Brewed with one-third real shampoo...but don't wash your hair with it!

Since this is a weekend, I thought you might be in a nostalgic mood again!

For years, I've been adamant that there was once a TV commercial that advertised "beer shampoo" - shampoo that included beer as an ingredient. I've always told people that the actress in the ad said, "But don't drink it!"

But everyone has always accused me of just making the whole thing up, since it seemed so farfetched.

Well, guess what?

As with the Flavor Fiend and Nature Valley ads, YouTube has once again rescued my believability:



I'm assuming the shampoo advertised in that 1978 commersh is no longer being made, so I have no objection to embedding the ad here. (Again, Facebookers are going to have to find it themselves because Facebook won't fix its bugs.)

Ever since I saw that "beer shampoo" ad when I was 5, I thought the height of comic genius would be if they made a "shampoo beer."

"Brewed with one-third real shampoo."

"Wow."

"But don't wash your hair with it!"

Except it probably wouldn't taste too good.

Dumb right-wing quote of the day

Cue the old "You are an idiot" jingle from Q-102.

After Arnold Schwarzenegger proposed ending welfare and closing down most state parks to cover California's budget deficit - which was caused in part by his own mismanagement - progressive voices have quite properly criticized his plans. They point out that almost all of his budget cuts would hit the poor.

But what's the Schwarzenegger administration's response to this criticism?

State finance director Mike Genest (pictured here) said the cuts hit the poor because "government doesn't provide services to rich people."

Seriously, he said that.

If that's true, then why have I spent the past 15 years exposing how rich neighborhoods get much better government services than poor areas?

My former school district recently closed the elementary school in a working-class neighborhood and forced students to be bused several miles out of town to a more affluent area. How is that not giving more services to the rich?

And what about this bank bailout garbage? The amount of California's budget deficit is less than 0.2% of the value of the recent Wall Street bailouts.

Oh, I get it now. Those aren't handouts to rich people. Those are handouts to rich corporations. Well, isn't that even worse?

If you think government doesn't provide as much services to the rich as to the poor, why does it seem like almost every new spending project goes to areas that are relatively well-off?

(Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/31/us/31calif.html)

ABC lives up to its initials (Bubble Gum Weekend)

ABC doesn't just stand for American Broadcasting Company. It also stands for Anti-Barack Channel, a reference to the network's bias that favored the GOP in the 2008 election.

And it stands for Already Been Chewed. As in gum, you know.

Usually our Bubble Gum Weekend feature links you to hilarious old gum commercials, but this week's installment isn't really an ad. I guess it could be an ad, because it shows gum, and every time people see gum, they buy more of it, because gum is funny. But anyway, the fact that it isn't truly a commersh means I can embed it directly in this entry and keep my integrity.

This uproarious clip seems to be from some 'Candid Camera'-style show that aired recently on ABC. It depicts a young woman chewing bubble gum, sticking it on the bottom of her shoe, walking around in a park, pulling the filthy gum off her shoe, and chewing it.

Yes, this does appear to be real. The individual in this ad actually chewed a dirty wad of gum off the bottom of her shoe! Onlookers (including an aging gent in a Phil Collins hat) were shocked at her amusing behavior.

And since I know you're going to ask: Yes, she bubbled.

So here's the clip (although those of you who read this on Facebook probably won't see this, because Facebook won't fix its failure to embed YouTube videos):



On the other hand, is it really ABC gum if the only person who's chewed it is yourself? Just because the bubble gum has become grimy from the pavement at the park (which is probably coated with dog feces and vomit residue) doesn't necessarily make it ABC gum. Maybe that wad of gum picked up someone else's discarded gum along the way for better bubbling, but who knows?

Court crimps drug war housing policy

Every person alive today knows there's a druggie hiding under every bed in the known universe. They know this because Congress said so.

Why, that storage bin under your bed that's full of old Power Mac software actually isn't a storage bin. It's a druggie ingeniously disguised as a storage bin. Did you know that?

But seriously now.

A government policy that gained height in the '90s evicted public housing residents if they had a relative who had even minimal drug involvement - even if the resident was unaware of what their relative did. It was a "one strike" policy that gutted due process.

For a while, agents were conducting warrantless searches of public housing in search of contraband left behind by family members.

These militant policies were courtesy of the right-wing Republican Congress of the time and of the Clinton regime. (What's this again about a two-party system?)

But now, several courts have ruled against efforts by housing authorities in Covington, Kentucky, to evict residents who are unaware of relatives' drug involvement.

The case resulted when a resident was evicted after her nephew who was visiting left cocaine in the apartment - without her knowledge. The resident was ordered to move out in only 14 days under this "one strike" rule - even though she had nothing to do with her nephew's drug offenses. In fact, she didn't even know about the drugs or the arrest until she got the eviction notice.

But local judges quite properly ruled in her favor and said she was wrongly evicted. Now the Kentucky Court of Appeals has upheld these rulings.

The court said that not only did the eviction violate the housing agreement - but authorities didn't even bother to show that the resident did anything illegal herself.

That this "one strike" policy was being wielded against innocents is another sign that the failed War on Drugs is out of control. Instead of using due process and common sense, authorities went off half-cocked. At least the court saw through the bullshit.

(In case you're asking, the comment section of the Cincinnati paper has already been flooded by Freeper-like bigoted commenters.)

(Source: http://nky.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/AB/20090529/NEWS0107/905300350)

Pee-In-A-Cup Portman disobeys campaign law

Meet Rob Portman - ultraconservative former Cincinnati area congressman and Bush's OMB director. Now he's running for Senate in Ohio, and he's proving to be quite a gaffe-a-minute guy.

Last weekend, Portman appeared at the Dayton Veterans Affairs Medical Center to campaign for vets' votes. But VA officials then had to warn him that campaigning on federal property is illegal.

Oops.

He had the nerve to campaign there after he was responsible for slashing the VA's budget (which led to vastly decreased quality of services for vets)?

In just the last 4 years of the Bush era (which includes Portman's OMB reign), the processing time for veterans to qualify for VA health care benefits increased from 70 days to over 300 days.

Gutting the VA was a pattern by the Bush regime though. Bush slashed VA funding in an effort to "prove" public health care didn't work - even though veterans had been more satisfied with the VA than they were with America's disastrous private health care system.

The VA's problems didn't get as bad as they are now until Bush almost totally gutted the VA for political purposes. Then again, the private civilian health care system declined under Bush too.

If you've had any experience with America's civilian health care lately, you'd know why privatizing vets' health care is the last thing America needs.

With Rob Portman running for Senate, America is staring down the barrel of a Bush conservative monopolizing another valuable Senate seat.

(Source: http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/dayton-news/portman-pays-visit-to-va-on-eve-of-holiday-132495.html)

Radio finds new way to be irrelevant

It's almost as if the broadcast industry today is intentionally trying to relieve itself of what little relevancy radio had remaining.

Twenty years ago, even stations that mostly aired music seemed to know the community around them. If they didn't have a full news feature, they had community events and public interest features.

These days, serving the community is a dirty word on almost any music or talk format. Music radio declined into a narrow set of tracks preapproved by national executives and big record labels. Talk radio became nearly synonymous with right-wing diatribes - usually syndicated, with no local interest.

This process was enabled largely by the rogue 1996 Telecommunications Act (a dogmatic law that nobody dares to criticize).

Some said there was a glimmer of hope around the middle of the current decade when major broadcasters agreed to air music from independent labels again - following a lawsuit over the industry shutting out indies. But I knew there'd be not a shred of compliance. And I was right.

I've noticed lately though that the industry has found a nifty way around that ruling: Just change your stations (even big FM signals) to a right-wing talk or sports format, so you don't have to worry about music at all.

Fact is, America has seen very, very few successful FM talk stations. And probably just as few successful sports talk stations on either AM or FM. Most of the sports talk outlets just rebroadcast a national feed where the hosts gripe about things Pete Rose did 30 years ago, so their ratings are as dismal as you'd expect.

Yet sports and right-wing talk on major FM signals are starting to proliferate wildly - just so radio can continue to shut out indie music. Today, it was discovered that powerful FM music stations in San Antonio and Grand Rapids are switching to talk or sports - following similar switches in other markets. The new talk station in San Antonio will include all nationally syndicated hosts - with no local programming whatsoever.

I don't think anyone in the U.S. and A. still relies on radio as an arbiter of new music. Radio has allowed itself to be completely left in the dust by the Internet and other venues. And I think the industry likes it fine that way.

What an amazing decline of a medium that had so much potential!

'Sucks' is out, harassment is in

If America became any more of a Bizarro World than it's become over the past 25 years, then pretty soon everyone would have been eating rocks and drinking sand like in the 'Saturday Night Live' skits.

Recently, a Texas Rangers baseball fan who wore a "Yankees Sucks" t-shirt to a game against the New York team was threatened by a guard with being ejected from the game unless she changed her shirt.

The guard reportedly said that the Texas ball club "considers that shirt to be profane." It violates the Rangers' "code of conduct", u c. This code was enacted because a few people got their pwecious widdle feewings hurt by words like 'sucks'.

Even "Weird Al" Yankovic (a relatively clean songwriter) used the word 'sucks' in at least one of his songs. So how thin-skinned does one have to be to complain to ballpark management after seeing this word on a shirt?

The woman who wore the "Yankees Sucks" shirt had her whole wedding anniversary ruined by the run-in. She turned the shirt inside-out, but she and her husband left the stadium before the game even started.

Sounds like Major League Baseball teams are getting as bad as the NFL is in trying to banish fun from sports.

