Archive for the ‘Featured’ Category:
Jackasses Upset About Obama Fathers Day Message
It seems that some jackasses were upset by President Obama’s Father’s Day message. What did The President say?
From the Seattle Times:
“Nurturing families come in many forms, and children may be raised by a father and mother, a single father, two fathers, a stepfather, a grandfather, or caring guardian.”
So that’s what he said. Not a big deal, right?
Oh. But it is a big deal. Like most of the things that President Obama says, this is just another step towards the dismantling of everything that makes our Great Nation great!
The outcry from two – TWO! – jackasses was enough to warrant news coverage.
The more well-known jackass to comment was American Family Association president Tim Wildmon, who, because he has no sense of humor, did not that say President Obama’s statement was wild, man. (Get it? Thank you, I’ll be here all week.) Wildmon told the AP: “This is the first time in our nation’s history that a president has used Father’s Day as an excuse to promote the radical homosexual agenda and completely redefine the word ‘family.'”
Because that’s what happened. Jackass.
The other jackass that offered trenchant commentary on this issue was Jenny Tyree, who is less well-known, at least to me.
Tyree is described as “a marriage analyst for CitizenLink, an affiliate of Focus on the Family”. CitizenLink is a web site or something. Tyree found the President’s mention of the concept of “‘two fathers’ in the proclamation” to be “very troubling”, calling it a “decision to promote a ‘motherless family.'”
Again — because that’s what he was doing. Jackass number two.
If you, like me, have no idea who Jenny Tyree is, she apparently is someone who has devoted her existence to railing against same-sex marriage. As she herself puts it:
My job is to defend one-man, one-woman marriage as God’s created intent and design for humans who are called to bear His image as male and female, and to advance marriage policies in the public arena that build on the wealth of research confirming that children, women and men thrive in stable marriages.
That sounds like a cool job! Beats working for The Post Office, know what I mean?
Nation & World | Active Father’s Day for Obama, critics | Seattle Times Newspaper
Adam and Steve DVD image via Amazon
Bob Etheridge Was Setup And Is A Schmuck [Politics]
The Bob Etheridge video was a setup. He’s still a schmuck.
As Mayor Quimby once said, it can be two things.
In case you don’t know what I’m talking about, here is a reasonably good account of the story at Huffington Post.
And here are the two videos.
[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZKie0Z4kaw]
[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1BC34jBVo0]
Now:
The reality is that the Etheridge video was clearly a setup. This is the GOP Conservative Hive Mind version of TMZ. They create a situation and hope that someone (usually a member of the Democratic party, whom the GOP Conservative Hive Mind believes is the greatest threat to life as they know it) falls for it.
Etheridge fell for it big time. That makes him a schmuck. He might even have anger management issues. Hell, he might even be a violent maniac. But that doesn’t change the fact that this was clearly an ambush.
Gotcha journalism, if you will.
If it’s not a setup, why does the YouTube account hosting the videos have only two clips, both of the Etheridge incident? Why is it so well edited? Why was there someone else present with a high quality camera ready to document the whole thing? And if it wasn’t a setup, what was it? A “school project”? Give me a break. We’re stupid, but we’re not THAT stupid.
This doesn’t let Etheridge off the hook. He acted like a schmuck. But the situation was fabricated.
Also interesting is that this tactic is what Andrew Breitbart, the neocon nitwit who promoted the Etheridge video, accused the black senators of doing when they walked by Tea Party protesters. He said that by walking by them, they were attempting to provoke a response. Or as he put it on Twitter, which is where everyone knows the most trenchant political debate occurs: “Dem strategy: Coordinated bloc walks in front of ‘tea partiers’ hoping to get youtube provocation to turn tables“. (The implication that a black person walking by a Tea Party protest is something that is likely to provoke a negative response is a curious side note to Breitbart’s reasoning.)
Breitbart, of course, says that was wrong. Wrong wrong wrong. So what about the Etheridge video? Which is more likely – that a Senator would be going to work and happen to walk by protesters? Or that two kids in suits with cameras happened to be waiting for a Senator?
They’re all assholes. Pick the asshole you agree with the most and vote that way, I suppose. But don’t buy into the notion that this is real. Because in all likelihood, it isn’t.
Not Having Kids Led To Murder [Laughing Instead of Crying]
CNN is reporting that “Fertility issues were at the center of former TV chef Juan-Carlos Cruz’s motivation in the alleged murder-for-hire plot to kill his wife“. In other words, not having kids led to murder.
See, I always thought it was the other way around.
This isn’t a funny story, of course, and that joke was in poor taste. But whatever. Let’s think about this for a minute.
I admit that I can’t completely relate to people who are desperate to have children and are unable to do so. I have two kids, and no fertility treatments were involved. Part of me doesn’t get the idea of fertility treatments — some people go through a lot in order to have a child themselves rather than, say, adopting, or just not having kids. But in the interest of trying to be an enlightened live and let live kind of guy (ha ha) I’m willing to accept the idea that there are feeling I can’t comprehend because I’ve never been in the same situation.
