Multi Medium

Non-Foggy Arena Construction Photoblogging

Fog is a nice-to-have, not a have-to-have.

Add comment July 3rd, 2009 at 05:23pm Posted by Eli    Permalink

Cenk Johnson Is Right!

Cenk makes a great case for the Sanders Doctrine:

What is the point of getting to 60 senators in the Democratic caucus if you can’t keep the caucus together on all of the votes? Well, Bernie Sanders has the answer:

“I think that with Al Franken coming on board, you have effectively 60 Democrats in the caucus, 58 and two Independents. I think the strategy should be to say, it doesn’t take 60 votes to pass a piece of legislation. It takes 60 votes to stop a filibuster. I think the strategy should be that every Democrat, no matter whether or not they ultimately end up voting for the final bill, is to say we are going to vote together to stop a Republican filibuster. And if somebody who votes for that ends up saying, ‘I’m not gonna vote for this bill, it’s too radical, blah, blah, blah, that’s fine.’” (emphasis added)

I love this Sanders Rule. It makes perfect sense. This is the whole point of having 60 senators in your caucus. I don’t need or want ideological rigidity on the Democratic side. I believe in the Big Tent. So, how people vote is up to them. But getting these bills to the floor to get up and down votes is absolutely necessary. This is part and parcel of being in the caucus. Not just in healthcare, but all of the bills must have up and down votes (but by far the most important thing right now is to include a public option in the healthcare bill that gets an up and down vote).

(…)

If they squander this - with control of the White House, a huge majority in the House, a filibuster proof majority in the Senate and all of the national polls behind them - then they were lying. They never intended to bring us change in the first place. The lobbyists will have won. And Obama’s presidency will be like all of the others. A lot of bullshit promises and no change despite every conceivable advantage. If they can’t get it done under these circumstances, then they can never get it done - nor did they ever want to.

There are so many centrist wankers in the Democratic caucus that I’m not actually 100% sure that a good bill can even pass an up-or-down vote, but I’d at least like to see it have that chance.  And if there have to be sacrifices, better to make smaller compromises to win over, say, Webb or McCaskill than the larger ones that would be needed to win over Collins or Snowe.

1 comment July 3rd, 2009 at 11:22am Posted by Eli    Permalink

Wanker Of The Day

Howie Kurtz:

In his column today, Washington Post media reporter Howard Kurtz devotes his column today to the question of: “Does Race Play a Role in Coverage?” He readily admits that “no one raises questions when an Irish American male reporter covers a pol named Murphy,” but that doesn’t stop him from writing a 1,600-word article raising questions about black women:

Rachel Swarns of the New York Times and The Washington Post’s Robin Givhan were among those herded behind the rope Monday. They and the other main beat reporters — Newsweek’s Allison Samuels, Darlene Superville of the Associated Press and Politico’s Nia-Malika Henderson — have something in common: They are all African American women. [...]

Whether racial and gender identification produces a gauzier, more favorable portrayal of Obama is perhaps too early to judge.

“There is no evidence that this is actually happening, but it would be irresponsible not to speculate.”

Add comment July 3rd, 2009 at 07:01am Posted by Eli    Permalink

Least Believable Statement Of The Day

From the Washington Post’s pathetic attempts at damage control (not OmbudsAndy’s blog; he’s the source) after getting caught trying to sell access to reporters and government officials at $25-250k a pop:

The flier came out of the office Charles Pelton, who joined The Post recently to find ways to generate business through conferences and events. The Post, like many struggling newspapers, is desperately seeking new sources of revenue.

“There’s no intention to influence or peddle,” Pelton said this morning. “There’s no intention to have a Lincoln Bedroom situation.”

Nooo, of course not.  Maybe Pelton didn’t think any of his target audience would expect anything in return for their $250,000.

Add comment July 2nd, 2009 at 09:36pm Posted by Eli    Permalink

Can We Please Vote Them Off The Planet Already?

Why are these twits even famous?  How can there possibly be anyone left who doesn’t think they’re obnoxious blithering idiots?

Publicity-loving couple Spencer Pratt and Heidi Montag spewed some controversial views on Alex Jones’ radio show earlier this week.

(…)

Jones, who is known for his conspiracy theories of “New World Order,” seems to be rubbing off on the Pratts.