Even though you can't wear a shirt with 'sucks', it's perfectly tolerable to drive up and down the road and pelt folks with trash - or physically block a person trying to walk down the street. In the topsy-turvy climate that's dominated in recent years, harassment like this is considered "free speech."

(Source: http://www.nbcnewyork.com/sports/baseball/yankees/To-Rangers-Yankees-Suck-Shirt-is-Profane.html)

Report says wage boost helps economy

Some facts are so obvious that you shouldn't need to conduct a costly study to prove them.

But some folks are stubborn, so I guess this expense had to be made. Not like this'll change wingnuts' minds.

A new report by the Economic Policy Institute finds that recent increases in the minimum wage have already helped stimulate the American economy to the tune of almost $5,000,000,000.

I still can't believe it took such a detailed study to prove the obvious. Anyone should be able to see that if the working class makes more money, they can spend more on items they need and boost the economy.

If giving government handouts to big banks is so great, why would it be such a bad thing to make sure working people get better pay as well?

Better pay - and more economic equality - should be considered a leading economic indicator just by definition.

But don't expect much press to be given to this report. The national media culture is as hostile to economic fairness as our local media is. When I used to read one of our local dailies (now defunct), I always got the impression that they saw no harm in even college graduates wearing paper hats and asking, "Do you want fries with that?" just to make a living. This is the same right-wing paper that blamed the minimum wage increase for wrecking the economy - even though the wage boost hadn't taken effect yet.

To this media culture, the economy is about Big Business making money off employees' backs. In that greed-driven ideology, it's not about giving workers buying power.

The minimum wage should be indexed with inflation. Members of Congress illegally vote themselves huge pay increases each year. So the failure to boost the minimum wage is one of America's gravest tragedies.

(Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE54R6YD20090528)

"Survey? What survey? lololololol"

If conservatives manage to get some referendumb passed to run roughshod over inalienable rights, they complain that opponents who sue to have it overturned aren't abiding by the will of the people.

But this story shows how phony the rightists' claims to populism truly are.

In Bradford County, Florida, the school board sent out a survey about (you guessed it!) uniforms. Parents rejected the failed idea of uniforms by about a 2-to-1 margin.

School board members were shocked that a majority of folks would dare to even think that school-imposed groupthink wasn't worthy of unadulterated praise. So they announced they were going to just ignore the results of the survey and continue imposing uniforms anyway.

But what about the will of the people? You know, the same will of the people that was so important in other cases?

I guess instead of lying about the results of surveys - as other school boards have been caught doing - Bradford County school officials have finally realized it's easier to just ignore survey results altogether.

A school board member's tirade exemplifies the smug attitude the school bored has about public opinion. She declared, "Once again we're going to let the parents dictate to us when we're the school board - and for once we ought to stand up for what's right and what's good for this community."

Heaven forbid public officials such as school board members actually let the public have input, huh?

At least now kids who come to school out of uniform won't go to jail, after state lawmakers put a clamp on that.

(Source: http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20321977&BRD=2150&PAG=461&dept_id=377017&rfi=6)

Limbaugh calls himself a civil rights leader (hahaha!)

I detect something off in the distance!

It's getting closer!

Why, it's the WAAAAAAAAAAHmbluance again!

Listen to what Rush Limbaugh said the other day about mounting losses for his party. (Since nobody else listens to Rush anymore.) The washed-up has-been whined, "If ever a civil rights movement was needed in America, it is for the Republican Party. If ever we needed to start marching for freedom and constitutional rights, it's for the Republican Party. The Republican Party is today's oppressed minority ..."

Aw, poor, poor, poor widdle Republicans. So oppressed.

Limbaugh complained that the GOP has been forced to the "back of the bus."

I guess Rush Limbaugh is the leader of the first civil rights movement in history for a party that oppressed everyone else and had almost limitless power for 28 years.

Contrast Rush Limbaugh versus the real civil rights leaders of 50 years ago. I doubt Rush has ever had police commissioners turning hoses on him.

(Source: http://mediamatters.org/limbaughwire/2009/05/27)

"Zero tolerance" becoming less tolerated in Florida

Maybe - just maybe - people might be starting to think that "zero tolerance" discipline policies that now pervade American schools aren't so brilliant after all.

The blab is rife with countless true stories of grade school children being arrested for drawing pictures of slingshots or accidentally bringing nail clippers to school.

But now Florida (of all places) is crimping this right-wing trend.

A bill to halt arrests for minor school infractions has now passed both houses of the Florida legislature unanimously and has been signed into law.

Yes, Florida. If even a Republican state like Florida can clip zealous educrats' wings, other states can't be far behind.

This actually shows you just how right-wing "zero tolerance" is. If our schools are more right-wing than 100% of Florida legislators, is it any wonder why schools are a major target of this blog?

The new law also requires schools to publicly review their corporal punishment policies, but I think the law doesn't go far enough in that regard: Paddling in schools should be outlawed completely.

(Source: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/florida/AP/story/1069084.html)

When laws attack

Eek! Laws!

The latest right-wing talking point is that a judge is less qualified if their rulings are overturned by the Supreme Court.

By the current Supreme Court? The 5-to-4 Federalist Society court???

With the state of the Supreme Court lately, a judge is probably more qualified if they have more rulings overturned by it.

The new rightist talking point is being repeated ad infinitum in regard to Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor. Sotomayor wasn't even on the list of progressive favorites, but the wingnutosphere still considers her too liberal.

One of the cases they use as "evidence" of this is a 2007 case about power companies' responsibilities to keep aquatic life from being killed by cooling vents of power plants. The law is clear: The EPA can consider whether a power company is able to afford the technology to protect aquatic life - not whether this purchase will keep the company from Making more Money.

That's what Sotomayor ruled as an appeals judge. And that ruling was right.

Of course, the Supreme Court gutted that ruling this year - on April 1, suitably enough, considering the fools who compose much of the current Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court made an activist ruling, and it was wrong. The law says power plants must use the "best technology available" - not the best technology that increases their profit margins. But the Supremes apparently think power companies have the "right" to not have to follow any sensible regulations that might reduce their precious, precious profits.

An aside: A right-wing critic of Sotomayor accused her of "blind political allegiance to the Greens." See, the Obama administration really is bipartisan.

When a law says what it says, and the Supreme Court doesn't follow the law, why should that cancel out the qualifications of a judge who the Supreme Court overruled?

Homeowners' association tries making vet remove bumper stickers

The right-wing brain trust would have you believe that they're superpatriots who stand up for the flag and the Constitution. But this story is another that dashes these claims to rack and ruin.

Homeowners' associations have become havens for the rightist intelligentsia. And Americans of almost every economic group are now muscled into compliance with their irrational ukases.

In Dallas, a disabled Vietnam vet decided to stick Marine Corps bumper stickers on his van. But then the homeowners' association at the condo where he lives threw a skizzum and tried making him remove the stickers. The association says bumper stickers on cars are forbidden because they're "advertising."

I'm as antiwar as anybody, but come on!

If he had placed signs on his condo, it would be one thing. But what gives the association the right to go after someone for putting stickers on his car?

The association has threatened to tow the van at the man's expense and fine him heavily.

If something like this happened to me and my car was towed, I'd break into the towing lot and take the car right back. And I'd be damned if I'd pay the association's fines.

If the association thinks it has the power to make people pay fines, doesn't that make it a government? If so, doesn't that mean it has to follow the Bill of Rights - which includes the First Amendment right to display a bumper sticker?

The association can't have it both ways. Of course they try to.

Some folks have nothing better to do in life than create stinks about nothing. I think that describes the homeowners' association in this story quite well.

Today, they're harassing a veteran over Marine Corps stickers. Tomorrow, they'll be fining you for your peace sign stickers, as it's becoming harder and harder to find housing that doesn't have a homeowners' association.

(Source: http://www.myfoxdfw.com/dpp/news/HOA_Asks_Vet_to_Remove_Bumper)

Former NYPD commish indicted for lying to White House

Federal prosecutors said today that former New York City police commissioner Bernie Kerik has been indicted on charges of lying to officials from the Bush White House when they vetted him to run the Department of Homeland Suckyurity.

Yes, I know the Bush White House lied to everyone else for 8 years, but still it doesn't look good for Kerik.

Kerik served as police commish under the grossly incompetent Mayor Rudolph Giuliani. Prosecutors say he hid renovations to his home made by contractors who wanted to do business with the city.

This adds to Kerik's other indictments - which include tax fraud, corruption, and conspiracy.

Of course, Kerik's lawyer says the whole thing is politically motivated.

Oh well. Another day, another GOP big shot indicted.

Maybe the bigger crime is that Kerik was ever considered for the DHS post at all.

(Source: http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/05/27/new.york.kerik.indicted;
http://firedoglake.com/2009/05/27/bernie-kerik-indicted-for-lying-to-white-house)

Why do you have to be a blue monster... ('Sesame Street' Wednesday)

Grover was given short shrift by this feature for months - but lately it's been Grover by the barrelful!

Again, this week's feature isn't an actual 'Sesame Street' segment. Rather, this is a clip someone made themselves and uploaded to YouPube.

Folks from my day may remember the song "Heartbreaker" that was written by the Bee Gees and had a hit version sung by Dionne Warwick. (When we had to do aerobics to this song in 4th grade, my classmates used to sing a parody they called "Fartmaker": "Why do you have to be a fartmaker...")

Anypoop, this YouTube clip features a Grover puppet singing "Heartbreaker"! It's almost surreal! And Grover becomes a fartmaker himself in this video!



