Damn, I miss these;
As funny as this is, it pales when one considers the real debate between Hillary and Sanders, how will you tell them apart? Easy, Sanders is the one that Bill is winking at.
Damn, I miss these;
As funny as this is, it pales when one considers the real debate between Hillary and Sanders, how will you tell them apart? Easy, Sanders is the one that Bill is winking at.
There is a bold courageous trans formative new artist in Chicago, I hear Monet got his start the same way, pass the Chardonnay and brie;
And you thought it took talent to be an artist.
Have you ever seen a more punchable face than that mope Ti-Rock Moore? Funny but in looking at that exhibit, no where is that stolen box of cigars.
If the curator was half serious about his new art exhibit, he would station a 300lb black man close by to slug each patron in the face, you know, so they could get a feel for what Officer Wilson went through, a little authenticity thrown in.
And see, he didn’t have his hands up at all, I knew it.
We Americans, we don’t like foreigners sticking their noses into our affairs. Ditto times two state’s rights. We have been known, out of sheer obstanacy at times, to push back against those that not only don’t understand our peculiarities but rail against them under the pretense of some superiority, fools. And no where is this more prevalent or timely than the latest kerfuffle over the Confederate flag flying at the war memorial right next to the Capital building in Charleston, looks like that is about to change;
South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley is set to join those calling on state lawmakers to remove the Confederate flag from a war memorial on the state Capitol grounds.
Up until now I have been apathetic about the controversy. Much like hunting, I don’t do it and don’t get the appeal, but understand that many do so I leave them do it, not being a Southerner (especially from SC, more on that in a bit) I don’t understand the loyalty or deference shown to an archaic symbol of a time not really worth lionizing. But, some folks see this an an issue worth fighting over, especially in South Carolina.
Since the country’s (separate states pledging themselves to the collective of one nation) inception, SC has been notable in their singularity, some say single handedly bringing the Civil War to fruition. Folks like John C. Calhoun and Preston Brooks had been arguing succession for years, but it was Lincoln’s election that pushed them over the edge, Fort Sumter soon followed.
A few words about Nikki Haley. I was a big fan before the shooting, expecting her to turn down a VP request from whoever gets the nomination, she doesn’t need it. But the day after the shooting I was sitting in my doctor’s office with CNN on (I know, commies) when Nikki was speaking. As she choked up, so did I (surreptitiously looking around to make sure no one was watching me) clearly here was a leader who understood their role in a crisis, so unlike Obama.
So now Nikki is calling for the permanent removal of the Confederate Flag. Normally after a tragedy like this ,politicians go all knee jerk (Obama, cough cough) and get on their soap box about gun control. This was different. A sufficient time period had lapsed. Buoyed by Tim Scott (another stud GOP up and comer) Nikki is saying it is time, South Carolinians are saying ,”It’s time”. Who am I to argue?
OT……………………. The USA/Columbia match starts in about 5 minutes, I’m stoked.
The GWT is not just fought on the battlefield, it is a fight of ideas, human rights, the freedom to look at scantily clad women and to permit them to dress any trashy old way they want. That fight just took a turn for the worse;
Racy lingerie retailer Frederick’s of Hollywood is seeking bankruptcy protection in federal court after closing all of its stores and switching to an online-only business, which it intends to sell to the highest bidder.
Fredericks (yeah, gratuitous link, you got a problem with that?) has been bleeding red ink for years.
Another American icon bites the dust, hope you Imams are happy.
Fredericks was big in Los Angeles, populating all the malls. Another lingerie staple was Trashy Lingerie on La Cienga, a must stop for any tourist who wanted the whole LA experience.
The Man Show did a great bit with Trashy Lingerie, dated, but still pretty good;
A lot of moral outrage this week over a recorded rant by a full of herself not so famous sports reporter over her car being towed;
The usual calls for her head have punctuated the airwaves and talk shows. And the usual perfunctory apology followed after being suspended for a week. First, I will address the rant, I thought it was brilliant. This woman has obviously dressed down an “inferior” before, look at how good she is at it. In a short one minute video she manages to cover all the bullet points (education, lack of skill sets, greed, intelligence, appearance, and a parting shot of fat shaming), and right off the cuff, impressive.
Like a pole dancer at the local strip club who describes her avocation as in the “entertainment industry” this woman thinks she is a real news reporter. And she thinks she is important because she is on TV. Go paint yourself in sheep’s blood and run naked down Penn. Ave at rush hour, you will get on TV.