“I really do feel like we took the blue pill or whatever from ‘The Matrix,’” Spencer said.

(…)

“We’ve been nonstop researching the Internet … for information for at least a month all day every day,” said Heidi.

What did the couple learn? Global warming is a scam.

“It’s mind-boggling trying to say there’s global warming right now,” said Spencer.

He also backs up Jones’ belief that 9/11 was an “inside job.”

“From your research, it 100 percent is,” Spencer said to Jones on the show, adding later: “I want to throw up.”

The born-again Christians are also troubled by human microchips — and birth control.

“This is very serious. It says in the Bible this is the mark of the beast, and that is a sign of worshipping the Devil. So over my dead body would I ever get a chip in my body,” Heidi said.

“My body belongs to Jesus Christ. I am a disciple of Jesus, and I will speak out to Christians … this chip is the end of humanity.”

Heidi also turned to the web for information about the Pill.

“I researched it, and one of the founding people who invented birth control said it was the worst thing they had ever done, they wished they’d never created it, how it morally corrupted society, it’s just sickening to him,” said Heidi.

“How it devalues women, how it causes depression, how it can cause cancer, how it sterilizes your body, and what it does to your body, how most women are suicidal sometimes on it.”

(…)

“We used to have a phenomenal relationship with the media, they’ve kind of turned on us now because they’ve created us into such a monstrous thing … like they made us too big, like they Obama-sized us …”

Speidi says they are ready for criticism.

“Conspiracy is a word they’ve created to make people sound crazy, but that’s not what God says,” Heidi said. “You can persecute us, you can say whatever you want.”

All stupid, all the time.

Add comment July 2nd, 2009 at 07:44pm Posted by Eli    Permalink

Obama Administration Continues The Real “Bush Doctrine”

No, not the Bush Doctrine about how invading countries for no good reason is Teh Awesome, I’m talking about the one that’s like the Peter Principle on steroids, where incompetence and criminality are rewarded with money and advancement instead of scorn, unemployment, or jail time.  Chris Bowers spells it out:

The past year has revealed a comprehensive philosophy of government championed by conservatives and moderates when they oppose major progressive economic reforms. I call it “crime and reward.” The philosophy is summed up as follows:

The flaw in progressive legislative proposals is that they don’t give enough money to the corporations that caused the problem(s) which overall legislative effort is supposedly trying to solve.

It applies in all major cases. Check it out:

1. The way to lower health care costs is to give companies that have increased health care costs even more money….

2. The way to fix climate change is to give the companies that are the main cause of climate change even more money….

3. The way to fix the financial crisis is to give the financial institutions that caused the financial crisis even more money….

On the three major areas of public policy that were addressed by the federal government over the last twelve months–health care, climate change, financial crisis–the “moderate” solution has consistently been to give hundreds of billions of dollars to the corporations that caused climate change, the financial crisis, and skyrocketing health care costs. It is a crime and reward ideology. When powerful private sector companies cause major national and global problems, the “moderate” solution is to give those who caused the problem hundreds of billions of dollars.

Crime and reward. Through a conservative-moderate alliance, it is the system of government under which we live, even in the era of the Democratic trifecta.

On the other hand, maybe it only looks like a “reward.”  Maybe it would be more accurate to say that this is just another demonstration of the criminals’ continuing ability to call the shots, just as they have for the previous eight years, and probably much longer.

Regardless of the cause, it’s a compelling illustration of just how broken and corrupt our political system has become when placing the public good over the corporate good becomes impossible, if not unthinkable.

Add comment July 2nd, 2009 at 06:56pm Posted by Eli    Permalink

Wanker Of The Day

Newt Gingrich:

Gingrich predictably went into scare-mongering mode, making arguments against measures that aren’t even part of the debate. He said the U.S. should not adopt a “single national health system” such as in Canada or the UK. “If I have to choose between my doctor and a government bureaucrat, I have zero doubt which one I want,” he said. Of course, no such choice is being offered.

Too right.  The choice being offered is between a government bureaucrat and an insurance company bureaucrat.  I also have zero doubt which one I want.

But Gingrich also touted the success of private health insurers. When Johnson noted that it is insurance companies that are coming between patients and needed care, Gingrich claimed, “If you don’t like your current insurance company, you can change insurance companies.” He later argued that private insurers have done “well”:

GINGRICH: They have it done well. And the fact is, overall, 71 percent of Americans are relatively satisfied with the health insurance.