How hilariously ridiculous!

Did any of you ever predict that in 2009 you'd be watching a video of Grover singing "Heartbreaker" and loudly passing gas at the end - and reading about it on a political blog, no less?

But man, the Bee Gees rule!

Congress to hand FairTax cult a victory?

The Democrats spent gabillions of dollars to regain Congress, and then this happens?

Washington think tank demigods are now seriously considering a national sales tax - a proposal that has otherwise had only fringe support in recent years.

Their proposal for a value-added tax (possibly as high as 25%) would be a regressive tax: It would hit the poor harder.

Countless commenters here have pointed out that all successful modern nations have relied primarily on a progressive tax structure. This is one of few traits these nations have in common. Under a progressive tax, the rich pay more, government services stay afloat, and the economy hums along. Not so under a value-added tax.

I wonder if the punditocracy won't be satisfied until there's not only a national sales tax but everyone pays the same amount in income tax (which defeats the whole purpose of an income tax).

The Obama administration seems to oppose a national sales tax, but congressional pressure mounts.

If the government wants to raise revenue, let's start by taking back the bailouts it gave to big banks and insurers. Let's also tax the major corporations that have completely avoided paying any taxes since 1998. Congress is recoiling at any sensible tax reform by the President, so Congress has made itself part of the problem.

I think we're almost at the point where we need a constitutional amendment to require federal taxes to be progressive.

(Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/26/AR2009052602909_pf.html)

Schwarzenegger may close state parks

It never ends when you put ideologues in charge of things, does it?

After California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger announced he wanted to abolish welfare to ease the budget deficit - even while failing to rein in handouts to the prison industry or huge salaries for his cronies - the Terminator realized he was on a roll. (Ending welfare would not only make California the only U.S. state with no welfare program. It would also make it the only place in any First World country without such a safety net.)

Now - emboldened by being able to get away with that - Schwarzenegger now wants to close 80% of California state parks.

Recall election, anyone? I mean, the GOP had Gray Davis recalled for much less.

(Source: http://www.mercurynews.com/topstories/ci_12454979?nclick_check=1)

Muncie school board votes against...well, guess

When school board members in Muncie, Indiana, proposed uniforms, I was afraid that was almost a shoo-in to be approved.

That's because nearby Anderson not only started requiring uniforms, but parents who objected were also ordered to pay the school board's legal fees in the resulting lawsuit. So I was afraid the Muncie school board might be emboldened by that.

Uproariously, however, it was not to be!

Muncie has now rejected uniforms, following objections by parents and students.

As an added sting against the thought guardians, the crowd at the school board meeting broke into applause when uniforms were rejected!

Life doesn't get much greater than that!

One thing is for damn sure: If I had kids in a public school who were required to wear uniforms, I'd tell my kids to just ignore this stupid policy. If the school wants to fight me, let the school get sued.

(Source: http://www.thestarpress.com/article/20090526/NEWS06/90526044/1002/NEWS01/School+uniforms+voted+down+3-2)

Watch your wallet: another Duke power outage

Wow, it's been what, a whole 2 weeks?

Story here:

http://www.wcpo.com/news/local/story/Thousands-Without-Power-In-Campbell-County/Jpv7_ZQZ1ES6_8m3gmLJNw.cspx

The power didn't completely go out here (for a change), but I know I detected the lights briefly flickering.

And no, there was no storm going on when this happened. Not even any wind. So what's the excuse this time?

If local governments don't award the electricity franchise to someone else after this, then we should seriously consider launching a recall effort against some of our "elected" officials. (As if there's not enough reason for that already.)

County wants to keep custody of boy even after parents follow order

This is a follow-up to the previous entry, and it shows just how irrational family services in Brown County, Minnesota, are being.

The parents of the 13-year-old cancer patient there have agreed to allow him to undergo more chemo instead of using alternative medicine. In doing so, they are complying with the court's order.

Despite this, the county wants to keep custody of the boy.

For crying out loud, why???

The parents followed the court order, so what grounds does the county have?

For a while, I thought there might have been a chance that the county's family services were merely misguided and not actually trying to do harm. The latest development has sharply reduced the likelihood of that.

After some of the stuff I've seen from youth protective agencies in my area, I truly believe we have to question whether family services ever had the boy's best interests in mind. Then again, I could be biased, after I discovered that agencies in my region like to call teenagers liars right to their faces.

(Source: http://www.wdbj7.com/Global/story.asp?S=10425392)

County gives itself "parental rights"

It's no wonder that people seem to have forgotten how to sue school systems or how to question Bush's lies. It's because the government has appointed itself the True Parent of all.

This is another story about the 13-year-old cancer patient in Minnesota. You can say what you want about him or his parents trying alternative medicine instead of more rounds of chemo (after the first round of chemo made life pretty much intolerable). Regardless of what one may feel about that, the county was out of line when it awarded itself full custodial "rights" over the teenager.

Recently, the boy's mother took him out of the state to find treatment. Authorities then charged the mother with interfering with parental rights. The "parental rights" refer to the "rights" of the county, which gave itself custody of the boy.

The county seems more out of line when you consider the type of parental conduct that prompts no intervention by authorities. A right-wing politician in Arkansas hasn't had his kids taken away from him, even though he raises them in a cult (namely the Quiverfull movement). Parents who beat their children usually don't lose custody - especially not in Minnesota, after the right-wing Minnesota Supreme Court made it legal to beat your kids bloody.

Even if the cancer patient and his parents are wrong to favor alternative medicine over chemo, why do his parents lose all parental rights, while followers of dangerous cults like Quiverfull don't lose any rights? (Some have claimed that Andrea Yates and her husband were Quiverfull followers.)

I'd be highly reluctant to support a court taking kids away from parents unless it's an extreme case, but why does the government favor right-wing cults?

(Source: http://kstp.com/news/stories/S946905.shtml?cat=206)

Places where you'll lose TV

Digital TV is going to be the biggest failure since all the others of the past 8 years.

With the deadline approaching for the end of analog TV, I thought I'd provide a list of sizeable American cities or counties where the forced switch to digital might make you lose most of your over-the-air TV reception.

In or near these cities, you may still get a few channels, but probably not major network affiliates. Or you may get no over-the-air TV at all:

• Allentown, PA
• Canton, OH
• Bloomington, IN
• Fayetteville, NC
• Bellingham, WA
• Flagstaff, AZ
• Pike County, KY
• Enid, OK
• Athens, GA
• Cumberland, MD
• Poughkeepsie, NY
• Mansfield, OH
• Kokomo, IN

Happy now, Bush?

Reportedly, folks who live only 15 miles from Cincinnati (a much bigger city than any of those listed) are able to get only one station via digital TV. I live 2 miles from downtown Cincinnati and am going to lose at least 2 stations that used to appear reasonably clearly.

Meanwhile, the digital converter box that many people have buyed for their TV sets has a new name that's making its way through the Internets (sic): the Bush box.

Court ends exclusive cable "rights" in apartments

Since America has become a rentership society, this ruling should have a swift but positive impact.

A federal court ruled today that cable companies can't have exclusive "rights" to cable TV service in apartment buildings. This upholds an FCC decision that outlawed these agreements as anticompetitive.

Under this ruling, new exclusive agreements can't be made, and old ones can no longer be enforced.

Kentucky law seems to already say this much - despite Kentucky lawmakers' increasing hostility to tenants in other matters.

This ruling is especially important because the government's earlier diktat to end analog TV will mean many areas will no longer be able to receive over-the-air TV at all - thus forcing folks to get cable or do without TV. At least with the new court decision, those who get cable can now get it from a different provider - if one exists.

(I can rattle off a list of mid-sized cities like Allentown, Pennsylvania, or Fayetteville, North Carolina, that will probably lose most of their over-the-air network affiliates once analog TV is forcibly shut off.)

The cable industry itself has become anticompetitive. Like the utility business in general, it thrives on monopoly.

(Source: http://www.suntimes.com/business/1591761,w-cable-rights-apartments-052609.article)

Sonia Sotomayor nominated for Supreme Court

To replace the retiring Justice David Souter, President Obama has nominated 54-year-old Sonia Sotomayor, a New York-based federal judge.

Although Sotomayor is described as a moderate - which since the mid-'90s has usually meant conservative - she has had some bright spots. For instance, she ruled against a series of intrusive strip searches at juvenile detention centers of teenage girls who had not been charged with a crime. Thus, Sotomayor dissented from more conservative colleagues.

A bit of triv you won't see many other places: Since sometime in the Nixon years, almost every new Supreme Court Justice has been more conservative than the one they replaced. The only exception has been Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Assuming Sotomayor is confirmed, it's possible that this outrageous streak has finally been broken. But since judges aren't supposed to really have positions, it's hard to tell.

I bet I can find 100,000 people who think Facebook has too many Bush groups

For a politician who has been retired for months and who was an idiot to begin with, Bush sure does have a lot of Facebook cults following him.

Hell, Bush probably has more Facebook groups supporting him than individual supporters! I think I can count on my fingers the number of people I've met who admit voting for him - but maybe that's because I've learned the hard way to keep my distance from the type of places his followers inhabit.

I just stumbled upon the Facebook page of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of mine. I notice that this peep happens to be a member of 4 - count 'em, 4 - pro-Bush groups that have almost the exact same name:

• "Thank you George W. Bush"
• "Thank You George Bush!!!"
• "Thank You, President George W. Bush"
• "Thank you President George W. Bush"

This isn't Facebook's fault, as any clod can start a group - and they do.

