Weekend Addition

Senator Judd Gregg, my darlings, is a supreme nitwit.  It's not ordinarily the case that a bit of dumbfuckery so extreme, so outrageous, so bloody motherfucking stupid comes down the pike on a Saturday afternoon that I feel compelled to give up precious writing time in order to unleash the Smack-o-Matic upon a sitting senator.  Judd Gregg, I'm afraid, has dropped just such a huge, steaming pile of stupidity right in our laps.  And it cannot be ignored.

Observe:

It was just five years ago that Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) was so anxious to let oil companies drill the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, he tried to use the budget reconciliation process to do it. "If you have 51 votes for your position, you win," he said at the time, adding, "Is there something wrong with majority rules? I don't think so."

This week, Gregg not only said there's something wrong with majority rules, he manufactured a bizarre history of the Senate that exists only in his imagination.

[U]nder the Senate rules, anything that comes across the floor of the Senate requires 60 votes to pass. It's called the filibuster. That's the way the Senate was structured. [...]

The Founding Fathers realized when they structured this they wanted checks and balances. They didn't want things rushed through. They saw the parliamentary system. They knew it didn't work... That's why we have the 60-vote situation over here in the Senate to require that things get full consideration.

That guy named Judd Gregg who said, "If you have 51 votes for your position, you win"? Yeah, he's gone missing, and has been replaced with this shameless hack.

It's hard to overstate how truly ridiculous Gregg's analysis is. It simply has no foundation in reality. The Senate wasn't "structured" to require supermajorities on literally every bill, nomination, and resolution -- that's the exact opposite of the truth. This isn't a subjective question open to interpretation; Gregg is just lying.

And when Gregg says the framers of the Constitution "saw the parliamentary system" and rejected it, he's just making things up. Matt Yglesias, who refers to Gregg as "an idiot," explained, "There were no countries operating on a modern parliamentary system when the constitution was written. And why doesn't it work? It seems to work in Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Hungary, India, Japan, Korea, etc."

You know what else is funny?  How the Founding Fathers, who were apparently soooo concerned with these supposed checks and balances, felt just fine about majority rule in the Senate (h/t):

First, the Constitution explicitly requires supermajorities only in a few special cases: ratifying treaties and constitutional amendments, overriding presidential vetoes, expelling members and for impeachments. With so many lawyers among them, the founders knew and operated under the maxim "expressio unius est exclusio alterius" -- the express mention of one thing excludes all others. But one need not leave it at a maxim. In the Federalist Papers, every time Alexander Hamilton or John Jay defends a particular supermajority rule, he does so at length and with an obvious sense of guilt over his departure from majority rule.

Second, Article I, Section 3, expressly says that the vice president as the presiding officer of the Senate should cast the deciding vote when senators are "equally divided." The procedural filibuster does an end run around this constitutional requirement, which presumed that on the truly contested bills there would be ties. With supermajority voting, the Senate is never "equally divided" on the big, contested issues of our day, so that it is a rogue senator, and not the vice president, who casts the deciding vote. The procedural filibuster effectively disenfranchises the vice president. [...]

Third, Article I pointedly mandates at least one rule of proceeding, namely, that a majority of senators (and House members, for that matter) will constitute a quorum. Article I, Section 5 states in part that "a majority of each shall constitute a majority to do business." Of course, in requiring a simple majority for a quorum, the founders were concerned about no-shows for a host of reasons -- not least of all because the first legislators had to travel great distances by stagecoach.

But the bigger reason for the rule was to keep a minority from walking out and thereby blocking a majority vote. In Federalist No. 75, Hamilton dismissed a supermajority rule for a quorum thus: "All provisions which require more than a majority of any body to its resolutions have a direct tendency to embarrass the operations of the government and an indirect one to subject the sense of the majority to that of the minority."

It would be illogical for the Constitution to preclude a supermajority rule with respect to a quorum while allowing it on an ad hoc and more convenient basis any time a minority wanted to block a vote. Yet that is essentially what Senate Rule 22 achieves on any bill that used to require a majority vote.