JOHNSON: But we have 46 million uninsured.

GINGRICH: Right. And we have — you know, that means you also have 260 million insured.

Silly liberals, always looking at the negatives.  I mean, how come no one ever talks about all the millions of Iraqis who are still alive, or the billions of people Hitler and Stalin didn’t kill?

Add comment July 2nd, 2009 at 11:31am Posted by Eli    Permalink

Role Model Fail

I’m okay with Obama wanting to emulate a former president, but why not FDR instead of The Worst And Most Unpopular President Ever?

President Obama offered a wonkish defense of his embattled health-care reform effort during an hour-long town hall meeting in Northern Virginia yesterday that featured seven questions, including one sent via Twitter and several from a handpicked audience of supporters.

(…)

In the stage-managed event, questions for Obama came from a live audience selected by the White House and the college, and from Internet questions chosen by the administration’s new-media team. Of the seven questions the president answered, four were selected by his staff from videos submitted to the White House Web site or from those responding to a request for “tweets.”

So we have handpicked questions from a handpicked audience.  Well gee, that doesn’t sound bogus or familiar at all.  I didn’t have a problem with the Nico Pitney pseudoscandal; the WH had no idea what the question would be, and it was fair and tough, but this is just way too reminiscent of Bush and his bubble.  Couple that with Obama’s similarly cavalier approach to the Constitution, secrecy, detainees, and executive powers, and sometimes it’s hard to tell what’s changed.

I can forgive a lot (but not the secrecy and unitary executive stuff) if Obama pushes through a strong healthcare reform package, but this is at least his second recent appearance where (as far as I can tell from the reporting) he didn’t say anything about the public option.  I find that very, very worrisome - mandatory insurance without a public option would actually be far, far worse than the status quo for everyone except the insurance and healthcare industries.

UPDATE: I just got a look at an actual transcript, and Obama did talk about the public option. So chalk that up to bad reporting on the town hall.

He definitely didn’t say anything about it in his not-the-Rose-Garden press conference, though. And I still have serious doubts about the depth of his commitment to it.

1 comment July 2nd, 2009 at 07:27am Posted by Eli    Permalink

Wanker Of The Day

Joe Lieberman.

He’s with us on everything except the public option.

Add comment July 1st, 2009 at 10:01pm Posted by Eli    Permalink

Conservative Media: Success Or Failure?

Mike Stark beat me to it. Sure, conservative news media outlets are losing tons of money, but their owners aren’t in it to make money.  Or perhaps more accurately, they’re not in it to make money off of conservative news media outlets.

Conservative news media’s raison d’etre is not to turn a profit, it’s to disseminate conservative propaganda and disinformation as widely and as forcefully as possible, in order to secure the most corporate-friendly government possible.  The NY Post and Washington Times and Weekly Standard may look like they’re losing money, but when you look at the big picture, they’re really doing the exact opposite.

Add comment July 1st, 2009 at 08:26pm Posted by Eli    Permalink

The Return Of Foggy Arena Photoblogging

Yep, it’s more foggy arena construction photos:

Add comment July 1st, 2009 at 11:16am Posted by Eli    Permalink

Wednesday Why-I-Love-The-Weekly-World-News Blogging

Wow.  This is just epic:

In an effort to distract his people from the election, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad organized a special tribute to Michael Jackson.  Broadcast on state television this weekend, the tribute video was a restaging of Jackson’s Smooth Criminal starring the Iranian Dictator.

Filmed on a government soundstage in Tehran, the video opens on Ahmedinejad, wearing a white pinstripe suit and blue shirt, entering a 1930’s style club.  Going to the back of the club he approaches a gangster, Mr. Big, who appears to be an Armani clad overweight version of Uncle Sam.

Mr. Big sits in a large chair atop a cage holding several Iranian children.  Ahmedinejad accuses Mr. Big of having stolen the “Hearts and Minds of Iran’s youth” and demands he return them.  The villain only laughs and orders his men to shoot Ahmedinejad.

The Iranian Leader throws a coin into a jukebox, which have been outlawed in Iran since 1982, that starts to play.  Mahmoud Ahmedinejad leads the gangsters in dancing to Smooth Criminal in a low budget recreation of Michael Jackson’s famous video.  Dancers for the video were taken from Iran’s popular show “So You Think You Can Dance for the Glory of Allah?”

