Paige has a point.

DO NOT BOO YOUR TEAM!

There is one thing that irritates me more than any other either while watching a game in the stands or watching on tv. That is fans booing their own team. This especially irritates me in college football. Come on folks these are kids. They are playing to the best of their ability. They make mistakes. Don’t make it worse. You show how classless you are when you boo a kid

I don’t like that either. Of course, this year, I’m biting a towel at home everytime Phil Fulmer makes a decision. So I don’t scream.

Read the rest. Love me some Paige, although she’s a Georgia fan.

I’ve seen a house of cards that didn’t collapse this badly.   The Mutts had a 7 game lead on September 12th. Usually, that’s good enough.  Not this year…As the front page of the New York Post subtly put it:

PAGING DR. HEIMLEICH!

I’m guessing this guy is happy right now…

Perhaps you could find YOURSELF?    Do you find that you are constantly searching for answers?  Do you need help with priorities?   This just might be the religion for you.

ht: Phil Arnold

First, we have BeckEye from Brooklyn, with her cleverly named ‘The Pop Eye‘.

I finally got around to reading The Catcher in the Rye recently, and I must say it was quite enjoyable. However, I’m having a hard time understanding what exactly qualifies it as this flaming “classic” that usually makes people foam at the mouth when they talk about it. Perhaps all the build-up it’s gotten has ruined its excellence for me? Perhaps I can’t fully appreciate it because I never read it as a teenager? Or perhaps it’s not quite as great as everyone claims?

I’m a firm believer that there are certain books that changed your life back in the teenage/early college days that really shouldn’t be re-read. You should savor the memory and smile that you had a life that could be changed by something written in a novel.

For me, ‘Catcher in the Rye’ had THE voice. You may have wanted to swat the whiny H. Caulfield, but that was the first book I ever read where people actually talked on page the way they talked in walking-around life. Maybe it IS a book you need to read as a teenager, because some of those words explicate teen-age angst better than any words writ after. I dunno, but I’m scared to pick that book up again. I don’t wanna be disappointed.

You got any of those books (Hardy Boys don’t count, lol)?

According to this fine piece of information brought to us by the fine Southern Beale, it turns out that half the marriages in the US really DON’T end in divorce despite what I’ve heard from most pulpits, teachers, media and the old dude I used to buy hamburgers from down the street. In fact, despite the moral end of civilization as we know it, and to put it in the words of John, Paul, George and Ringo - it’s getting better all the time.

The story of ever-increasing divorce is a powerful narrative. It is also wrong. In fact, the divorce rate has been falling continuously over the past quarter-century, and is now at its lowest level since 1970. While marriage rates are also declining, those marriages that do occur are increasingly more stable. For instance, marriages that began in the 1990s were more likely to celebrate a 10th anniversary than those that started in the 1980s, which, in turn, were also more likely to last than marriages that began back in the 1970s.

This honestly good news comes from one of yesterday’s op-ed pieces in the NY Times.

My wife and I recently survived soared past one of those significant milestone anniversaries. I was beginning to feel quite superior to many of the great divorced unwashed masses, but now I realize that our achievement has been lessened….sheesh I can’t win.*

*If you live in a town that doesn’t GET irony**, that last paragraph is one of those moments where the writer is just joshin’.

**One of my favorite movie quotes: “We haven’t had any irony here since about, uh, ‘83, when I was the only practitioner of it. And I stopped because I was tired of being stared at‘.

Let’s hit a few hot spots on this fine, Saturday night:

• Ginger writes about a moment in real life, real time, where her daughter witnessed a moment that had to be explained. Not a good moment for mother or child.

• Larry Elvis takes on consumerism.

• Sharon Cobb hosts a video of Candidate Rudy, and …. Bo Derek? Wait for Mike Huckabee.

• It’s a great movie, but it is very, very depressing.

• Fractions Suck.

• Rest in Peace, Mr. Otto. A friend of our dear Rachel. A sad day indeed.

• Fraud in Iraq.

• TV Round Up by BOM

Make yourself crazy and have a good night.

SaysUncle has been having a bit of a problem with Google.

Google is anti-gun.

There are several back-and-forth emails, which include this bit from Google:

Thanks for your email. We feel that, because the content of your site is largely focused on firearms, the site is not a good fit for the AdSense program. We appreciate your understanding.