That said, the idea that not being able to have a child would drive a man to hire someone to kill his wife seems far-fetched. It was SO IMPORTANT to have kids? Again, why not adopt? How long are you going to try? Ever heard of Kate Gosselin? She did some sort of procedure and ended up with six more kids. SIX. KIDS. The Octo-mom? Hello? Even twins seems like a lot to me.
Hell, one kid is a lot. Maybe, before desperately trying every fertility treatment in town, potential parents should spend some time with a large family. Preferably one with very young children. Who don’t sleep. And talk. A lot. Maybe one of the kids is a biter. Another one wets the bed. Nightly. Still another likes to flush things, like mom’s shoes, down the toilet. At least once a week.
Maybe then they would see that having kids? Not the only way to go through life.
Now, a disclaimer of sorts. I love my children. I wanted to have them. They are cute, they are annoying, blah blah blah. But in the same way that it shouldn’t matter if a woman in public life has kids, and that we should stop referring to single women as unmarried as if being married is a goal for a woman, it would be nice if people would stop thinking about children as something that they need. You aren’t “childless.” You just don’t have kids. Or maybe whether or not you have children is even an issue.
I personally don’t even like to ask people if they plan on having kids. Which I guess is a good thing, since, according to CNN, not having kids can lead to murder.
Sources: Inability to have child behind TV chef’s murder scheme – CNN.com
Does It Matter If A Woman In Public Life Has Kids? – Jezebel
All the Single Ladies – Maureen Dowd, New York Times
Jon and Kate Plus 8 DVD Image via Amazon.com
Are We Done With Lance Armstrong Now? [Rants]
According to published reports, professional bike rider Floyd Landis has admitted that he was doping and claims that Lance Armstrong was doing it too. My question is: are we done with Lance Armstrong now?
I’ve never liked Lance Armstrong. There was always something about him. Maybe it’s the way he uses the fact that he had cancer as a marketing tool. Or the fact that nobody ever says what a douche the guy is. I mean, he was making out with an Olsen twin. What the hell? That’s douchey behavior.
But nobody calls him on it. Why not? Because he’s Lance Armstrong. He only has one testicle. (Note: I’m not sure how many testicles he has. Ask the Olsen twins.)
He dumped Sheryl Crow, and it could be because she had breast cancer. The rumor, if I recall correctly, was that she wanted kids and he didn’t. Then he went out and had kids. Methinks Lance just wanted to bang younger women.
But he had cancer! And made those rubber bracelets!
And he’s such a champion! He won all those bike races! No way was he aided by drugs. The French are just jealous. They’re still mad because we saved their ass in WWII. Amirite?
Now it appears that Lance Armstrong may have been lying all along. Landis is definitely lying; he’s either lying doping now, or he was lying about not doping before. Since only high school students trying to look cool lie about taking drugs, I’m going to go with the latter.
Landis is definitely an enormous jackass. In a 2007 New York Times Magazine story, Landis denied doing anything that was against cycling rules. The article talked about his “supporters”; I think some even gave him money to help with his legal fees. Legal fees to defend himself against the allegations that he had done bad things in order to win a bike race.
I’m not someone who spends a lot of time worrying about performance enhancing drugs in sports. I don’t think it’s a good idea, but I do think there is a tremendous amount of hypocrisy in the sports world when it comes to this topic. Brett Favre couldn’t take the field without popping pain pills. Um, hello? If you’re going to put an asterisk next to Barry Bonds because he couldn’t have hit home runs without HGH, shouldn’t you do the same thing for Brett Favre’s consecutive game streak? Oh, but the pain pills didn’t help him play better. True. They helped him play, period. But hey, you know. He’s Brett Favre. That makes it okay.
I could give two shits about cycling. But that’s not the point. The point is the lying, the repeated lying, and the lack of anyone giving a shit about telling the truth.
If it turns out that Lance Armstrong is a lying sack of shit, what will that mean for his “legacy”? Will people burn their rubber bracelets in outrage? Will he have to give back all the money he earned from being a “hero” and a “champion”?
Nah. Because nobody cares. They believed whatever he said, reporters bought into it, and that’s it. It’s old news, right? Who cares? What’s done is done. Besides, he’s really sorry. The French made him do it.
Deadspin points out that “No proof is offered, as of yet. Just the word of a man who has nothing left to lose.” That is, no proof that Armstrong did anything, and Landis has nothing left to lose. For the record, I still think Lance Armstrong is a dick, and that he gets a pass when he does douchey stuff like making out with an Olsen twin, or dumping Sheryl Crow because she has cancer and is too old for his one-balled self, or using his cancer as a marketing tool. But it’s possible that he wasn’t lying about this.
Besides, he had CANCER. Didn’t you know? He’s such a great guy.
Movies I Saw In Theaters – Love at First Bite [Movies]
There are a lot of movies I saw in theaters when I was a kid that I wouldn’t take my kids to see now. One of them is the George Hamilton / Susan St. James non-classic ‘Love at First Bite.’