You know, I just read the Constitution again.  Funny how it never mentioned the necessity of a filibuster to preserve our precious democracy.  Funny how those folks who built our country from the ground up didn't bother giving everything "full consideration" until 1837:

In 1789, the first U.S. Senate adopted rules allowing the Senate "to move the previous question," ending debate and proceeding to a vote. Aaron Burr argued that the motion regarding the previous question was redundant, had only been exercised once in the preceding four years, and should be eliminated.^[4] In 1806, the Senate agreed, recodifying its rules, and thus the potential for a filibuster sprang into being.^[4] Because the Senate created no alternative mechanism for terminating debate, the filibuster became an option for delay and blocking of floor votes.

The filibuster remained a solely theoretical option until the late 1830s. The first Senate filibuster occurred in 1837.

Ye olde cherry on top is dear silly Sen. Gregg trying to claim that a procedural tactic he denigrated when Cons were in the majority is somehow essential to our democracy and has been since the country was founded.

Politicians say dumbfuck things every day.  But this has just set a new diamond standard for dumbfuckery.  The sad thing is that I'm sure some idiot Con will surpass him next week.

Why Keanu Reeves?

Seriously.

I'm watching Dracula.  And you know something?  It would've been a far, far better movie without Keanu Reeves.  Acting so wooden you could've saved a forest by using it for toilet paper manufacture.  An English accent so atrocious they should've dubbed a seven year-old Doctor Who fan from Brooklyn over his voice - it would've been more believable.  He's not even that attractive, and I say that as a woman who usually goes for the dark-haired skinny geeks.

The movie's only redemption lies in other outstanding cast members - Anthony Hopkins, Gary Oldman, Sadie Frost.  Even Winona Rider didn't suck.

That's why I watch this travesty.  Well, that and because it's good mindless fun.  A well-balanced diet must include a serving of premium cheese every once in a while.  And, truth be told, I watch it for Sadie Frost in that red dress.

It sure as shit ain't for Keanu.  And that leads me to my question: why the fuck do so many directors ruin their movies by casting him?  I've never been able to find a satisfactory answer.

Dumbfuckery du Jour

A dumbfuckery double-header today, my darlings!

I'm sure a non-inconsiderable number of Virginians are reconsidering their choice in governor just about now:

Just weeks after Gov. Bob McDonnell (R-VA) refused to renew an executive order that would have protected gay and lesbian state workers from discrimination, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is asking the state’s colleges and universities “to rescind policies that ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.” Cuccinelli — who has previously argued “homosexual acts are…intrinsically wrong” — wrote a letter to all of the state’s public colleges and universities:

“It is my advice that the law and public policy of the Commonwealth of Virginia prohibit a college or university from including ’sexual orientation,’ ‘gender identity,’ ‘gender expression,’ or like classification as a protected class within its non-discrimination policy absent specific authorization from the General Assembly,” he wrote. Colleges that have included such language in their policies — which include all of Virginia’s leading schools — have done so “without proper authority” and should “take appropriate actions to bring their policies in conformance with the law and public policy of Virginia,” Cuccinelli wrote.

But remember, kids, Bob McDonnell's repressive right-wing religious fanatic thesis was written twenty years ago and shouldn't be used to judge how he'll govern.  His fast-tracked anti-gay agenda is surely just a big ol' coinkydink.

Speaking of anti-gay fuckwits, we have a tremendous two-faced twit living the hypocritical life in sunny California:

"We need to preserve traditional values for the future of our children. Children must be raised with morals and principles. As a society, we must provide them with a secured and loving environment that allows them to flourish."

Those are the words of California state Senator Roy Ashburn, a father of four, quoted in a 2005 press release announcing a rally to support "traditional marriage."

Ashburn, of course, is the senator with the anti-gay record who was reportedly a regular at Sacramento gay clubs. He was picked up for a DUI early Wednesday morning, reportedly with an unidentified man in he car.