The ironic bit? Hop on over to his site to check out the Google Ads in the left sidebar.

Looking for something to do today? Well, head on over to Shelbyville for Celebration Pet Day!

Some of the exciting events for today include

10:45 a.m. - Amanda Oliver presents an informational program about Tellington T Touch Therapy for pets.

11:30 a.m. - Pamela Johnson-Bennett from Cat Behavior Associates gives a basic informational program with an audience question and answer session. Afterwards, she will do a book signing.

12:30 p.m. - Equine specialist, Sam Powell, the “Horse Whisperer”.

1:00 p.m. - Celebration Pet Day Pet Show

Blogger and animal loverCheryl Richardson has been busily putting this all together, and it promises to be a fantastic time. Proceeds from the event benefit the Shelbyville-Bedford County Humane Association.

Not sure how to get there? CPD organisers have provided directions to the festival from nearly every part of the state.

Or rather, I’m talking at Viacom.

I rarely join the debate that always occurs in the comments sections of political posts, even though I feel passionately about politics and current events. I don’t chime in because (especially compared to most of you folks), I feel that I would come to the argument unprepared and wouldn’t be able to defend or provide evidence supporting my opinions.

But there’s a post and a later comment that has gotten me ALL worked up into a tizzy (heh.. I said “tizzy”) because it’s about something I know and can come to the debate wholly prepared about. Music. And music marketing.

What is it, you ask? Well, CMT.com (yes, that bastard Viacom offspring) has started a blog where all kinds of people (though only a few of the author names are familiar to me) write about Country music related schtuff. Yesterday, Ryan Kaldari uploaded and commented on the video for Taylor Swift’s new single, “Our Song.”

Jeezy Creezy, what happened to Taylor Swift, the girl next door? Someone has abducted her and replaced her with Taylor Swift, the blonde Barbie doll. Is that Paris Hilton painting her toe-nails and yakking on the phone? Oh no, that’s Taylor Swift. Is that Mena Suvari laying in a bed of rose petals? Nope, Taylor again!

I took issue to him claiming the video is overly sexy and in the comments section, Ryan later clarified what he was getting at with the post. Not “sexy” but “shallow.” I don’t disagree but I also think, though, that “shallow” with this particular song isn’t bad… it’s a light-hearted, feel-good ditty. No social commentary. No earth-shattering revelations. Just a little tune, written by a 17-year-old about revelling in young love. Of course it’s going to be a little shallow.

Go over there and see for yourself. Too shallow? Too sexy? Just right?

Sista’s Sista has an amazing accomplishment under her belt. She’s guest-blogging at Sista’s with a very moving post about her weight-loss journey.

And as I look at these latest pictures, the first thing I notice is not a smaller body. What I notice first, and what brings me to tears now, is the peace and happines that is visible (even if only to me) that has come through this process. I am healthier than I have ever been . I am taking care of my body in a way that I never have before. I am exercising 6 days a week - which is probably the biggest surprise to me. I am learning to push myself physically. I never have done that before. I always looked for a reason to go slowly, or stop early or not even exercise at all. Now, I crave it. I always thought that was malarky when I heard folks say that before. But it is true now.

In the second story today to deal with people being upset about a fictional depiction of actual events, we go to Michael Not Mike who has an update on the latest farrago in the Church Vs. Homosexual Community battle.

n case you are not one of those whipped up about this event, it is an annual street fair that caters to a certain segment of the GLBT (this is one time all 4 letters are appropriate) community who enjoy certain sexual fetishes, especially BDSM and leather. … [The poster advertising the event is] obviously … meant to bear a striking resemblance to Leonardo De Vinci’s Last Supper.

Matt Barber, policy director for cultural issues with CWA said his group wants California’s elected officials – including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer – to “publicly condemn this unprovoked attack against Christ and His followers.” How exactly is this an attack on Christ or his followers? While it is certainly a parody of a painting made 1500 years after the events it purports to depict, it in no way says anything negative about Jesus or Christians.

Lucky Vol Abroad. She has a front-row seat for the Princess Diana Inquest over in Great Britain.