‘Love at First Bite‘ is a parody of Dracula movies. I saw it in theaters, despite being about 8 years old at the time. Either my mother or my father took me, I don’t remember. Probably my father, since he was more likely to take me to something like this.
I don’t remember much about ‘Love at First Bite’. Judging by the clip, it looks like there wasn’t anything in there that was overly questionable for a young man to see or hear. I think I heard an s-word. Ooo! They say “shit” in the animated ‘Transformers’ movie and ‘Short Circuit’, both movies that were intended for kid audiences.
So why wouldn’t I take my kids to see ‘Love at First Bite’?
For one thing, there are a lot more choices now. Tons of movies specifically meant for kids, and also all of the films and television shows that I love and now want to watch with my children.
Also, the way we consume media has changed. Going to a movie theater is no longer an easy way to spend a couple of hours with a child. Well, it’s still easy, but it costs a fickin’ fortune. In Manhattan, adult movie tickets are typically $12.50, kids are about $7.50. That’s too much.
If ‘Love at First Bite’ were made today, it would probably have a lot more sex and explicit language. This comment from YouTube is telling (and unlike most comments from YouTube, doesn’t call anyone gay):
Ah yes, I do SO miss the days when comedy could just be silly and funny and didn’t have to be “edgy”….thanks? for this blast from the past !
‘Edgy’ is rightly in quotes. The word is so overused that it doesn’t mean anything anymore.
That’s from ‘The Hangover’, which is rated R. ‘Love at First Bite‘ was rated PG. If they remade ‘Love at First Bite‘ today, I imagine they would go for an R. You know. To get the kids in.
To be clear, I’m not knocking ‘The Hangover’ or the current wave of R-rated comedies. I actually think it’s better for movies like that to get a R-rating, which is meant to tell parents that a movie isn’t appropriate for children under 17. That doesn’t stop parents from bringing kids to movies like ‘Kick-Ass’ of course, but that — stupid parents — is a different topic.
I also don’t think my kids would be damaged by seeing ‘Love at First Bite‘. I think I’m more uptight about what they see, although my butt enclenches when it comes to superhero movies. Both of my boys have seen ‘Iron Man’; the youngest hasn’t seen ‘Iron Man 2’ because I decided it was too much for him (he’s pretty young). A lot of that is because of the intensity of ‘Iron Man 2’. For much of the movie, Jon Favreau puts his foot on the gas and doesn’t let up for long stretches, which was a lot of fun to watch but could potentially freak out a little kid.
That’s something that older movies didn’t do as much. We watched ‘Star Wars’ recently, and I was pleasantly surprised by a couple of things. One was how well it holds up. (I did have to explain to my son that Han shot first, despite what George Lucas edited into the movie after the fact.) Another was how it manages to be fun and exciting without being INTENSE. Or, to borrow from a YouTube commenter, ‘edgy’.
In some ways, that lack of ‘edge’ makes ‘Star Wars’ more kid-friendly than a lot of what passes for kiddie fare these days. ‘Star Wars’ doesn’t insert overly intense music during key scenes or employ schlocky horror movie techniques intended to get the heart pumping. It just starts a good story.
‘Love at First Bite’ (although I admit I can’t remember a lot of it) does the same kind of thing. That’s probably one of the reasons I can’t remember it. It wasn’t traumatizing. Another movie, ‘The Twilight Zone’, I walked out of and will never forget. The girl with no mouth. Here’s the clip. I just watched it for the first time since 1983 when I saw it in theaters, and I really regret doing so. Um, here’s the clip. But be warned. It’s still really fucking scary.
That’s a horror movie, of course. But my point is that if a movie doesn’t have stuff like that in it, scenes that are intended to be frightening or ‘edgy’, odds are it won’t be something that your cause your kids to flip out.
(Shit. I can’t believe I watched that clip of the girl with no mouth from ‘The Twilight Zone’. I’m really not happy right now. Dammit.)
A better way to look at this could be that if I were a parent in 1979, I should be OK with taking my kid to see ‘Love at First Bite’ in theaters. But today’s equivalent of ‘Love at First Bite’, whatever that is, not so much.
Love at First Bite DVD image from Amazon.com
How Not To Pressure Your Working Spouse [DaddyTips]
Have you ever wondered how not to pressure your working spouse? Or is that a topic you’ve never given a moment of thought?
You should think about it. Because it’s important. Pressuring your spouse, especially when they are at work (say, by sending an email) can cause frustration and also be downright mean. Read more »
Lloyd Blankfein Looks Like Wallace Shawn [Princess Bride vs Goldman Sachs]
Is it just me or does Lloyd Blankfein look like Wallace Shawn?
When I saw Blankfein’s photo on the cover of yesterday’s New York Times, I immediately thought of Wallace Shawn in The Princess Bride.
Watch these two videos and see if you agree.
Lloyd C. Blankfein in Senate Testimony
[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MYX9L603FU]
Wallace Shawn in The Princess Bride, inconceivable
[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-b7RmmMJeo]
“Intentionally profiting from the economic downturn? Inconceivable!”