 [snip]

Here's a look at the votes of Ashburn, a Republican of Bakersfield:

• In 2006, he voted no on a measure to add material on the contributions of gay Americans who had contributed to the development of California or the United States
• In 2008 he voted against expanding anti-discrimination laws to include sexual discrimination.
• In 2009 he voted against a resolution to oppose Prop 8, the anti-gay marriage ballot question.
• Last September, he voted against recognizing out-of-state same-sex marriages.
• That same month Ashburn opposed creating Harvey Milk Day, to honor the slain gay rights icon from San Francisco.

West Sacramento's openly-gay mayor, Christopher Cabaldon, had a few choice words on Facebook a few months ago:

 "It wouldn't bother me so bad to see Roy Ashburn at Badlands with a boy if he didn't have such a bad voting record on gay rights," he wrote.

So, my darlings, we have yet another anti-gay gay Con.  These people are incredibly pathetic.

Bonus dumbfuckery: Senate hopeful Sue Lowden may want to acquaint herself with what Medicare is.  John McCain was for Medicare cuts via reconciliation before he was against them.  Mitt Romney can't figure out if his own health plan is constitutional or not. 

And yet another right wing fucktard commits a terrorist act, and the nation's fucktarded Cons don't suddenly call for military tribunals, warrantless wiretapping, and pants-pissing fear in response.   Interesting, eh?

Given the larger political climate, Matt Yglesias raises an important observation.

[I]t's striking how differently the country behaves when you see a non-Muslim individual attempt or succeed at killing some people based on quasi-political motivations versus when it's a Muslim who does it. And the important thing, I think, is not merely to make a pure hypocrisy argument but to point out that the country's response to non-Muslim killers ranging from Bedell to the IRS plane crasher to the Holocaust Museum shooter is much, much, much better and smarter.

In the wake of an incident involving a non-Muslim we of course look back and try to see if there's any reasonable preventive steps we could have taken to prevent the murders. But wild overreactions and wholesale reconfigurations of the constitution, of US foreign policy, or of daily life are considered off the table by definition. And rightly so!

Quite right. In response to several of these recent incidents, most notably the man who flew an airplane into an Austin office building, the country generally remained quite calm. There was no panic or collective freak-out. The same with yesterday's shooting. No one is running around trying to blame the White House for the violent acts of random lunatics; no one is demanding officials take radical steps to prevent these kinds of unpredictable acts; and no one is proposing sweeping new legislation to show how "serious" they are about isolated incidents like these.

We're all perfectly mature about the whole thing, and accept as a given that tragedies like this will happen from time to time. Politically, the only oddity comes when some right-wing politicians suggest some empathy for the madmen.

So, remember, kiddies: if you plan to shoot up a military installation or fly a plane into a federal building, but want to earn the love of the Cons at the same time, change your name to Billy Bob Jones and remember to post an anti-tax, anti-guvmint screed on a few websites first.  Then you, too, can be hailed as a proud, brave American by America's right wing, rather than causing America's right wing to demand anyone with a funny name like yours get pulled off the street and thrown into Gitmo on the principle of guilt-by-association.

Music That Made Me Go, WTF?!

Stopped looking for music for the Duke.  The stuff he likes, I ain't in the mood for.  Turned to Kamelot radio on Last.fm, and found a heavy metal band doing covers of some of the least metal songs in the universe.  You've never heard "Don't Stop Believin'" until you've heard it done metal.  And "I Just Died In Your Arms." "Take On Me." Srlsly, WTF?!

Here's one that wasn't on Playlist, but I just had to track down on YouTube because I knew I wouldn't believe it til I heard it:



It's actually kinda awesome...

For those who like the original:



Searching for music to feed my Muse takes me to some bizarre places sometimes.

Music That's Made Me Laugh

I'm listening to Last.fm by way of trying to find stuff that the current villain might listen to.  This is not one of those songs.  But it made me ROFL a lot, so I figured I'd share.  So not work appropriate unless you have a really lax sexual harassment policy.



"Lust keeps on lurking." ZOMG I love this band!

For Pure Cheesy Martial Arts Goodness...

...I can't recommend Iron Monkey highly enough.  It's got it all.  See-through plot, ridiculous situations, over-the-top villains, corny one-liners, and completely implausible fight sequences.