Using his “Dance Magic” to distract the gangsters, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad frees the children and escapes.  Shortly the magic wears off and Mr. Big orders his men to follow “That cursed yet benevolent man!”  Ahmedinajad and the children are soon surrounded by the gangster and his men.

Looking to the sky Ahmedinejad sees a crescent moon and star, and drawing power from the Iranian people, turns into a giant Iranian robot.  The robot looks suspiciously like an original 1984 Optimus Prime doll, repainted with the Iranian national colors.  In a dazzling stop motion animation sequence cut together with stock news footage of explosions, the giant Ahmedinejad robot dispatches the American gangsters and saves the day.

Ratings for the broadcast cannot yet be determined, but State sponsored media insists that it was incredibly popular despite millions of Iranians saying otherwise.

I would totally pay to see that.

Add comment July 1st, 2009 at 07:16am Posted by Eli    Permalink

Franken Musings

1) The Coleman campaign kinda reminds me of the invasion of Iraq.  They declared victory prematurely, pissed off the natives, and poured massive quantities of money and resources down a black hole rather than admit defeat.  Of course, in this case the only fatalities were Norm’s political career, and maybe Tim Pawlenty’s.

2) Looking forward to the Republicans caterwauling about how the MN Supreme Court engaged in judicial activism by declaring the candidate with the most votes to be the winner.

3) Looking foward to Harry Reid explaining why you just can’t get anything done without 67 votes in the Senate.

2 comments June 30th, 2009 at 09:57pm Posted by Eli    Permalink

Phinal Philly Photoblogging

These will probably be the last Philly photos for a good long while. I think this is actually the post office, but I’m not 100% positive.

Add comment June 30th, 2009 at 06:05pm Posted by Eli    Permalink

More Sarah-Bashing

Heaven help me, I just can’t get enough…

Alaska’s lipstick-wearing pit-bull is a “Little Shop of Horrors.”

That’s how one longtime friend and campaign trail companion of John McCain, the vanquished 2008 GOP presidential nominee, described veep nominee Sarah Palin.

In an expansive story in the August edition of Vanity Fair, a slew of senior members of McCain’s campaign team told reporter Todd S. Purdum that they suffer a kind of survivor’s guilt following the 2008 presidential election.

“They can’t quite believe that for two frantic months last fall, caught in a Bermuda Triangle of a campaign, they worked their tails off to try to elect as vice president of the United States someone who, by mid-October, they believed for certain was nowhere near ready for the job, and might never be,” Vanity Fair reports.

During the campaign, there were reports of anonymous McCain aides describing Palin, the governor of Alaska, as a “diva” and a “whack job.”

The Vanity Fair article recounts how strained Palin’s relationship was with the McCain advisers. She maintained “only the barest level of civil discourse” with Tucker Eskew, the operative assigned to be her chief minder, the magazine reports.

She believed Steve Schmidt, McCain’s top strategist, had lied to her about conducting polling in Alaska - that was a “belief she conveyed to anyone who would listen,” the magazine reported.

(…)One McCain aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said he “always wanted to tell myself the best-case story about her.”

“I think, as I’ve evaluated it, I think some of my worst fears…the after-election events have confirmed that her more negative aspects my have been there….”

As his voice trailed off, he said, “I saw her as a raw talent. Raw, but a talent. I hoped she could become better.”

I look forward to the inevitable counter-hissy-fit.  If Palin goes ballistic about Letterman jokes and a blogger having Photoshop fun with her and Trig, this should make her go nukular.

(I wonder if Sarah feels betrayed that a magazine named after her would say such mean things…)

Add comment June 30th, 2009 at 11:47am Posted by Eli    Permalink

Love, Republican Style

Unless I’m very much mistaken, Ross Douthat appears to be making the argument that the Republican sex scandals are somehow a good thing, that they simply indicate Republicans’ earthy excess of passion, not like those bloodless effete Democrats.

Leave it to a conservative pundit to figure out a mental contortion that makes adultery sound more admirable than fidelity - reading his column is like watching those Cirque De Soleil girls sit on their own heads.