The hilarious thing about this is that the party of background noise is marginalizing itself even more by turning its attention inward to Facebook groups that nobody else reads. All they do there is shout discredited talking points at themselves.

So I'm not going to waste any more time on them - other than to point out how truly irrelevant they are, thereby discouraging other political leaders from caving to them.

Fort Thomas cannon silenced

This story is almost too frustrating for words.

I told you in December about the school system of Fort Thomas, Kentucky, threatening to abolish its tradition of firing a cannon during football games because it had one accident in 40 years.

This threat was motivated by insurance company demands. My suggestion was that the school needed to find a better insurer instead of buckling under.

I also pointed out that several students at schools in my area have had their lives wrecked by classroom accidents that were the schools' fault. Yet no insurance company ever cracked down on the schools for that.

So now what did the Fort Thomas schools do?

To meet insurers' demands, the school board is retiring the cannon after 40 years. Of course.

Obviously, the school system worships insurers. Insurer worship is their religion - and they are trying to impose it on the community. In doing so, the school system is violating the First Amendment's requirement of separation of church and state.

How much is the owner of the cannon willing to sell it for? If we can buy it, we'd like to also find property within sight of the football field so the tradition can continue.

If that doesn't work out, here's what the school should do in the fall when football starts up again. If there exists a film of any firing of the cannon, this should be used in a video clip followed by a cartoon blast and a briefcase full of money exploding.

This clip should be shown on a giant screen during halftime.

I guarantee you the crowd will erupt in cheers!

(Source: http://www.kypost.com/content/wcposhared/story/Highlands-HS-Cannon-Permanently-Silenced/GmjwDZx4Lkm-rdgtx3XeKQ.cspx;
http://nky.cincinnati.com/article/AB/20090514/NEWS0103/905150354/Cannon+tradition+ends)

New law protects renters from greedy banks

What? There's actually new laws that protect renters? From banks, no less???

The Republican era really is over, isn't it?

President Obama signed a new housing law last week that shields tenants from banks that try to evict them after foreclosing on their landlords.

Many Americans are shocked that a nationwide safeguard like this didn't already exist. Depending on the jurisdiction, a renter might have been able to successfully fight a gluttonous bank. But this is the first time in recent memory that a federal law has protected renters from foreclosures.

Under this groundbreaking new law, if a bank forecloses on your landlord, you can't be evicted by the bank until 90 days after the end of your lease. If you have no lease, you still get 90 days.

If anything, this law doesn't go far enough. Banks that foreclose should be prohibited from evicting tenants at all, even after 90 days. If a property is sold with no foreclosure, new owners are usually bound by the old leases (if a lease exists) - but banks that foreclose are exempt from this. I think it's time to end this special privilege for banks.

Still, the new law is a vast improvement over the previous state of affairs. Until now, banks in most parts of the country didn't have to give tenants any time at all - lease be damned.

Only Free Republic regulars seem to think the new law is a step in the wrong direction.

(Source: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/biz/6439813.html)

Local cops make another bogus arrest

This time, I wasn't the arrestee, nor was I a witness. I don't even know who was arrested or who the arresting officer is, because I wasn't there.

Yes, I may be the Mayor of Simpleton, but I know one thing, and that's that the arrest was bogus.

And one other thing is for sure: The arrest needs to be investigated. Now.

I've just been informed that the Highland Heights/Southgate police in northern Kentucky arrested a person at Newport on the Levee for third-degree trespassing.

Why is this arrest a sham? Because third-degree trespassing is not an arrestable offense under Kentucky law. You can get a citation - but it's illegal for police to arrest you for it.

Didn't authorities learn shit from the NKU case?

Even if the arrestee at Newport on the Levee is guilty, they cannot be arrested, because it was such a minor offense. They can only be ticketed.

And I can't help but have doubts about their guilt. I've also been told that police in northern Kentucky assume mall customers are trespassing if they have less than $10 in their possession. This assumption is also bogus.

What if the item they went to the mall to buy costs less than $10? Ever think of that?

Again, I wasn't there. For all I know, the arrestee at Newport on the Levee may be guilty of serious crimes they weren't even cited for. From my experience, however, one has to question what went on.

I also know Highland Heights has had its own violent crime problems. Why is that city's police being sent into Newport instead of being allowed to deal with Highland Heights issues? Sounds like a waste of valuable police resources to me.

The worst part of this story though is that the law wasn't even being followed by authorities - even after I exposed the phony trespassing arrest at NKU!

If anyone can find any proof that third-degree trespassing is arrestable under Kentucky law, I challenge them to comment here in a diplomatic, mature fashion. Otherwise, they should admit the arrest was illegal.

What's better than Bubble Yum? Making fun of a Bubble Yum commercial! (Bubble Gum Weekend)

Why is a political site talking about BUBBLE GUM???

Because it fucking bips. That's why.

You'd think I'd remember a Bubble Yum commersh from 1980. Except for those weeks around 1981 when our TV broke, my family and I peeped much of the small screen in the early '80s.

We even devised an informal ranking of the stupidest commercials. I remember a Silkience shampoo spot being #1, while a Diet Pepsi commersh was a close second.

To be fair, most commercials for any product were mighty stupid. Stupidity sells. So the ad agencies were actually geniuses.

One could also say that this Bubble Yum ad from 1980 slides down a similar knoll of silliness:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWxxnY7xa1g

Oddly, I don't remember that commersh. But it evokes comparisons to segments in educational shows they made us watch in middle school which everyone ridiculed.

"Now yummier"? If someone buyed Bubble Yum after seeing this ad, and they thought it sucked, could they sue Bubble Yum for false advertising?

Also, the factory in this ad looks a bit like the Foundry game in Halo.

But people in the commersh bubbled.

Newt's suit

What???

Newt Gingrich is trying to silence dissent???

Nah. Couldn't be!

But he is. Just like the little asswipe did when he was House Speaker.

Back then, he could pass laws to punish universities if they dissented. Now he just sues people.

This time, the Newter has teamed up with former Michigan GOP head Saul Anuzis to threaten a lawsuit against the holder of a Twitter account for allegedly impersonating them.

Except this person didn't impersonate them. Gingrich and Anuzis are threatening this user solely because this user supports a petition to pass the Employee Free Choice Act, which Newt and other Republicans have long despised.

If anyone seriously thinks these GOP sorryasses are being impersonated, then they have not a shred of understanding of how Twitter works.

Attorneys for Anuzis and Gingrich also say this account is violating RICO and trespassing laws.

Hahaha, trespassing laws??? Get a grip, jizzchops.

Is this anything like how NKU cried "trespassing!"?

If I was the judge who had to hear Newt's lawsuit, Gingrich, Anuzis, and their attorneys would be fined back to the Shit Age for filing a frivolous suit.

(Source: http://www.jacksonville.com/interact/blog/efca_now/2009-05-17/newt_gingrich_threatens_efca_blogger_twitter_abuse)

Schwarzenegger steps up war on poor

He really is the Terminator, isn't he?

If you thought the class warriors had gotten their inner turmoil out of their system during the Contract With America, then you don't know just how much indignation they manage to fit into their heads.

Even today, it continues under California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Now the governor plans to completely abolish welfare, medical insurance for poor kids, and college tuition assistance.

The excuse is that these cuts would help ease the state's budget deficit. Yet handouts to big corporations and tax breaks for the very rich continue unabated. Right-wingers of every faction also waste taxpayer money every time they throw a fit about things not going their way and expect state dollars to be spent soothing them.

Furthermore, the prison industry is so big in California that it gets billions of dollars a year. If the state needs to cut something, why not that?

And Schwarzenegger gave his cronies patronage jobs paying 6-digit salaries!

So this budget excuse is just that. An excuse.

Is Grover Norquist secretly advising the governor?

(Source: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=103&topic_id=450540&mesg_id=450540)

South Carolina guv: Laws? What laws?

Let's suppose you're the governor of your state. And let's suppose the legislature passed a law requiring you to do something you disagreed with. What would you do?

Why, you'd probably obey the law.

But that's because you're not Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina - a big Republican. He thinks laws are just (to use Bush's words) "damn pieces of paper."

Recently, South Carolina lawmakers passed a law directing Sanford to ask for stimulus money to soften school budget woes.

But Sanford has announced that he's going to ignore this new law.

Lovely. South Carolina has a governor who not only breaks laws but brags about it in plain sight.

What's more, the law is needed to avoid firing teachers and raising college tuition. So by disobeying the law, Mark Sanford isn't even acting in the public's interests!

Can't they impeach him?

This follows Sanford filing a frivolous lawsuit against the legislature because it dared to override his veto of this law.

Mark Sanford has truly established himself as one of the biggest clowns in American politics today.

(Source: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/breaking/story/740168.html;
http://www.wistv.com/Global/story.asp?S=10389561&nav=0RaPa9u0)

Freeper makes penis "joke" (more Freeper Madness)

Free Republic regulars hate a lot of things.

They hate every recent Democratic presidential nominee. They hate Green Day. They hate "the liberals."

They hate most everything - but they love Pepsi Light! Actually, they probably hate even that!

Because Freepers hate poor people, I'm sure I've already exposed them for this fascism.

Freepers also hate gays, and their hatred of gays emerges in weird ways. You can't help but be in awe, because Freepers can be quite colorful in their invective.

So it's impossible to resist an entry about it here. Impossible, I tell ya! Referring to a gay rights organization that sued over church officials' inability to follow IRS rules, a Freeper urged:

"Even better, file the same suit against them on the grounds that they worship penises and hence are a religious group."