In other words, it's a fucking fantastic martial arts film.  Well worth seeing.

Comment o' the Day

Chris Rhetts posted a comment that should not remain buried in comments.  No, it needs to be out here in the open, for all to see:

I just wanted to say that just a few minutes ago, in a rare, life altering moment of clarity, I FINALLY GOT IT! Republicans are offering us an amazingly delightful alternative to reality and we, poor fools, don't have the sense God gave a piss ant to accept it. What's the matter with us anyway? Consider for a moment that instead of castigating dickheads like Tony Watts and Jim Inhofe - all we have to do is close our eyes, wish really, really hard that they aren't the two-faced douche bags they seem to be, and *poof!* global warming goes away in a cloud of shit. By the way this Chardonnay I'm sucking down by the quart right now is fantastic. You should try some.

You know what?  Excellent idea.  I just hope it comes in gallons...

Dumbfuckery du Jour

I've only read two political blogs today, and I'm already stuffed to the gills with stupid.

I mean, we've got the media now blaring the Con talking points about how "controversial" reconciliation is - when back in 2003, they didn't make a peep.  Not.  One.  Folks, listen to me: if reconciliation is this horrific process that destroys the republic, then the fucking republic was already destroyed.  The Cons have used this process seventeen fucking times.  The Dems?  A grand total of seven.  Now, I know numbers can be confusing to our media, so let me just put it like this:

17
vs
7

Please note which is the largest number.  That's the number of times the Republicans have used this "controversial" procedure to "force" legislation through by *gasp* *horror* majority vote.  And the number of times the media screamed and yelled and had heart palpitations over it?  0.

The double standard in this country is unfuckingbelievable.

In other news, we've got a manufactroversy working its way up to a full screaming tantrum.  Apparently, in Con circles, if a man is eminently qualified for a federal judgeship, if he is supported by "Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Sen. Bob Bennett (R-Utah), and Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah)," if he would make an outstanding addition to the federal bench, he is merely being used to tempt his brother into voting for health care reform.  Because, you see, his brother is a Blue Dog Dem.  That's it.  That's the sum total of the evidence Cons are running with.  That's what's got them all worked into a frenzy.

I would really, really like a sane minority party now, please.  And, Minnesota?  Would you please be so kind as to do something with Michelle Bachmann come next election day, pleaseI'mbeggingyou?  She's not even my rep, and she's making me feel mortal embarrassment.

Moving on, I cannot help but mention Michael Steele's latest troubles.  Anyone who was tempted to believe the RNC was still being run by adults can dispense with that notion now.  Likewise anyone who believed Cons would actually offer ideas.  Their idea, simply, boils down to this: "Hey!  Let's scare America into voting for us!" 

Well, it's not like they have anything else going for them, now, is it?

There's a lot more stupid where that comes from, but the crème de la crème, the pinnacle, the most outstanding dumbfuckery of the day, is the letter John McCain's waving around in a pathetic attempt to keep DADT from being repealed:

One of the reports these opponents hide behind is by “Flag and General Officers for the Military.” It’s a letter signed by 1,000 “distinguished retired military leaders” who all say they oppose DADT repeal: “Our past experience as military leaders leads us to be greatly concerned about the impact of repeal [of the law] on morale, discipline, unit cohesion, and overall military readiness.” On Feb. 2, for example, a “cranky” Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) told Mullen and Defense Secretary Robert Gates, “Well, I hope you’ll pay attention to the views of over a thousand retired and flag general officers” when considering whether to repeal DADT. Frank Gaffney, president of conservative Center for Security Policy, cited the letter in a Washington Times op-ed that same day.

However, a new Servicemembers United report severely undermines the legitimacy of this letter. Some of the problems:

– The average age of the officers is 74. The “oldest living signer is 98, and several signers died in the time since the document was published.” Servicemembers United Executive Director Alex Nicholson added that only “a small fraction of these officers have even served in the military during the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ period, much less in the 21st century military,” so it’s hard to believe that they “know how accepting and tolerant 18- and 21-year-olds are today.