Add comment June 30th, 2009 at 06:46am Posted by Eli    Permalink

The Family Values Party

Once again, Republicans are all about putting family first:

MR. GREGORY: …Governor Mark Sanford disappeared for five days then announced that, in fact, he’d had a mistress, he was visiting a mistress in Argentina. He misled his staff, he misled the voters. Should he resign?

SEN. GRAHAM: Well, the first thing, I’m the godfather of Mark and Jenny’s youngest child, so I’m just going to put that on the table. My main focus right now is can this marriage be saved? Can these kids have a mom and dad to guide them through life? That is my main focus. I think if Mark can reconcile with Jenny, and that’s not going to be easy, that he can finish his last 18 months. He’s had a good reform agenda. And I do believe that if, if he can reconcile with his family and if he’s willing to try, that the people of South Carolina would be willing to give him a second chance. But he’s also got to reconcile the legislature. If he can get his family back together, I think he can continue out his term and maybe do some good things next year.

…Or maybe it would be easier for Sanford to put his marriage back together and reconcile with his wife and kids if he’s not trying to run a state, fend off calls for resignation and impeachment, and dodge the media spotlight on his affair.

He said he was resigning as chairman of the Republican Governors Association so he would have more time to repair his marriage, but that’s a band-aid on a sucking chest wound.  If he really wants to save his marriage, he should make that his full-time job for a while.

Add comment June 29th, 2009 at 08:22pm Posted by Eli    Permalink

Grungy Philly Photoblogging

Just some random non-glamorous shots from the walk back from the Franklin museum:

Add comment June 29th, 2009 at 11:36am Posted by Eli    Permalink

Monday Media Blogging - Binocular Soccer Edition

What.

Should I even ask why the ref is wearing a giant scary rabbit head?

(By way of Picture Is Unrelated)

Add comment June 29th, 2009 at 07:46am Posted by Eli    Permalink

Profiles In Courage

Mark Sanford:

Sanford said he spoke with close spiritual and political associates who advised him to fight to restore the public’s — and his family’s — trust in him.

“Resigning would be the easiest thing to do,” he said

Because only a coward would give up the power of a governorship and the ability to go on screwing over the people of South Carolina, apparently.

I wonder if the governor applauded Bill Clinton’s courage in not taking the easy way out when Sanford and his pals were calling for him to resign.

Add comment June 28th, 2009 at 05:27pm Posted by Eli    Permalink

Sunday Mr. Deity Blogging

Mr. Deity is not at all happy with how he comes off in the Bible, and wants to take it out on the Christians…

Add comment June 28th, 2009 at 11:25am Posted by Eli    Permalink

Epic Messaging Fail

This is just foolish on so many levels:

Democrats plan a July 4th ad campaign to punish House Republicans who voted against the $100-plus billion Iraq and Afghanistan war supplemental — emulating GOP attacks against John Kerry and other Dems who voted against Bush war bills.

A series of 60-second radio ads will run during drive time from July 1 through July 8, according to a script provided to POLITICO — and they have the support-our-troops ring of GOP spots.

They’ll target seven Republicans seen as vulnerable in ‘10, including Reps. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), Charlie Dent (R-Pa.), Jim Gerlach (R-Pa..), Dan Lungren (R-Calif.), Mike McCaul (R-Texas), Lee Terry (R-Neb.) and Joe Wilson (R-S.C.).

The Terry script:

Around here, we recognize Independence Day with parades … and picnics … maybe a few fireworks. But July Fourth is about more than that.

It’s about remembering those who fought for our freedoms. And those still fighting today.

Congressman Lee Terry used to understand that.

When George Bush asked, Congressman Terry voted to fully fund our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And, last year he said, quote, “We must give our military every resource it needs.”

Seems like Congressman Terry is playing politics now …

Last month Congressman Terry voted AGAINST funding for those same troops.

It’s true: vote No. 348 – you can look it up.

“Republicans never hesitated to criticize those who voted against the previous supplemental bills that included funding for the troops, but now that they are trying to score political points, Republicans’ votes have conveniently changed,” said DCCC executive director Jon Vogel.