Now, what to do with her? Don’t do anything, who cares that she is a bitch or was bitchy to some predatory tow company. Do people have to be nice to be good at their job (assuming she is good at her job since I never heard of her before)? There are rude low rent people out there, alert the media. I guess ESPN had to suspend her for a short period of time, but does she really need to get fired over this?
Fell sorry for her parents, but give the girl a break. She has a job and is paying taxes, let boorish vulgar sleeping dogs lie.
Often times Hollywood is more entertaining (and often for the wrong reasons) than intended. Not only for their goofy ideas (spoon fed to them by their dem enablers) and faux sanctimony, but the sense of entitlement, of privilege, that we should not hate them because they are pretty, they really care.
One of the biggest libs in lib land is Ben Affleck, you know, the guy that called Bill Maher a racist because he (Maher) blanches at the idea that radical Muslims want him dead. Affleck is a big star and is not about to let a little unsavory family history sully his image;
As a guest on PBS genealogy program Finding Your Roots, Ben Affleck discovered one of his ancestors owned slaves and asked producers to suppress that fact, hacked Sony emails uploaded by WikiLeaks this week show.
The censorship—an apparent violation of PBS rules—is revealed in a July 2014 email thread between Sony Entertainment CEO Michael Lynton and Finding Your Roots host Henry Louis Gates Jr. In it, the two discuss the unusual request of an unnamed “megastar” later referred to as “Batman.”
“[C]onfidentially, for the first time, one of our guests has asked us to edit out something about one of his ancestors—the fact that he owned slaves,” Gates writes to Lynton. “We’ve never had anyone ever try to censor or edit what we found. He’s a megastar. What do we do?”
In his reply, Lynton recommends removing the material as long as “no one [else] knows,” before writing “all things being equal I would definitely take it out.”
You remember Gates, another one of those elitist snobs who thinks it is racist for a cop to ask him a few questions. I guess Van Jones or Charles Ogletree were busy.
The beauty of this little incident is that it single handedly touches all the bases in this grand slam of liberal hypocrisy, to wit;
Image over reality- its not what is, its what is presented
White guilt run amok- when you are liberal and white, you personally feel responsible for every perceived injustice that happened from the dawn of time until now, perpetrated by a white man. And as a liberal white man, his credentials must constantly be renewed. It matters not that hundreds of thousands of folks in the south owned slaves, it matters not that even blacks owned slaves, it matters not that when stacked up against the history of slavery with other nations and empires, we were relative pikers in the practice, and it matters not that even within Africa tribes owned other tribes, dealing in slavery way before the white man ever dreamed of the idea, all that matters is the liberal white man is he will be forever tainted by his whiteness, he can never be forgiven the deeds of others of his skin pigment.
The Clinton Doctrine- there really is different rules for different classes, rules for normal folk, and rules for nobility (less rules, of course). The hoity-toity (of which Affleck resides) get treated differently, they are owed this special treatment by right of celebrity. Something that has never been done before (like allowing a guest to dictate what facts will be allowed and what will be omitted), becomes ,”Well, he is a big shot, lets make an exception”.
Black Indignation is a one way street. The cop that hassled Gates must be a racist because he was a cop, but Affleck, even though he was spawned from a slave holder, he gets taught the secret handshake and is allowed into the club because he is a lib just like us. Racism (and the outrage spawned from perceived racism) is always conditional on who (or what class) is the victim. Blacks can not be racists by virtue of their skin color, liberals can not be racists as long as they understand that the cost of them being white can never ever be fully repaid, that charge card will always be maxed out.
Moral equivalence- actions will always be viewed through the prism of race, and as such, morality is ancillary;
Eventually, Gates acknowledges that fulfilling the request “would be a violation of PBS rules, actually, even for Batman” and “would embarrass him and compromise our integrity,” concluding, “Once we open the door to censorship, we lose control of the brand.”
And yet, even these considerations were suborned in the name of racial justice. Censorship is allowed if it perpetuates the cause. Integrity, rules, both guidelines to be navigated (or ignored) dependent upon the message being delivered. It is the motive that counts, everything else is malleable.
Naturally all this drama happens on PBS.
Who knows, that ancient ancestor might have been George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, even Andy Jackson, no matter, disregard everything admirable this man had done through his lifetime, being a slave owner is all that is important.