– “At least one signer, Gen. Louis Menetrey, was deceased when the letter was published and didn’t sign the document himself. According to a footnote on the letter, his wife signed the document for him after his death using power of attorney — six years after Alzheimer’s disease robbed him of the ability to communicate.”

– One signatory said that they “no longer want to be a part of the letter, writing to the organization, ‘I do not wish to be on any list regarding this issue.‘”

– Multiple generals said they “never agreed” to sign the letter in the first place, writing “I never agreed. To represent either side of this issue” and “I do not remember being asked about this issue.”

– At least seven officers “were involved in scandals tarnishing their careers.” Gen. Carl Mundy, for instance, gained negative publicity when he told CBS’s 60 Minutes that “minority officers do not shoot as well as the non-minorities.”

In June 2009, a PBS’s Ray Suarez also did a report on the letter, reporting, “The NewsHour contacted a number of four-star officers requesting an interview for this story. However, none agreed to speak to us on camera. One general expressed surprise his name was even on the list, since he says he had never agreed to sign the letter, and at least three officers listed as signatories are dead.”

So.  We've got a letter signed by dead people, people who didn't know someone had signed their names to this schlock, old geezers who aren't even in the military anymore and are terminally out of touch with the modern era, people who don't want their names on it, and people one really shouldn't associate with if they want to retain any shred, atom or indeed quark of credibility.  Fantastic.  That really shores up the position of the "gayz r icky" brigade.

I guess McCain figures if it's good enough for creationists, it's good enough for him.  He's taking a page right out of DIsco's playbook, there.  We all know how much that was worth:



(By the way, for those who are curious, there are currently over 1100 Steves signed on to Project Steve, the NCSE's brilliant response to all those supposed skeptical scientists.  So much for all that controversy over evolution in the scientific community, eh?)

We're also seeing shades of Inhofe's list of scientists who dissent from global warming.  Said list is savaged here and here:

“Padded” would be an extremely generous description of this list of “prominent scientists.” Some would use the word “laughable” (though not the N.Y. Times‘ Andy Revkin, see below). For instance, since when have economists, who are pervasive on this list, become scientists, and why should we care what they think about climate science?

[snip]

Then we have the likes of this from Inhofe’s list:

CBS Chicago affiliate Chief Meteorologist Steve Baskerville expressed skepticism that there is a “consensus” about mankind’s role in global warming.

Wow, a TV weatherman expressed skepticism. If only the IPCC had been told of this in time, they could have scrapped their entire report. Seriously, Wikipedia says “Baskerville is an alumnus of Temple University and holds a Certificate in Broadcast Meteorology from Mississippi State University.” I guess Inhofe has a pretty low bar for “prominent scientists” — but then again he once had science fiction writer Michael Crichton testify at a hearing on climate science.

I suppose, then, it's only a matter of time before McCain calls upon some anti-gay actor to testify against repealing DADT, exhorting us to take seriously his wise counsel because he wore a uniform in a two-bit war movie once.

I'd say these fucktards who have to make up fictitious lists of supporters are fucking pathetic, but that would be a grave insult to fucking pathetic people everywhere.  They're so far beyond pathetic they can't see it on a clear day. Pathetic, in fact, would be a vast improvement over their current state of abject dumbfuckery.

Now, if you'll excuse me, my poor brain has melted down from a critical overload of burning stupid.  Must go have a lie-down...

Dumbfuckery du Jour

Another tough day, I'm afraid.  Jim Bunning ended his little tantrum by trading obstinate obstructionism for the chance to get sand kicked in his face, then, eyes stinging, proceeded to pull a Shelby.  Somebody needs to put him in a home for terminally stupid dumbfuck Cons.

So there was the temptation to unleash upon that.  But, I thought, then there's MO State Sen. Gary Nodler.  All you need to know is that he claims that armed forces who allow teh gayz to serve openly suffer higher casualty rates, and you just know there's an R after his name. So I planned to unlimber the Smack-o-Matic and make him cry for his mommy.