Controversial elements? This means the inquest is likely to hear all kinds of crackpot fantasies and conspiracy theories cooked up in the minds of wackos and grieving fathers. This inquest is likely to drag on forever and come up with no more than a confirmation of the French inquiry.

I’m pretty much of the opinion that alcohol, frayed nerves, and failure to wear seatbelts were the cause of death in all three cases. But the part of me which enjoys thrillers can imagine a scenario where government elements bumped Dodi and Diana off.

Cantalyssa writes this:

If you are the praying type, please keep Mr. Ivy in them today. For the nonprayers, general good thoughts are being accepted, too.

We are all sending our favorite HBIC good thoughts today as Bad, Bad Ivy needs them.

Hugs to Ivy and her hubby.

The Post Where We Talk About ‘The Office’

Yes, there will be spoilers. After the jump.

Read the rest of this entry »

Lesley wrote a kick-ass post a couple of days ago, but for some reason it just landed in my feedreader late yesterday. But I really liked it, and so I wanted to go ahead and feature it here.

It’s a meaty post with a lot of salient points, the main thrust of it being that Lesley is of the opinion that unions in general–and the UAW in particular–have outlived their usefulness.

The part of the post I found most intriguing, however, was where she discusses the union-bargained benefits. I had no idea of the level of health coverage offered to UAW members. Frankly I’m gobsmacked.

Lifetime health insurance. It’s a great benefit and along with huge pensions is what’s really crippling the automakers now. I really have no capability to feel sympathy for these guys who may be facing old age with just MediCare to get them through. As in, the health care coverage that the vast majority of us will have when we retire. Boo [redacted] hoo, you don’t get your $5 prescriptions and primo health care and you have to rely on the government’s old people health insurance like the rest of us schmucks who don’t have jobs with companies that have ever provided such preposterous benefits. I mean, seriously. Consider for a moment that you own a business. You hire a few people. They decide that they’re going to band together and make demands of raises and benefits or they’ll walk out on you. You have to agree to their demands because there’s no one else to hire. Then, 25 or 30 years later, they retire. You’ve put money into a pension plan that they’re now drawing. They’re not working for you any more, but you still have to pay for their health care insurance premiums. How does that make sense? Of course, it doesn’t make any more sense than employers having to pay for health care at all, but I would think that it would make even less sense to pay for it when they don’t even work for you any more. They’re no longer helping you generate revenue!

I’ve worked in companies where I thought an idealised form of unionisation would be helpful to employees. But it does seem to me that labor unions in their current state of being have long since lost any relevance they may have had in the past.

Okay, so that quote was about whistling. But still.

Aunt B. is talking about kissing.

I do find kissing to be very intimate and have a hard time with the whole “Hello!” *kiss, kiss* phenomenon. I wouldn’t run up to Dr. J after not seeing her for months and grab her tit. In the same way, I wouldn’t run up to her and kiss her, not even on the cheek. And I don’t mind smooching her!

I sort of feel the same way. While I’m into kissing the man I’m into kissing, I sort of reserve kisses for him and him alone. I’m usually taken aback by social hello-kissers. But at the same time I’m kind of flattered that someone likes me enough to at least air-kiss my cheek.

I was playing Taboo with my mother- and sister-in-law a few years back The word was “kiss”, and we had to throw out several clues without using various words associated directly with kissing. (For those of you unfamiliar with how “Taboo” works…) My first clue proffered was “Wives do this to husbands”. They didn’t get it, so my next clue (we’re a very religious family) was “Judas did this to Jesus.” Their prompt answer, in unison, was “Betray!”

Now I realise that is a really tangential story, but I think of it whenever people start talking about kissing. And it also makes me wonder just exactly what was going through my father- and brother-in-laws’ thought when they put the second answer with the first clue.

Seems a lot of people are upset by things that are dramatised depictions of actual events.

First, Southern Beale has a bit of info about this picture.

This photo turns up all over the right-wing media, but the ’stoning’ actually takes place in a 1994 Dutch indie film called De Steen, directed by Mahnaz Tamizi. The ‘teenage girl’ is actress Smadar Monsinos.

She has gotten her information from Sadly, No.

However, the story deepens somewhat from here. Several commenters at her place assert that

This is NO actress… This was a woman in her 20’s in the city of Arok in Iran and the photo was taken in 1992 and the photographer GAVE IT to Tamizi.