Much like the death penalty, asset forfeiture laws have been mangled, compromised, bastardized and manipulated to the point that they are unrecognizable to original intend. And as such, much like the death penalty, something I supported until its current application made it unworkable and a mockery to anything remotely resembling justice, asset forfeiture laws (AFL) have been abused to the point of being an enemy to individual civil liberty, and also a mockery of justice. Too bad, since the original intend was both noble and just, namely to deprive convicted criminals of their ill gotten gains, and who could argue with that? If a meth dealer was stopped on the highway for speeding, carrying several pounds of the illegal drug along with 50 grand in cash, the idea was that if the property (the cash and his brand new Benz) could be linked to the crime (say he hasn’t held a real job in 3 years and has been living on public assistance), then upon conviction he loses these items, tough luck sucker. But alas, greed and laziness came in to the picture, police agencies would seize property, anything they could grab, upon arrest (not conviction) even with a tenuous link between property and crime. Innocent people were getting screwed because cash starved public agencies wanted their stuff and had a legal avenue to steal it.
Enter the top choice (so far) for the VP slot on the next GOP presidential ticket, NM governor Susan Martinez, who just grabbed some low hanging fruit and made herself even more relevant;
New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez signed a bill to abolish civil asset forfeiture Friday.
She signed just before the noon deadline that would have pocket vetoed the legislation.
“As an attorney and career prosecutor, I understand how important it is that we ensure safeguards are in place to protect our constitutional rights,” Martinez said in a letter announcing her decision. “On balance, the changes made by this legislation improve the transparency and accountability of the forfeiture process and provide further protections to innocent property owners.”
Civil asset forfeiture is a practice where police can seize your property and keep it even if they don’t convict or charge you with a crime. Then, you must go through the difficult, and often unsuccessful process to get your property–whether it’s a vehicle, cash or your home–back from the police.
No, she is not abolishing the entire practice, nor do I think she should, just bringing it back to the original intent. Even the ACLU is on board (wait a minute, maybe we should rethink this).
Requiring demonstrable facts linking the crime to the property (no more, “Well, he was in the vicinity, good enough”) independently reviewed by an Appeals Board before anything can be seized, then holding said property in “Trust” until any convictions, yes, we are getting closer to what the law as actually written to do.
No doubt many would like all AFL abolished in toto, anymore end arounds or subverting intent and we just might go that route.
AFL, like the death penalty, should be used judicially and sparingly, under the spotlight of public review, both serve a purpose. Guys like that turd Tsarnaev and Maj. Hasan, I want them dead. And not 25 years from now dead. justice delayed in justice denied, a year appeals max, then give them the cocktail.
Two months ago I wrote a series of posts in an attempt to resuscitate what I believed was a dying blog. “Collaboration Is Needed’, “Suggestion Box”, and “Entering Hard Hat Area” were all written to provide the impetus for some needed change, change that would give us more eyeballs and make us more relevant. Aside from the structural problems of posting, we needed a fresh face, more updated features to attract new commenters , but most of all we needed a path by which new members could sign up and join the community. Many of the regulars provided what I thought were some really good ideas, workable stuff that would make us more vibrant.
Some movement did happen. We got JimK to surface, to voice his apathy with the blog and his desire to abdicate and turn the car keys over to someone else. Thrill stepped up and volunteered to handle admin duties. I thought this was fortuitous since he has experience at blog running and a desire to improve the blog. Both Alex and Hal also stepped up, saying they would collaborate and share admin duties. That was indeed a time of optimism, a time where I thought we were on our way to being part of something that, well, we could really be proud of.
Knowing Rome was not built in a day and that you have to walk before you can run, I expected fits and starts, some wheel spinning. We even had one day where the site went down entirely, still not sure what happened there.
So where are we now, two months later? JimK never got back to Thrill and updated his “admin” status, so he is basically still flapping in the wind. And it appears that the other admin guys are happy with the status quo, despite all the changes we had talked about, some new buttons or features on the home page,some easier functionality on posting comments, and the fact that still no new members can sign up.
In different posts through out the years I have often said ,”You get the government you deserve”, as one explanation for our convoluted chaotic government and the typical low information voter that facilitates their power grab. You also get the blog you deserve. If everyone is happy with the status quo, the one or two posts every other day with less than a handful of comments, well, that is what we have now. I think we can do better but am also reminded of that idiom of pissing in to the wind.
The world is an absolute mess; the ME on fire in some part due to Obama’s retreat, Iran getting a guarantee on its nuclear development as long as it is in a secret underground facility with no meddling allowed by Israel, and Iran solidifying a Persian Empire with take overs of Yemen, Lebanon, Iraq, and Syria, all the while pulling Obama’s chain with meaningless executive nuclear agreements, but this post is about none of that.