But then I saw this:

Last week, a 12,000-pound SeaWorld Orlando orca killed trainer Dawn Brancheau while she swam in the tank. The orca, named Tilikum, had been involved in violent episodes in the past, including an incident in 1991 when “Tilikum and two female killer whales dragged trainer Keltie Byrne underwater, drowning her in front of spectators at Sealand of the Pacific, a defunct aquarium in Victoria, British Columbia.” Tilikum also seemed to be involved in the death of a man who snuck into the orca’s pool in 1999.

The American Family Association, the powerful right-wing Christian political organization, blogged that, “If the counsel of the Judeo-Christian tradition had been followed,” Beancheau would have never died. AFA blogger Bryan Fischer reasoned that according to Exodus, an animal like Tilikum should have been stoned back in 1991, and if biblical law were to be followed, the owners of Tilikum should be put to death:

Chalk another death up to animal rights insanity and to the ongoing failure of the West to take counsel on practical matters from the Scripture. [...] Says the ancient civil code of Israel, “When an ox gores a man or woman to death, the ox shall be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten, but the owner shall not be liable.” (Exodus 21:28) So, your animal kills somebody, your moral responsibility is to put that animal to death. You have no moral culpability in the death, because you didn’t know the animal was going to go postal on somebody. But, the Scripture soberly warns, if one of your animals kills a second time because you didn’t kill it after it claimed its first human victim, this time you die right along with your animal. To use the example from Exodus, if your ox kills a second time, “the ox shall be stoned, and its owner also shall be put to death.” (Exodus 21:29)

That's right.  These fucktards, who for reasons beyond my comprehension like to lay claim to moral superiority, believe people should stone killer whales to death for being killer fucking whales because the Bible sez so.

It's a wild fucking animal, and they think it should be executed.  Not only that, they're suggesting its owners should also be executed.  This, it seems, is the Christian thing to do.

If that is moral superiority, my friends, count me as a proud moral degenerate. 

It would be hard to think of something more abhorrent, unenlightened, anti-compassionate, and just generally disgusting than this attitude, except that they're Christian fundamentalists, which means their website is sure to be a rich source of equally abhorrent, unenlightened, anti-compassionate, and just generally disgusting items.  After all, if they advocate the stoning of killer whales plus owners, I'm pretty certain they're all about stoning teh gayz, too.  And, taking a trot through ye olde blog, I see I'm not far off: they frothed over hate crimes legislation by implying all gays are pedophiles.  Not to mention they're so phobic about the word "gay" that they've turned even Gays into Homosexuals.  And when STDs are on the rise among youngsters, they push more of the abstinence education that doesn't work.  My friend Garrett swears too much prayer rots a person's brain.  These dumbfucks are living, drooling proof of that.

So, way to go, AFA.  You've proven once again that you're completely unfit for polite society.

A Geology Buff at Home Depot

Monday afternoon, I slipped free of the Muse for a few hours and spent time with a friend.  I cleverly managed this by staying up until 8 that morning writing.

We'd planned to watch a movie, but we got to talking about all the things she wants to do with her new home instead.  I'm one of those people who gets all sorts of bizarre ideas for jerry-rigging solutions.  So when she said her new fridge doesn't attract her fridge magnets, I told her all she needs to do is mount a nice sheet of metal.  And Home Depot's within walking distance.  We could certainly find a piece of sheet metal at Home Depot.  So off to Home Depot we walked.

On the way, we passed by Staples.  In the Staples parking lot, they have enormous boulders incorporated into the landscaping.  They're my friends, so I stopped to give them a pat and try, once again, to figure out what they are (good with granite, can identify basalt, get a little shaky on the less obvious stuff, alas).

Once at Home Depot, we found the perfect bits o' metal (little sheets used for roof flashing)*.  Then we rambled through the rest of the store.  I had to go say hi to the travertine tiles, of course - and tell my friend how travertine is formed.  I stopped to drool over stone facings for exterior walls.  We wandered up the aisle with all the other stone tiles, where I promised the black granite I'd be taking it home soon so that it can break up that horrible expanse of white which is my breakfast bar.  Then I discovered a set of brown marble tiles just larger than your typical coaster.  Instant heaven.  Yes, I bought them.  No, I don't know what I'll do with them, but that's not the point.  They're bits of brown marble!!1!11!  I can look at all of the crystals and textures and the streaking and the one really weird tile that was stuck in the middle and looks like breccia more than marble.  I can hold them and squeeze them and - ahem.  Well, I'll try not to get quite that carried away.  But I can at least gaze at them lovingly and contemplate the story of deposition, orogeny and metamorphism that made them what they are today.