Bwuhuhuhuhuhuhuh. A Feeper maked a funny.

I'm laughing alright, but only at the Freepers for thinking that's humorous.

I bet comedy clubs aren't doing such great business, as long as everyone can read Free Republic. But I guarantee you, everyone is laughing at Free Republic - not with Free Republic.

Google thinks Malkin is a "news" source!

Right-wing commentator Michelle Malkin founded a website called Hot Air. At first, its fans tried to pass it off as a competitor to YouTube that didn't reflexively buckle under to bogus DMCA complaints.

But that's a bunch of, well, hot air, for Hot Air appears to be nothing but another right-wing site like so many others.

Hot Air carries headlines from other sites (including mainstream papers) under the words, "We pick, you click." This is fitting, as Hot Air seems to act as a portal to run only articles that it wants you to see.

One gets the sinking feeling that Google News has become like that as well.

After I exposed the fact that Google News doesn't run stories from left-wing sites but picks up editorials from such explicitly conservative sites as the misnamed National Right to Work Foundation, I've noticed more right-wing Google News favoritism.

Today, my Google News feed included an article from (drum roll, please) Hot Air. This article was some rambling nutball editorial by some nobody using the handle Doctor Zero. The piece advocated privatizing the education system, cited a discredited report from a quarter-century ago, and demanded an unconstitutional federal work-for-less law.

That's Google's idea of "news."

Everyone uses Google for something or other, and Google has quite an innovative business model. But obviously, some right-wing operative is in charge of Google News. So one has to ask: Is there any similar news service that doesn't have a right-wing bias?

"Zero tolerance" fascists at it again

You'd think the "zero tolerance" fascism that defines America's schools these days would subside.

For one thing, that would be progress, you see. For another, the "zero tolerance" thought guardians have gotten enough bad press that you'd think they'd stop because of that. Further, you'd think the lawsuits would be mounting by now. Then again, schools know how to browbeat people into not suing.

At Linton Middle School in Penn Hills, Pennsylvania, the right-wing extremists who call themselves school officials have recommended expulsion for a student who had eyebrow clippers in her handbag. She has been suspended, and may be expelled through the first part of next school year.

The eyebrow trimmer was discovered during a random search of the handbag.

Schools are doing random searches of handbags now? That's enough of a reason right there to pretty much declare the American school system has boned its shark.

Why do I get the feeling that some school officials in that district are idiots? Not all are, but certainly some are.

Sooner or later, there's got to be a lawsuit against schools over their right-wing "zero tolerance" policies. This bullshit can't go on forever.

(Source: http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=456&sid=1680681)

Church violating IRS rules?

Let's get this crystal clear: I've long supported organized labor and opposed corporate power. But my description as a populist seems to scare away a few who have been misled to believe that this label was devised as a shield for bigotry.

Nothing can be further from the truth - for I have no reason to support bigotry of any form. Quite the contrary, I'm rather tired of some individuals standing in the way of efforts to make sure people are treated fairly. Progress is what it is, and if you want to stick with the losing side of history, please don't pull everyone else down with you.

Peep this story out of Maine. After Maine legalized gay marriage, Maine's Catholic diocese is now collecting signatures for a referendum to overturn this act.

Let me be clear again: Leave it alone now.

But there's another issue in play here that's just as serious: There have been complaints that the diocese is violating IRS tax regulations for nonprofits by engaging in political activity.

And these complaints are valid.

Let me spell it out for you: The. Diocese. Is. Violating. Tax. Rules. End of story. I don't know to what extent it's gone on already, but I don't think there's much doubt that the Church is violating tax rules now.

What's sad is that it violates tax rules over THIS, of all things! The IRS rules are the IRS rules, I know, but if the Church wanted to challenge IRS regulations, why didn't it pick a better issue?

After the discovery that the Catholic Church was running abusive reform schools in Ireland for 100 years, it sounds like the Church has more important things to worry about than gay marriage. An organization should confront its own problems instead of interfering in everyone else's private lives (especially since America is supposed to have separation of church and state).

(Source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/05/21/national/a123659D01.DTL)

Wal-Mart won't carry the most popular CD in the land

Corporate power = censorship.

Just as sure as Big Business has been a major defender of discriminatory policies, it's also a threat to the free exchange of ideas and art. (Fusion fascism!)

This is now being illustrated again, this time by Wal-Mart's attempt to decide for us what lyrics we should find acceptable in music.

The most popular album in the country according to the latest Billboard 200 chart is '21st Century Breakdown', the newest offering by Green Day. But if the only store in your town is Wal-Mart, forget about being able to buy this work.

Wal-Mart demanded that Green Day censor lyrics on its latest album. But the band refused. So the retail giant opted not to sell it at all.

I'm not saying a store is legally obliged to sell a CD it hates. But I have a right to object to Wal-Mart's belief that it's qualified to make decisions for me about what lyrics are "appropriate" (even if Wal-Mart is within its legal rights not to sell the album).

See how that works, Wal-Fart? It's a two-way street, you know.

What I object to even more is perks and handouts by cities and towns that have enabled Wal-Mart to establish a monopoly. So folks in these towns can't even buy the music they love!

America has become a Wal-Mart fiefdom.

(Source: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gI3tEiSlpfDVROEVdLGRF8-zxrRwD98AJOEG0)

Bill would protect service flags

This weekend, be sure to remember what Memorial Day is all about.

A condominium association near Canton, Ohio, had a policy that outraged the families of America's fighting men and women. This policy forbade residents from displaying Gold Star or Blue Star flags to honor family members who served in war.

But now Rep. John Boccieri (D-Ohio) has introduced a bill that would prevent condo or homeowners' associations from prohibiting service flags.

This is also shaping up to be another battle against residential associations' irrational, illogical dictates, which affect Americans of almost every economic class.

(Source: http://www.kypost.com/content/wcposhared/story/Ohio-Flag-Flap-Prompts-Bill-In-Congress/k6f0UZQKU0O9q1mMa2eIHg.cspx)

Not-too-Breitbart

Let's be honest: Breitbart is a trap.

Even respectable sites have linked to stories on the Breitbart website - which often carries articles from mainstream sources like the AP.

But Breitbart isn't what it appears at first glance.

It's actually a portal for its founder, Andrew Breitbart, a right-wing commentator for Sun Myung Moon's Washington Times.

Mr. Breitbart's own tirades are illogical, but they can be colorful. For instance, he complained that left-leaning entertainment celebs had gone to the "stinky side."

Even though it features mainstream articles, using Breitbart as a news portal can be hazardous to the free flow of ideas, as its blog links are almost exclusively right-wing. As a portal, one assumes the site can also control what articles from mainstream sources appear.

For example, Breitbart was instrumental in coddling an MSNBC operative's unsuccessful attempt to debunk the story of how Sarah Palin didn't know Africa is a continent.

And the AP partners with this site?

So watch your sources carefully, folks. Breitbart is little more than a glorified Drudge Report (another site Mr. Breitbart has been involved with).

It's amazing how The Last Word has been around longer than Breitbart or Drudge Report, yet the pop-up media never cites The Last Word as it does with Drudge and Breitbart.

Radio again proves it's irrelevant

The Cincinnati folks who read this blog might know about the format change today, and probably some of you are thinking, "Finally, an '80s-based music station!"

Well, let me put it this way: There's nothing to see here, folks.

The new '80s-based format on 94.9 seems to have a playlist of only about 8 songs, and its execution has been a comedy of errors so far. My record collection would have far more variety than 94.9 does, even just using '70s or '80s songs that were hits when they were new.

Besides, 94.9 switches formats so often now that I wouldn't be surprised if this format is gone by the end of the year.

And the radio industry wonders why its audience is declining.

Some of you are asking what happened to the country format that used to be on 94.9. Reportedly, it moved back to 97.3, though I haven't bothered to check. Apparently, the rock format that was on 97.3 is gone altogether.

Not like anyone cared about either one of those stations anymore, after radio made itself irrelevant.

Even the major FM stations are in worse shape than most AM stations were in 15 years ago. Radio was a medium that could have adapted, but it didn't. Instead it kept demanding government privileges like the 1996 Telecommunications Act and raids against competitors. Well, a hell of a lot of good that did, huh?

Utility violated Clean Air Act

Charlotte-based Duke Energy has a monopoly on electric power in Cincinnati and other areas. Locals know of Duke's woes.

Now a federal jury has found Dook guilty of violating the Clean Air Act when it made changes at an Indiana power plant that significantly increased air pollution.

Jurors said Duke did not obtain the required permits, and that the changes increased the plant's sulfur dioxide output.

I guess Duke Energy thought it was above the law, seeing how it didn't even bother to obtain permits it needed.

It's unknown what penalty looms for Duke. Luckily, Indiana isn't under the 9th U.S. Circuit, which likes to absolve corporations of any responsibility for anything. (This despite conservatives' claims that the 9th Circus is too liberal.) So I'm sure there will be at least a heavy fine.

(Source: http://www.kypost.com/content/wcposhared/story/Jury-Finds-Duke-Energy-Violated-Clean-Air-Act/HZ7P6u4570C39QHSOnKXhA.cspx)

Obama ends another Bush diktat

Good.

If the past 4 months are going to be remembered fondly for one thing, it's going to be the slow but sure stop stick against the Bush bulldozer of unitary rule.

President Obama has reversed several illegal Bush fiats already, and now he's reversing another. This time, Obama is reversing Bush's ukase that illegally used federal regulations to limit injured consumers' ability to sue companies in state courts.