I of course believe it is entirely possible that the movie was based on a photograph given to Tamizi, so that both groups are partially right. I’ve been trying to find Tamizi’s story about the creation of the film, but I’ve not yet been able to find it.

UPDATE:

The picture in question is shown in a FrontPage Magazine article dated 27 January 2005 with the caption “(This picture, smuggled out of Iran, was taken in 1992 in the town of Arak)”

It appears in more than 22 (I stopped counting at that point) different websites accompanying articles (including one in The Daily Mail) about the practice of stoning. In the 22 articles it accompanies, there are at least four different sources given for the photo–if a source is given at all.

The photo most often appears in anti-death penalty advocacy sites, as well as various “Stop Stoning” sites. Only one Anti-death penalty site that I could find actually credited the photo to Tamizi.

I desperately want to know the whole story behind this picture. If it is a still from a move, as I believe it is, then what inspired the director to make that movie? Was it a picture like this one? Was it a narrative of an actual stoning? Trust me, there’s a story there.

What I do find interesting is that the use of the photo is being maligned by prominent left-wing sites (including Daily Kos) when it appears in a FrontPage Magazine (right wing) article, but has been unquestioned by those same left-wing sites for years when used in anti-capital punishment sites.

Update #2:  Comments Closed ON This Post  10/2/07 11:53am

If you’re close to Bedford County and love animals, do blogger Cheryl Richardson a favor and stop by Celebration Pet Day on Saturday. (And if you’re there in the morning, stop by and purchase some Bedford County Bicentennial swag from Yours Truly, a member of the Bicentennial organizing committee). There will be a horse whisperer, people in superhero costumes, and more fun.

Maybe you could take a photo of a cat for purposes of superimposing misspelled, nonsensical statements on it in AWL KAPITAL LETTURZ.

Mike Byrd at his Enclave blog is applauding Bill Clinton’s statements about a purported “bait and switch” by Republicans in slamming moveon.org and the NYTimes about the “Gen. Betray us” ad.

Mike’s contribution to the discussion is mainly the post’s title, but he obviously thinks Clinton masterfully did something and that the something was pointing out hypocrisy of Republicans (oh, “and a few spooked Dems” . . . hmmm, I missed Clinton’s reference to them). Uh, I disagree.

John Kerry wasn’t leading our troops during time of war when his heroic myth was rebutted . . . Max Cleland wasn’t leading our troops in theatre when taken to task for his wrong vote on airport security . . . and, sorry, but the fact that Max Cleland was injured while in the service doesn’t make him “off limits” for criticism, on war or anything else.

In a war with an all-volunteer military, troop morale is particularly important for success. And calling the commander of our troops in Iraq a traitor is music to Jihadist ears. Perhaps Clinton is projecting, but I think it is ludicrous to say that criticizing this outrageous “traitor” ad was an effort to distract from the “real issues.” Bombing aspirin factories after embarrassing depositions comes to mind. There was nothing to hide from in that report, and fear of Bill Clinton calling me a hypocrite isn’t sufficient reason to give moveon.org (and its accomplice, the New York Times) a pass.

Jackson breaks it down:

I got the following IM from my wife today:

according to salary.com, an average stay at home mom makes 124k annually for all the work she does….
(would make)

All of the contrived innuendo related to her and my recent conversations aside, it does make me think about how we put a price on our time.

I will be perfectly honest here, I know that being a stay at home mom is tough. Hell, I know it is valuable. However, the work an average stay at home mom performs is worth no where near 124k annually. The value a stay at home parent provides is the added love and care for the children, and frankly you can’t put a price on that. It is irreplaceable. The actual work, not so much.

That “holy [redacted], house wives should all be millionaires” number that gets tossed around is based on some pretty ridiculous assumptions. There are blatant exaggerations like “10 hours a week as an Executive Chef, $15,000 annually”. Sure, a homemaker cooks and cleans and creates “menus” and buys groceries, but not at the level of an Executive Chef. “You are worth $124,000″ is a feel good story, but it is bull[also redacted] disguised as a logical analysis.

I agree. The role of stay-at-home mom is one that is priceless. There’s a whole lot more over at Jackson’s place, he makes some great points go on over and read it all for yourselves.