Yes, I appreciate the “Were you lying then or are you lying now” gotcha here, but do the Democrats really want to brand themselves as the Stay-In-Iraq-Forever Party?  They could have easily circumvented that pitfall - and secured a lot more progressive Democrat votes - by simply including a withdrawal timeline, but they didn’t, and I still don’t understand why.  After all, Obama did provide such a timeline during his presidential campaign, is it no longer operative now?  Why raise doubts about his stated commitment to get us out of Iraq, especially when it came so close to making the supplemental unpassable?

Of course, even if the supplemental hadn’t been written by morons ($108 billion to bail out the IMF?  WTF?), we’re still left with the Democratic Party embracing the GOP’s voting-against-war-funding/war-prolonging-is-like-personally-shooting-the-troops-in-the-head framing.  And while there is some poetic justice to seeing Republicans hoist by their own petard, it’s really not an argument our side should be validating.  I can’t wait to see the 2010 campaigns against Terry et al. where the Democratic challengers make a big deal about how the Republicans refused to vote to prolong the war.  I’m sure that’ll go over well.

Add comment June 27th, 2009 at 11:46am Posted by Eli    Permalink

Friday Quote & Puppy & Rabbit Blogging

This week’s quote is from the utterly insane Myra Breckinridge, in which Rex Reed has a sex change and becomes Raquel Welch (no, really)…

I used to be Jewish before I was transmogrified - and now I just eat nuts and raisins, and play Scrabble with my guru.

And, of course, there’ll be other people’s puppies and rabbits…

Awww!!!

Add comment June 26th, 2009 at 11:03pm Posted by Eli    Permalink

Re-Enactment Fail

Yer doin’ it wrong.

2 comments June 26th, 2009 at 09:16pm Posted by Eli    Permalink

More Giant Heart Photoblogging

This time, from the inside:

2 comments June 26th, 2009 at 11:33am Posted by Eli    Permalink

Jay Rockefeller? Really?

Given his wishy-washy Republican sympathies on intelligence matters, this is a bit of a surprise:

“We can’t count on insurance companies. They are just maximizing their profits. They are sticking it to consumers.

“I am all for letting insurance companies compete. But I want them to compete in a system that offers real health-care insurance. I call it a public plan,” Rockefeller said.

Earlier this month, Rockefeller introduced the Consumers Health Care Act that would give all consumers the option to participate in a government-run plan competing with private plans.

Government-backed programs are big enough to bring medical costs down, Rockefeller believes.

“Back in 1993, all our Veterans Administration hospitals got together and agreed to buy prescription drugs as a group. The next week, the costs of those drugs went down by 50 percent.

(…)

“I think the anger against insurance companies is going to spread,” Rockefeller said Thursday. “But a public plan, run by the government, will make sure doctors get paid, hospitals get paid and people get good health care.

“Today, an extra 15 percent, 20 percent or 25 percent [of health-care costs] goes to pay private insurance companies. In a public plan, you just pay for what you get. There are no marketers, no people shuffling paper, no one making television ads.”

(…)

“There is a very small chance any Republicans will vote for this health-care plan. They were against Medicare and Medicaid [created in the 1960s]. They voted against children’s health insurance.

“We have a moral choice. This is a classic case of the good guys versus the bad guys. I know it is not political for me to say that,” Rockefeller added.

“But do you want to be non-partisan and get nothing? Or do you want to be partisan and end up with a good health- care plan? That is the choice.”

Let’s see..

• Understands that insurance companies can’t be trusted and everyone hates them?  Check.

• Understands that the federal government’s bargaining power will lower prices?  Check.

• Understands that a public plan without the insurance companies’ administrative overhead will be cheaper?  Check.

• Understands that Republicans are corrupt amoral monsters who are implacably opposed to any meaningful healthcare reform?  Check.

• Understands that fixing our healthcare system is the morally right thing to do?  Check.

• Understands that watered-down “bipartisan” reform is worthless?  Check.

Not bad.  Not bad at all.  Now if he can just convince the Obama administration and the rest of the conservative Democrats who still want to play ball with the anti-healthcare party, maybe we’ll have something.

(h/t mark louis, by way of Phoenix Woman)

Add comment June 26th, 2009 at 07:33am Posted by Eli    Permalink

Thursday Why-I-Love-The-Weekly-World-News Blogging

Once again, the Weekly World News scoops everybody:

Weekly World News reporters have tracked down Governor Sanford’s Sasquatch lover for an exclusive interview.