So, yeah.  When I go to Home Depot, I go for the rocks.  Is anybody surprised?

*Efrique pointed out that not all roof flashing thingies are magnetic, which is a key point to keep in mind should you decide to do this yourself.

Dumbfuckery du Jour

As usual, there's an overabundance of dumbfuckery.  Sorting through it, trying to select the most dumbfuckalicious tidbit to serve up to my readers, is a difficult task.  I mean, should I continue beating Jim "Fuck you and your unemployment benefits / doctor payments / transportation projects!" Bunning?  Not to mention all of the dumbfuck Cons who, although they have no actual quibbles with the legislation Bunning's blocking, have come galloping in defense of the indefensible?  Rich possibilities, there.

But what about Rep. Sue "Even though I've smeared every Muslim in the country, it's okay because some of my friends are Arab" Myrick, who's now taking serious heat from her constituents over her dumbshittery?

How about all of the states, including my own, who have climate change denialism bills pending or passed?  Rich pickings, there.  Very, very rich indeed.  Some people need to be sat down with a copy of Al Gore's Our Choice.  Even if they can't understand the clear, mostly jargon-free text, they should be able to get a few clues from the simple diagrams.

But I think we'll just have to pick... the absolutely disgusting political attacks from Cons against the Justice Department employees who decided that the rule of law was important.  Here's how low these fucktards will go (h/t):

In the latest bit of brazen slander from the right, Republican Senators are trying to invent a scandal about Justice Department lawyers who — horror — represented Guantanamo detainees. You know, provided the representation that the Rehnquist and Roberts Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled those detainees are entitled? And which even the military commissions provide for? Instead, there’s this McCarthyite tactic of calling Justice Department lawyers the “Gitmo Nine,” a name that oh-so-cleverly suggests that those lawyers were themselves detained at Guantanamo. From the Washington Times:

Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa is rightly unhappy that the Justice Department won’t divulge the names of the nine Justice Department lawyers who directly represented suspected-terrorist detainees, or their cases. Grassley identified two himself, Neal Katyal (an aside: Katyal is a very impressive guy and very charming and level-headed) and Jennifer Daskal.

There’s absolutely nothing “hidden” about this; it’s a pure smear job. Daskal, a former Human Rights Watch attorney, is so committed to hiding her representation of Guantanamo detainees that it’s on her Wikipedia page. And Katyal, the deputy solicitor general whom even this Washington Times bottom-feeder has to concede is a talented attorney, very publicly represented Salim Ahmed Hamdan and took his case to the Supreme Court, which promptly struck down the first phase of the military commissions. There is not a shred of a legitimate issue here, just pure innuendo.

But wait!  There's yet more outrageously disgusting behavior!

Liz Cheney’s neoconservative outfit Keep America Safe has released an ad today ominously warning of the anonymous “al Qaeda seven” in the Justice Department: 

In a coordinated assault, a plethora of other right wing voices are issuing similarly irresponsible charges:

– The American Spectator escalates the number of potential terrorist “abettors” in the Department of Justice from 9 to “as many as 13 to 16.”

– David Davenport, a researcher at the conservative Hoover Institution, wrote in an editorial for the San Francisco Chronicle, “The Department of Justice is supposed to be prosecuting terrorists, not coddling them.”

– The Investor’s Business Daily headlines its editorial: “DOJ: Department of Jihad?” “Just whose side are they on?” IBD asks.

– “It’s like they’re bringing al Qaeda lawyers inside the Department of Justice,” said Debra Burlingame, who lost her brother on 9/11 and a board member of Liz Cheney’s group Keep America Safe.