Periodically I look at alternatives to cable, what’s out there to fill my TV needs so I can 86 my cable provider. Live events, the ability to DVR, and my eclectic tastes always bring me back. One channel that I can’t part with is TCM. Sports, movies, and Foxnews, what else is there to watch? Maybe some netflix originals, more on that in a minute. I have always liked old movies and a unique feature of old movies is that everyone smoked. Hollywood had everyone smoking because they thought they were trailblazers, they thought smoking was admirable, that the folks would think these actors were cool and would want to watch them, but mostly they connected smoking with glamour, they were wrong.
Today smoking is out, profanity is in, they are still getting it wrong. Lately, in between March Madness Games (teaser, more on that in a bit) I have been watching the new Netflix original series Bloodline, it is really good. Without going in to specifics, it is not about guys in the military, in prison, or in gangs, it is about an ordinary family (with not so ordinary secrets) and yet every 4th word out of their mouths (all mouths, kids included) is f bombs. Not even through the first episode the smoking similarity was obvious. Does Hollywood think that ordinary folks talk like this or that ordinary folks watching this will think dialogue like this is cool or emblematic in some way? Yes, it is a minor irritant, and detracts little from the stellar quality, but why do they do it?
I don’t think I live a pampered sheltered life, but the only time that I ever hear f bombs or profanity in general is on TV, I never (hardly ever) come across it in real life. I am out and about every day interacting with my fellow earth dwellers, is Hollywood the only place where folks swear like sailors on a regular basis? Even in the blogosphere or this site for instance, writers manage to go whole paragraphs without it, why can’t Hollywood write 3 lines without any f bombs? Is it me? I predict that, just like the smoking prevalence of the old movies, when future generations looks at our current entertainment fare, quizzical expressions and scratching of heads will result when they analyze the apparent appeal of lazy speech.
In the event this post garners no interest, I admitted it was a personal pet peeve, I will hijack my own post, and ask the most important question; Can Kentucky be beaten?
Here’s the deal, I like Ted Cruz, personally, he is more like me than Obama. His conservative credentials are stellar, he is a government/spending reduction guy, big on national defense who (seemingly) understands the radical Islamist threat, understands that the world is a dangerous place made more dangerous by a limped dick American foreign presence, who genuinely believes in that “shinning city on a hill” image (not the imperialist America that causes more problems than it solves image of Obama) and who actually believes in The Constitution. Okay so far. And just yesterday he announced his candidacy for the 2016 presidential race. So why am I nonplussed by the whole affair?
Over at Hot Air there is a piece titled “9 Reasons Ted Cruz Is Exactly Like Barack Obama”. The author denies that he is trolling us, with the last sentence in the article, he exposes himself as exactly that. But the similarities are interesting.
Much has been made about how Cruz, Paul, and Rubio will have to answer the question of why Obama was considered inexperienced as a 1 term Senator, when each of them are similarly lacking. This criticism is valid, to a point. Clearly Obama’s problem is that he is Obama, would 8 years as a Senator change that? Would a couple of terms as governor of Illinois change his history of indoctrination, his America bad/fleece the rich/more government is always the answer/Constitution? We don’t need no stinking Constitution attitudes? Once a Marxist, always a Marxist, no matter how much time he served at the public trough.
But I still don’t like it, a one term Senator that has not done jack shit except vote “present” does not inspire confidence, not Obama and certainly not any of these 3. Could they make a good president? Sure, given the right moral grounding, the right understanding of where his loyalties (with the people, not his own aggrandizement) should be, the right understanding of his actual duties (and limitations) that The Constitution spells out, and with the right experts surrounding him providing advice and counsel.
Much will be made about Cruz’s religious convictions? That in itself is not a problem for me. Bush the younger was equally religious, his problem was not his faith but his spending policies. Cruz will suffer because his socially conservative views (no gay marriage, no abortion-ever, immigration-send them all back where they came from) appeal to a smaller audience. I like the fact the he is an AGW skeptic, this too will come up in debates.
Probably the biggest reason for my apathy is that it is so early and we still have 2 more years of Obama agony. No way do I want to go through the endless debates that dragged on for decades (seemingly). That and a little voice in the back of my head that admits that the dems are sneakier, more polished, more corrupt, more willing to bring a gun to a knife fight. Any GOP candidate will be at a disadvantage, in contrast not only with the lying MSM, but with the uninformed voter.
At this point I think that Cruz is unelectable, but am willing to listen to a counter argument, any takers?