(…)

While the Governor has come forward admitting to having an affair, he has attempted to protect the identity of his lover.  However the Weekly World News team has tracked down the cryptid home-wrecker.

Maria, an eastern ridgeback Sasquatch, agreed to meet with reporters in a hotel room near her home.  Though she cannot speak, she was able to communicate through descriptive grunts and an interpreter.

The two apparently met while Sanford was out hunting with other conservative lawmakers.  Sanford snuck up on her in a blind and from the first time their eyes met they knew there was a connection that spanned cultures, language, and species.  Sanford left his hunting party almost immediately and spent the rest of the weekend in her cave.

Since that fateful trip five years ago, the two have maintained their affair, seeing each other whenever possible.  Mary admits it was not an ideal situation, but the two felt compelled by a love that was larger than themselves.  Mary kept in contact with the Governor mostly through email, and frequented the same nearby internet café.  Transcripts of their emails are included below:

From Governor Sanford.  June 8th, 2008

Dearest Maria.  Tomorrow I leave Carolina for those wretched Bahamas.  Wretched because they take me even farther away from you.  Each morning when I awake to the sounds of tropical beaches, I will be thinking of you: the feel of your kisses, the curve of your hips, the downy softness of your pelt.  Though my mind and the great state of South Carolina pull me elsewhere, my heart is always in a cave with you.

My Eternal Love,
Marky Warky

From Maria.  June 7th, 2008

To my Dearest Mark.  It seems like an eternity since I have held you in my arms, although I know it has only been days.  Your scent lingers in my fur, and that gives me comfort.  I can’t bring myself to bathe in the river and wash it away, not yet.  Until fate brings us together again, my heart and my body hunger for you.

Eternally yours,
Maria

Truly a touching tale of a doomed love that could never be.

1 comment June 25th, 2009 at 08:38pm Posted by Eli    Permalink

Minute 25: The Desecrationing

For the love of God, when will this stupid crazy woman go away???

Famous bad mother Sarah Palin, hot off her successful campaign to fire David Letterman, from television, is now yelling about how some other random person hates or rapes her children. See that photoshop up there of Governor Palin with Bristol Palin’s child, Trig? We thought “Verne Troyer” too, but no, it is the head of conservative Alaskan radio host Eddie Burke, who is in love with Sarah Palin….  Now Palin has denounced the blogger through her evil spokesperson Meg Stapleton….

“Recently we learned of a malicious desecration of a photo of the Governor and baby Trig that has become an iconic representation of a mother’s love for a special needs child,” Palin spokeswoman Meghan Stapelton said in a statement provided to CNN. “The mere idea of someone doctoring the photo of a special needs baby is appalling.”

(…)

“Babies and children are off limits,” She said. “It is past time to restore decency in politics and real tolerance for all Americans. The Obama Administration sets the moral compass for its party. We ask that special needs children be loved, respected and accepted and that this type of degeneracy be condemned.”

HAHAHAHAHAA. Yeah c’mon Obama, what the hell man, some lady in Alaska photoshopped a radio host’s head onto one of ten million photos of Trig being used as a campaign prop, when will you condemn these… these Degenerates. A DESECRATION! This photo “has become an iconic representation of a mother’s love for a special needs child,” damnit! It’s art, you fools! Art! Really… really good photo we got goin’ here. National fucking treasure.

Yeah, I think “desecration” is perhaps a little… presumptuous, as if Sarah thinks she’s the Madonna and Trig is the Second Coming.  It’s just a throwaway bit of visual snark by a blogger who thinks she’s an idiot - Palin shouldn’t even deign to respond to it, but instead she’s lashing out like it’s some kind of sacrilegious attack on MOTHERHOOD ITSELF.

Epic perspective fail, or desperate attempt to prolong her long-expired fifteen minutes?  I don’t really care, I just want it to stop.

Unless she runs for president, in which case I want her to be comically outraged at nothing ALL THE TIME.

(h/t WT)

Add comment June 25th, 2009 at 07:27pm Posted by Eli    Permalink

This Explains A Lot…

(From Superpoop)

1 comment June 25th, 2009 at 11:23am Posted by Eli    Permalink

Headline Of The Day

On the NY Daily News homepage:

‘You have urinated on my jacket,’ said the president to the monkey

Add comment June 25th, 2009 at 07:19am Posted by Eli    Permalink