You know, my uterus is kicking up too much of a fuss to give these disgusting dumbfucks the proper kicking they deserve.  But this, I think, does it quite well indeed:

"This is the typically regressive fear tactic that you expect from anybody named Cheney," said Morris Davis, the former chief prosecutor at the Bush era military commissions, who has been a critic of the commission system. 

[snip]

"Back in the 18th century after the Boston Massacre, we provided a zealous defense [to British soldiers], and a lot of people there have the same view," he siad. [sic]

And which terrorist sympathizer was all for fair trials for foreigners who murdered good American citizens?  None other than John Adams.

These little shits need to stop making up American history and actually start studying some.  Then, possibly, they might be able to extract their heads from their colons long enough to understand that the ideals this country was founded on weren't limited to natural-born citizens approved by the conservative class, and discover that McCarthyism wasn't a proud moment worth emulating.

Then again, I might have far too much faith in their ability to think a decent thought...

Stay of Execution

Another notebook and pen would've bought it today, but Aunty Flow deigned to show just as they were being fed their last meal.  Alas for them, she's only around for a week.  And there is no appeal to a higher authority.  Mwah-ha-ha. 

So we're taking the opportunity now to clear out the DVR.  Many, many weeks of The Daily Show and Colbert Report to watch, plus a great many educational programs that have languished whilst the Muse relentlessly cracked ye olde whip.  I've got Monty Python and the Holy Grail.  Then there's books I haven't been able to read - I actually finished a book this morning!  And started another one!  And the Muse didn't argue!  She knows that my writing ability suffers when I'm doubled over in agony.  I can see her lovingly oil the whip, though.

I've got even more lined up that's actually writing-related.  Plenty o' work on that front that can be done when ye olde body's at less than 100%.  In fact, between the DVR, the books, and the busywork, it's almost too bad these enforced breaks last only a few days.  (Almost.  I'm really looking forward to writing those scenes I've got sketched, so let's hope Aunty doesn't overstay her welcome.)

Eventually, we'll even have a blog post on pollyticks.  It's kinda hard trying to read, nurse an aching uterus, and watch teevee at the same time, but I'm getting there. 

Dumbfuckery du Jour

Sen. Jim Bunning is quite enjoying himself fucking up as many lives as he can:

Sen. Jim Bunning (R) of Kentucky, who has occasionally seemed mentally unstable in recent years, is single-handedly blocking a bipartisan measure to extend unemployment benefits for Americans out of work, which has also led thousands of transportation workers to be furloughed without pay today.

Today, Democrats tried once again to garner unanimous consent to end this fiasco. And for the seventh time, Bunning blocked passage.

Despite warnings of hardships for the unemployed and highway workers, Kentucky Sen. Jim Bunning on Monday again held up legislation that extends unemployment and health insurance benefits.

Benefits for about one million Americans stopped Sunday night after Bunning objected last week to an attempt to fast-track a bill that would have extended payments.

Bunning is feeling some heat over this, and he's not handling the pressure especially well. The senator has a bit of a run-in with the media today on the Hill, and resorted to flipping off an ABC News journalist this afternoon.

And given the scope of Bunning's truly ridiculous obstructionism, the bizarre right-wing senator seems to actually flipping off the entire country.

Here's a list of transportation projects that have come to a halt because Jim Bunning is throwing a temper tantrum, and here's how it's affecting small businesses.

And, as Steve later discovered, doctors are experiencing issues due to Bunning's issues as well. 

When one man can fuck up the country like this, it's time to seriously rethink the role of the Senate in modern American government.

My Readers Are Going to Kill Me

I have come to this realization after filling in a few blank spots leading up to a few things in my narrative outline, and contemplating the deeply emotional reaction of X-Files fans to that bit in the movie where Mulder and Scully almost kiss after several seasons' worth of sexual tension, only to be interrupted by a very bad bee.

What Chris Carter et al did to those fans (self included) is a minor irritation compared to what I appear to be inflicting upon my future fan base.

So.  It was an honor and a pleasure knowing you, my darlings.  Good thing we have a few more years together before the book comes out, and howling mobs show up at my doorstep wanting a word.