The Bush policy was part of his campaign of preemption: using federal dictates to trump states' rights, even though the Constitution gave such powers to the states, not the federal government. Ironically, Bush misused health and safety regulations to do this. In other words, health and safety rules were being cited to make people less safe and to deprive injured parties of the right to seek a remedy.

Often, the Bush regime's argument went like this: If a federal regulation said a product was safe, that was evidence of its absolute safety, which thus absolved the product's maker of any liability.

For that alone, Bush was a total scuzzmouth.

What was the point in dividing the country into states, if Bush wouldn't even let people seek remedies under state laws?

Thank you, President Obama. The Bush era has come to a close, and we need to drive a sharp stick into everything Bush did, so Bush's policies never come back.

(Source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/05/20/national/w154719D31.DTL)

National 21 comes to credit cards

Yes, I know, I should be strongly supporting any legislation to rein in credit card companies. But when you start encroaching on adults' personal choices, I have to take issue.

The new credit card reform bill that's about to become law contains a very irritating provision that's going to have to be confronted.

Under the new law, adults who are at least 18 but younger than 21 who want a credit card will now have to first prove than they can repay credit card expenses or get their mommy and daddy to pay it.

Um, these are grown men and women we're talking about. Eighteen is an adult. End of story. No statute anywhere in the world can possibly change that.

Americans between 18 and 21 can be killed in a war, but they can no longer get a credit card without their parents' permission?

In case anyone asks, I also think the drinking age should be lowered to 18. The national 21 drinking age seems to have influenced later efforts to deprive young adults of rights that they long enjoyed. Those who'd deny these rights try backing up their stances with tired canards and junk science.

There's also some concern that the new law will induce banks to raise fees on other services to make up for the "loss" caused by the limits on confiscatory credit card charges. Because banks think they have a "right" to a certain profit margin, you see. I think there's going to have to be another law, this one to limit bank fees.

Other than these glaring complaints that are going to have to be addressed, this isn't a bad bill in the least bit. Credit card companies are out of control, and someone needed to clamp down. But I think the states are going to have to pass laws to remedy the flaws of this bill.

(Source: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hfMsNdPKrayQbV8JSYqKXphY7FfgD98A7T401)

Maine lawmakers think corporations have rights

The minions of the GOP/DLC oligopoly have long wanted corporations to be considered people. But dammit, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison spoiled it for them with all that Bill of Rights business that only protects human rights, not corporate rights.

Nonetheless, Maine legislators remain undeterred!

Recently, Democratic Rep. Alan Casavant offered a sensible bill that would have let cities and towns adopt laws that would bar corporations from being considered people.

But because lawmakers have corporations swimming around in their pockets and caressing their naughty bits, this bill didn't pass. Indeed, the Maine House voted 124 to 23 to reject the bill. Sounds like the Kentucky legislature, doesn't it?

Rep. Stephen Beaudette adopted the DLC party line. "This is so obviously unconstitutional," he said of the bill.

Uh, no. Corporations have no constitutional rights. None.

Corporations being considered people goes against everything a democratic republic is all about. If anything should be considered unconstitutional, it's corporate personhood.

America has become a corporate fiefdom. Not only are corporations given rights that are supposed to be accorded to people. Now that corporations can influence a city to seize residential neighborhoods to be turned over for private development, corporations are actually given more rights than people.

I think it's time for a constitutional amendment to strip corporate personhood. Then maybe we can clear up the constitutional questions for good.

(Source: http://www.sunjournal.com/story/318079-3/MaineNews/Maine_House_votes_down_denial_of_corporate_rights;
http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/newsupdate.php?updates/maine-house-votes-down-corporations-bill)

Abusive church reform schools blasted in report

America has no monopoly on abusive facilities for children.

Officials in Ireland have now released a 2,600-page report detailing decades of abuse in reform schools and orphanages run by the Catholic Church.

The abuse in these tax-supported but Church-run facilities included rapes, beatings, and other acts. The investigation also unearthed Vatican records that prove the Church knew about pedophiles in its ranks as long ago as the 1930s but wouldn't do anything about them.

These institutions also exploited child labor. One survivor says she was raised in an orphanage where children were forced to manufacture rosaries and were then beaten or raped.

The Church said it would continue to shield the identities of clergy members responsible for abuse. In fact, the Christian Brothers, a Catholic order that ran some of the schools, sued to keep their identities unnamed in the report.

Some young people spent years in Church-run reform schools for offenses as minor as truancy.

Maybe someday, U.S. officials will finally release a detailed report about abuse by America's teen confinement racket.

(Source: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hG7UpOwvc_tTJz3KkFUHO9AUBnBAD98A7LA80)

Woman contracts flesh-eating bacteria in hospital

Several years ago, a woman had to have her arms and legs amputated after contracting flesh-eating bacteria at a hospital.

This didn't happen in some faraway, remote land. It happened in America.

In 2005, a woman went to South Seminole Hospital in Longwood, Florida, to give birth to her son. She contracted the bacteria there. She said, "I woke up from surgery and I had no arms and no legs."

The health care company wouldn't even tell her what happened - apparently to cover for its own irresponsibility. This violated state law.

Now she's settled a lawsuit for an undisclosed sum.

Some physicians won't even hospitalize patients, because of the risk of the patient getting sicker at the hospital, due to the pandemic of infections that plague American health care facilities these days.

If I ever have to be hospitalized, it may be best if it happens during an international vacation. Unless the American health care system is reformed, one takes a huge risk these days just by entering an American hospital.

(Source: http://www.wftv.com/news/19502816/detail.html;
http://www.wftv.com/news/6253589/detail.html)

More Washington Times fail

The only function of Sun Myung Moon's Washington Times seems to be to provide right-wing talking points to spread elsewhere. The paper's circulation numbers have always been dismal, but it makes up for that in influence.

It's amazing that any paper founded by a right-wing tax cheat and cult leader would be regarded as credible by anyone, but you have to remember that this is the same planet where Free Republic was practically allowed to dictate coverage of the Bush National Guard memos.

Last week, the Timesies may have hit a new low, when it ran a photo of President Obama's daughters with a story about murdered Chicago children. The Obama children are not mentioned in the story, and the story has nothing to do with them, other than the fact that they lived in Chicago.

That's like if a paper ran a story about Jim Bunning abusing the nonprofit status of his "charity" and ran my photo with it.

Washington Times editor John Solomon blamed this bizarre subliminal juxtaposition on a computer - which is as bad as when the assistant principal in middle school blamed a computer when I ended up in classes that were too hard.

Uh, John? As editor of the Times, aren't you supposed to stop stuff like this from happening?

Of course, the Timesies did this on purpose, so I didn't believe the computer excuse anyway.

The Secret Service should be looking into this pronto.

Incidentally, John Solomon was exposed here before for his right-wing hackery - which dates back to his partisan hit pieces he did when he was with the AP.

(Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/14/iwashington-timesi-run-ob_n_203413.html)

Teacher strike suppressed; civil disobedience breaks out

Let's get this clear: Under almost all circumstances, the government has no right to intervene against a labor strike.

This right of workers to strike is ironclad.

But working Americans have been forced to learn the hard way what Allowed Clouds are all about. The Taft-Hartley Act is perhaps the most venomous Allowed Cloud of all, as it attempts to gut the right to strike.

Recently, a court barred teachers in Los Angeles from going on strike to protest school budget cuts. This order was unlawful, of course, but who's counting?

After this order, teachers planned on missing work last Friday anyway and engaging in a protest at the school district's main office. But the school system declared that any instructor who left campus would be in violation of the court's order.

The school system also threatened to strip the teachers of their teaching licenses if they went on strike.

Accounts of exactly what happened vary, but it's clear to me that the teachers had every reason to go on strike. It's also clear that taking away their teaching credentials for going on strike would be political retaliation.

It's not unreasonable to think the Department of Labor should intervene on the teachers' behalf. But as workplace abuses amassed for years under Bush with no consequences, the Labor Department already has its work cut out for it, so we can't expect a resolution overnight.

(Source: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3879134)

BTPer files frivolous suit

We've established that the recent Tea Parties were organized by idiots, but now it's becoming even more obvious just how out of touch they are with this planet.

Here's the background. It seems that someone has set up a blog ridiculing the Tea Parties:

http://teablogging.net

I didn't know about this blog until just a few days ago. As the pop-up media has cheered the Tea Parties, dissenting blogs haven't received any coverage that I know of.

Anybip, that blog is now the target of a libel suit in small claims court by some nobody named Michael Leahy. Leahy helped start a right-wing Twitter account and is heavily involved with the Tea Parties.

Leahy's complaint is that the blog exposed the fact that he has several tax liens and suggested that this may be a sign that he is a tax cheat.

Note that the blog doesn't come right out and call him a tax fraud. The blog is merely speculating.

Although Michael Leahy isn't even famous enough to receive a Wikipedia article (unlike a writer of the same name), he has chosen to place himself in the public eye by helping organize so many political activities. So it's not unfair for a blog to speculate on whether having multiple tax liens makes him a tax cheat.

In other words, Leahy has no case.

I think Michael Leahy is just trying to suppress criticism. This is almost certainly a SLAPP suit, and the court needs to come down hard on him.

The Far Right has a history of trying to silence critics. We've seen it in the NKU arrest, and we're seeing it now. The free flow of ideas is alien to them.