Via Jim Ridley

This should be an interesting test of his grass-roots efforts, which resemble some indie rocker’s scrappy guerrilla-marketing push (complete with phone-pole flyers, stenciled signs and viral videos) more than presidential politics. Indeed, the initial notice I got about the rally came from the leader of one of Nashville’s best punk bands of recent years.

You can also pay upwards of $500 (the campaign suggests $1,000) for an 11 a.m. meet-and-greet the same day at The Pinnacle atop the downtown Sheraton Hotel. Now that’s presidential politics.

Full disclosure: Ron Paul is my personal candidate of choice. But I’m not paying $500 to shake his hand.

Update: I guess Ron Paul isn’t for everyone, though.

(Oh, and a “Jacquerie” is a bloody peasant revolt.)

Several colleges are eliminating the Student Loan portion of their financial aid packages.

Les Jones puts my thoughts about this into some very good words:

I’m of two minds about student loans. On the one hand, they enable students to go attend college who wouldn’t otherwise be able to afford it. On the other hand, some students wind up saddled with big debts early in life, and often have degrees where the likely career prospects make repaying the loads difficult.

The U.S. government, in trying to help the former, is enabling the latter. Many people would object to Bank of America letting an 18 year old anthropology major take on tens of thousands of dollars a year in debt to finance their personal lives in college, but the government is making it possible for that same student to take on the same debt to pay for tuition. With the student load the interest rate is lower, but you may not be able escape the debt with bankruptcy.

I still think that the student loans I took out were some of the biggest financial mistakes of my life. I’m every day thankful that I didn’t compound the problem by going on to law school.

Sharon Cobb offers up some commentary on the Phil Spector mistrial.

As it turned out, the vote was 10-2, with the 10 being in favor of convicting Phil Spector on the murder charges. The 2 who voted against a murder conviction probably couldn’t get past the fact that the writer and producer of ‘Be My Baby’ could be a murderer.
What’s up with Los Angeles jurors? I think when a celebrity is involved in a crime in Los Angeles, they need a change of venue, like East Tennessee.

Famous men who murder women who are free:
O.J. Simpson
Robert Blake
Phil Spector

I watch very closely the blog debates on Capital Punishment. Every time someone comes up for execution we get a detail-ridden brief or three about how they only drank alcohol as children because their mothers were hookers and now they’re mentally challenged and besides the confession was forced and the prosecution was corrupt and the lawyers back then didn’t understand the law and the jury was misinformed.

You know how people are always saying they’d rather see 100 guilty men go free than one man wrongfully convicted? Well, here are the first three…only 97 more to go.

Jackson is sure that Apple won’t release a PDA. I’ll let him tell you why.

There is just no market for that device. People may say that Apple can create a market for this device like they did for the iPhone. The difference is that the iPhone took two devices people loved (iPod and phone) and made them better by combining them without sacrificing the quality of either. This is a device that no one wants because it is not as good as the two devices they already have (phone and computer).

So what do you think? Will Apple release a PDA for completeness’ sake, or does Jackson have it right? He is usually right about this sort of thing.

Kevin of Lean Left highlights this story about Verizon and Naral.

Saying it had the right to block “controversial or unsavory” text messages, Verizon Wireless has rejected a request from Naral Pro-Choice America, the abortion rights group, to make Verizon’s mobile network available for a text-message program.

The other leading wireless carriers have accepted the program, which allows people to sign up for text messages from Naral by sending a message to a five-digit number known as a short code.

Text messaging is a growing political tool in the United States and a dominant one abroad, and such sign-up programs are used by many political candidates and advocacy groups to send updates to supporters.

But legal experts said private companies like Verizon probably have the legal right to decide which messages to carry. The laws that forbid common carriers from interfering with voice transmissions on ordinary phone lines do not apply to text messages.

Kevin goes further to explain what that means for the future of the Internet.

If there are no Net Neutrality rules, then this is what will eventually happen to the internet. Opinions unpopular with the handful of people who set policy at the handful of companies that control access to the Internet will decide that you aren’t allowed to go places they do not approve of.

Kleinheider is also discussing this at VV, where commenter GoldnI announces that it appears Verizon has reversed its earlier decision.

See also: TGW