(Source: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/5/19/733183/-Liberal-blogger-sued-for-libel-by-teabagger-Michael-Leahy)

Heeeyyy yooouuu Grover! ('Sesame Street' Wednesday)

Few (if any) installments of this feature have dealt with lovable, furry Grover - the gangly blue monster of 'Sesame Street' fame.

According to his biographers, Grover was born into humble beginnings in Elko, Nevada, in 1929, before moving to New York at an early age. He barely learned to read or how to use a map, and he lived with his mommy well past the age at which he should have retired.

But Grover's a workaholic, and retire he shall never do. We've seen him working as a waiter, a professor, a farmer, a nose warmer salesman, and many other occupations.

He even made a guest appearance on another children's show, 'The Electric Company', after getting lost one day back in 1972:



Is it just my imagination, or does Crank actually mutter "shit!" under his breath when he finds out Vi is out of the soup of the day?

It's also worth noting that Crank's voice sounds exactly like Peter Griffin of 'Family Guy'.

Grover's neighborhood seems to be infamous throughout the city. When he mentions that he lives on a street that has an 8-foot-tall bird walking around, you can almost hear Vi trying to hold back laughter. Crank bursts out in helpless guffawing when they figure out Grover lives on Sesame Street.

Grover is cool.

An epidemic of medical errors

According to the official party line, the American medical system is superior because it is. Government intervention in health care is bad because it is.

But this story should dash those tired fibs.

The nonprofit Consumers Union says preventable medical mistakes now kill over 100,000 Americans every year.

The group says this follows legislators' failure to enact patient safety measures recommended by a 1999 Institute of Medicine study.

The government has had 10 years to fix the problem and instead sat on its hands?

If a glaucoma patient legally uses marijuana prescribed by a doctor to treat their condition, the DEA is knocking on their door within the week. But when health care providers make deadly mistakes in the name of satisfying their profit margin, the government calls that the "free market."

At the same time, the American health care system is the most expensive in the world. Has all this expense made anyone safer?

Errors cited in the study include giving patients the wrong drugs or the wrong dosage. I've mentioned before that patients have even had the wrong organs removed or have been forced to wait too long before being treated. I've also discussed how hospitals have failed to contain superbugs - which now run rampant in American health care facilities.

Our health care system has become one of greed and carnage.

(Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSTRE54I6U320090519)

Debunkin' Duncan

Let's get this clear: School isn't being run with you in mind, kids. At least not in the good ol' U.S. and A.

I know that when I was in high school (the first part at least), I practically had no life at all, because I spent almost all of my waking hours at school or working on school assignments. Every single thing I did was because school said so - and it was all for nothing.

What kind of life is that?

If it was that bad 20 years ago, think what it would be like now.

The American school system does not care whether you acquire useful knowledge or skills. It cares only about how well you can follow arbitrary rules and conform to the system. Let's get that cleared up before we go any further.

So Education Secretary Arne Duncan looked awfully silly when he expected to be taken seriously when he advocated that kids spend even more time in school.

Now Duncan's claim is pretty much discredited - by an Associated Press analysis, of all things!

That doesn't mean our schools are great. They're worse than they were in my day.

Often, America's schools are contrasted with other countries in the amount of time students spend in school. Take South Korea, for instance. Duncan has cited South Korea as one of the standards that the United States should follow.

Well, Arne, maybe we should - because the AP finds that South Korean kids actually spend less time in school than their American counterparts. While South Korea has more school days, the average American 8th-grader spends 1,146 hours in school a year, compared to only 923 hours in South Korea.

It turns out the United States has more school hours than just about anywhere.

If that time was used wisely, and if students were allowed to work at their own pace, it wouldn't be such a tragedy. Just think what could be accomplished! But we can't have that, I guess. It would make too much sense.

Some folks have suggested that Arne Duncan is actually the worst appointee to Obama's Cabinet - worse even than Robert Gates or Ray LaHood. People have come to this conclusion after visiting Chicago schools (which Duncan ran) and finding that they now resemble harsh boot camps.

(At least Chicago doesn't have a districtwide uniform policy, in case you're wondering. I checked the Chicago student handbook, and it says that even in schools that require uniforms, the only penalty for violators is possible exclusion from extracurricular activities. So it wouldn't have affected me one bit, luckily.)

Sooner or later, we have to put the facts out there, and then maybe the standards push can finally be reframed. Right now, however, the major parties don't have the political will.

(Source: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5husRstDOy6YVktMTCOP-pknQw7pAD988GTU00)

Politicians' demagoguery may cost innocents

Here's the future of Pennsylvania:

1) A person loses their job and applies for unemployment benefits.

2) Person is told they need a state-issued ID before getting benefits. But they don't have it because their wallet or purse was stolen.

3) Person tries replacing the ID, but this requires a Social Security card.

4) Person tries getting their Social Security card, but this requires a birth certificate.

5) Person tries getting their birth certificate, but this requires the ID - which was stolen.

6) Go back to step #3. Repeat and rinse.

Why?

Because the Republican-led Pennsylvania Senate recently passed a bill to implement these steps just to make it harder to receive much-needed benefits.

But the poor or unemployed - who need benefits more - are more likely to lack an ID in the first place.

Why did senators pass this bill? Republican Sen. Joseph Scarnati says his bill is designed to target undocumented immigrants. But the rules that were in place before the bill passed already did that! Scarnati has failed to produce any instance of an undocumented immigrant receiving public benefits in Pennsylvania.

Yet he sticks by his excuses. He thinks that'll get him votes, I guess.

The only thing this bill will accomplish is making it much, much harder for citizens to get benefits. But politicians don't care about that.

The only American place that already has a rule like this in force is Colorado. But a year after it passed, Colorado reported that it had spent millions of taxpayer dollars to implement it but could not find one instance of it saving any money.

But I guess that doesn't matter when making political hay is more important, huh?

(Source: http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/index.ssf/2009/05/antiimmigrant_myths_foster_cos.html)

"Best interests" not always so

One of the scariest phrases to hear is being told by some lofty professional that something is in your "best interests" - when you have no power to fight it.

If someone has cancer, I have little doubt that treatment that may save their life is the best option. But this raises serious ethical questions in a Minnesota case that's been in the news lately.

A 13-year-old boy who has Hodgkin's lymphoma is refusing radiation and chemotherapy even though doctors believe it will save his life. The boy's parents agree with his stance. They stopped chemo after one treatment and switched to alternative medicine.

Chemo and radiation are very hard on patients. It's easy to see why patients of any age might resist it.

Should doctors make an effort to make sure the boy gets treated? I believe so - but certain actions ought to be considered out of bounds right from the start.

One medical ethics expert said that if he refuses chemo or radiation, he could be placed in restraints.

Is putting him in restraints ethical? I don't think so.

Few things would be as undignified for a young person of that age as being placed in restraints in the name of medicine. It doesn't matter what anyone says about it being in his "best interests."

If anyone suggests putting him in restraints, they clearly don't have his "best interests" in mind. Putting a patient in restraints in the name of medical treatment is a cop-out that would be employed only by someone who isn't creative enough to find a better option.

In addition, the boy might be taken from his parents if he refuses chemo, and placed in state custody. This idea should also be nixed, especially considering his age.

Activist judges on the Minnesota Supreme Court made it legal for parents to beat their kids senseless. At the same time, a young cancer patient may be taken from his parents just to be placed in restraints. State officials sure love it when kids suffer, don't they?

"Best interests" has become a phrase that brings instant despair to many who hear it.

(Source: http://dailyme.com/story/2009051900002125/doctors-face-tough-task-boy-refuses.html)

Supremes let Bush officials off hook for abuse

Just after 9/11, the federal government detained almost 800 foreign nationals - most of them Arabs or Muslims - at a federal prison in New York. Many were detained for about a year with no trial - and a large number were physically or verbally abused outright.

One of the detainees who was abused was a Pakistani who later pleaded guilty to having false Social Security papers and was deported.

And he probably should have been deported for this offense. I have little doubt about that. Even so, the abuse he suffered during his detention is unacceptable. The United States is supposed to be a leader in humanity, and if the government abuses people accused of immigration violations, it bodes ill for the country's future.

Later, the man filed suit against top Bush officials for allowing the abuse. Among the defendants were then-Attorney General John Ashcroft.

And the man has every right to sue.

But the legal eagles of the U.S. Supreme Court think not.

Yesterday, the Supremes ruled that these officials cannot be named as defendants in a lawsuit alleging detainee abuse. The high court overturned a lower court ruling allowing the suit.

This ruling is an activist one, and a reader of another website called it "a huge load of poo." It also means Bush regime officials are in effect above the law. The abuse was illegal, and now officials can't even be held responsible for it?

Not surprisingly, this is another 5 to 4 ruling - with the usual matchbook law jurists composing the 5.

Now anyone can be abused in any American detention facility, and nobody who ordered the abuse can even be held liable - all because the Supreme Court pulls rulings out of its ass like this. There's no legal basis for making high-ranking officials immune from abuse suits. None.

(Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE54H3CF20090518?sp=true)

Drug warriors want security chief punished for opinions

The rightist brain trust despises it when someone criticizes their precious War on Drugs. Dissent against the failed drug war is not tolerated.

Recently, an article by Kentucky's homeland security chief seemed to suggest the state was wasting money on the War on Drugs, as this effort is ineffective. And it's true: The state is wasting money.

The piece said that effects of the unsuccessful drug war "gobble up our tax dollars and deprive good citizens of what they deserve and are entitled to have."

The thought guardians of drug warring went absolutely bananas over this article!

The head of the Kentucky Narcotics Officers Association was so outraged at this criticism that he threatened to stop cooperating with the state's homeland security agency.

Actually, the article wasn't even geared towards public viewing. It was in a homeland security bulletin intended only for law enforcement.

In addition, the president of Kentucky's prosecutorial community demanded that the governor punish the author of that article just for writing it.

So much for free speech, huh?

One northern Kentucky prosecutor seemed to accuse the article of insulting police. But the article didn't. It criticized the War on Drugs - not law enforcement officers per se. That's like if they accused this blog of being against the police all because it criticizes bad laws and illegal government actions.

Is falsely accusing people of attacking police the latest wrinkle in the new McCarthyism? Crying "druggie, druggie, druggie!" every time someone has the "wrong" opinion is bad enough, but this is preposterous.

Our prosecutors and other drug war apologists keep offering trite excuses for the War on Drugs - but don't do anything about crimes like the mail thefts I've been suffering.

(Source: http://nky.cincinnati.com/article/AB/20090516/NEWS0103/905170390/Drug+remark+sparks+controversy)

FBI infiltrated antiwar group

The individual who came up with this is too scuzzy to be deemed an American. This is downright evil.

I've discussed before the drawn-out scandal in which the Maryland Police State Police illegally infiltrated antiwar and other groups that state officials disagreed with.

But now it turns out the FBI and an undercover Minnesota cop conducted a similar illegal infiltration of an antiwar organization in Iowa City, Iowa, last year. The group was coordinating a protest against the Republican National Convention in St. Paul.

The FBI didn't even bother to notify Iowa police that it was spying on folks in the Hawkeye State.

What is it about peace that scares the government so much that it needs to spy on antiwar activists?

Also, reports by police claiming that protesters broke windows and threw bodily waste at cops during the convention have already been debunked.

This act of spying on dissidents isn't unique in recent Iowa history. In 2003, Polk County authorities spied on an antiwar conference in Des Moines. The following year, the fascist Bush regime investigated this conference. No illegal activity by the antiwar activists was found.

Which is always the case in stories like this. Of all the recent illegal spy operations against dissenters in the U.S., authorities have yet to find any significant illegal acts being planned or committed by the dissidents.

Somebody at the FBI needs to be doing hard time for penetrating the antiwar group with no probable cause whatsoever.

(Source: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20090517/NEWS/905170341)

Supreme Court crushes maternity leave law

This is yet another indication that the U.S. Supreme Court is just making things up as it's going along.

Today, the court dashed a longstanding law on maternity leave to smithereens. The Supremes ruled that the 1978 Pregnancy Discrimination Act - which is supposed to bar companies from treating maternity leave differently from other medical leaves - doesn't apply to women who took maternity leave before 1978 who are trying to have it counted towards their pensions.

Today's ruling is an activist one, and it has no legal basis. Even the Ninth Circuit had already ruled that the law applies to maternity leaves from before 1978. But the Supreme Court has now overruled the lower courts - for reasons so murky that we're still sorting them out.

The case arose when 4 employees of AT&T sued to have their maternity leave count towards their pensions. But AT&T fought these 4 women tooth and nail.

If AT&T thinks long-ago maternity leaves shouldn't count retroactively, then why does the communications giant support retroactive immunity for telcoms that conspired with the Bush regime in the wiretap scandal? Little bit of hypocrisy there, don't you think?

Naturally, the Bush regime had urged the Supreme Court to rule in AT&T's favor in the maternity leave case.

Perhaps even more astounding is that AT&T continues to discriminate by not counting the maternity leaves from before 1978. The company seems to remain unrepentant for that.

(Source: http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/retirement/2009-05-18-maternityleave_N.htm)

Another package stolen

This is the second time within the past few months that an important package I've ordered off Amazon has been stolen from the porch.

For this package, I signed up for the postal service to e-mail me when it was delivered. Yesterday evening, I got an e-mail claiming it was delivered at 9:44 AM yesterday. However, the postal service didn't send out this notice until 5 PM - giving thieves over 7 hours to steal the item.

I notified Amazon. Amazon sent me a reply saying that "this is not a typical Amazon.com experience." Unfortunately, it is. Of the last 2 or 3 items I've ordered from them, 2 of them have been stolen after being delivered.

Amazon also informed me that the package was actually delivered last Monday - not yesterday morning. In other words, the postal service took 5 days to tell me it was delivered.

I am unable to notify the postal service. I looked all over the postal service's website for the form to report stolen mail, and couldn't find it - anywhere. Not that this matters, because the postal service didn't do anything about the thefts all the other times I complained.

The postal service does not take mail theft seriously. At all.

But I do.

If I catch ANYONE trying to steal a package that I have delivered here, their spinal column is going to be snapped in half over the porch railing. I work too damn hard for some spoiled baby to steal what I work for.

More no-fly list worship

Did you know America has a state religion?

It's called the no-fly list. It's the Bushist Bible.

Criticism of the no-fly list is not tolerated by government officials or the blogosphere. They consider this criticism to be blasphemy.

So who should be surprised that there's now a bipartisan bill in Congress to make it illegal for anyone on the no-fly list to buy a gun?

Regardless of whether you think federal gun laws are tough enough (which they are), why does anyone even THINK the no-fly list might be a reliable guide to ANYTHING?

Innocent travelers have been barred from flying just because they have the same name as someone on the list. And how do we know the person on the list should even be on it in the first place?

The list contains 1,000,000 people. Does America really have 1,000,000 terrorists roaming about who the government won't even catch?

Here's a bill I'd like to introduce: Under my bill, whoever conceived the no-fly list would be required to eat all copies of it. Whoever came up with the idea of the no-fly list is barely human.

(Source: http://www.nassaunewslive.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=691:no-fly-no-buy-for-guns-bill-proposed-by-rep-mccarthy&catid=58:congress&Itemid=105)

The incredible self-destructing Visa card!

"The incredible self-destructing Visa card!" (Sung to the tune of "The incredible edible egg!")

In Virginia, a customer buyed a $100 Vanilla Visa card at a CVS drugstore. Immediately, she tried using it to buy items online.

However, the card was declined. The customer then found tiny, tiny print on the card declaring, "Funds may not be available for 24 hours after purchase."

So she waited a day and tried using the card again. The card was again declined! So she called the customer service number on the card and was told to go back to CVS and argue with them about it.

The manager of CVS told her that by trying to use the card within 24 hours of buying it, the card agreement had been invalidated - so the card was no good.

So this customer was out $100.

Does anything on the card actually say it will be invalidated if you try using it within 24 hours? Nope! Visa ripped off this customer and countless others without even warning them.

And that's got to be hundreds - maybe thousands - of Americans. If the same thing happened to 100,000 people, Visa pocketed $10,000,000.

Cards like the Vanilla Visa are popular because it's easier to buy stuff online using some type of credit or debit card. And because even if you try to buy something in person, some sellers put up a fuss if you try paying in cash. I've heard there's firms now that won't even accept cash. These firms use the reasoning that while currency claims to be "legal tender for all debts", it doesn't mean you can actually buy anything with it.

It also sounds like Visa was trying to shift blame onto CVS. Why else would the Visa folks tell the customer to march back to CVS to complain, when this scam is primarily Visa's fault?

If there isn't either a class action suit or a crackdown by a state or federal Attorney General, I'll just utterly poop.

(Source: http://consumerist.com/5254184/your-visa-gift-card-will-self+destruct-if-used-within-24-hours)

That Wrigley's spearmint pickup is goin' for you! (Bubble Gum Weekend)

Gum is cool.

Indeed it is.

For decades, gum chewers far and wide were confronted by a deep mystery.

They always wondered why sticks of gum often appeared to have tire tracks on them.

But that mystery was solved by a series of Wrigley's spearmint gum commercials that aired frequently around 1982.

The ads showed peeps working their asses off until they were bored to tears. They included lumberjacks, musicians, and other hard-working folks! But they always whipped out a stick of Wrigley's, gently folded it, and crammed it into their mouths - which gave them a pep and made the day move faster!

The ads featured a catchy little tune with screaming guitars and all the production elements that made you realize that gum was patriotic and American. The music could have easily been used in an ad for a branch of the U.S. military.

But the tire tracks mystery was solved by the mention of "that Wrigley's spearmint pickup":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbeCX1ROCbw

I get it now. The Wrigley's spearmint pickup must be a truck that runs over each stick of gum. Sort of like the Mix Van.

Yes, the line about "good, smooth chewin'" was spoofed by many a viewer as "good, smooth pooin'" However, since this was before I was in high school, it was not followed up with "that crisp, clean baste."

Right-wingers' map nightmare just worsened!

The minions of the Evil Empire are going to be hiding their heads under the covers tonight!

My LeftMaps project (which is like an adjunct of this blog) has been picking up steam, and today I finished the eighth bicycling map in this series. This one is of Crestview, Kentucky, which I practically did in one sitting.

This map should carry an extra sting for the Far Right. Although I seldom visit Crestview, this is the first map in this series dealing with a place that's in my first high school's territory.

Because right-wingers hate this mapping project so much, they're going to have night terrors tonight in which a map of Crestview grows wings and slowly flies into their bedroom via the window. The map will then plop down right on their face and gnaw it right off.

To see this set of bike maps (including the latest addition), point your pooper here:

http://bunkerblast.info/maps

Another Republican in the Obama administration?

When President Obama promised bipartisanship, I thought it was great that he was going to appoint members of the Green Party to his administration.

Wait. He hasn't.

Now, folks, you'd think Robert Gates and Ray LaHood would have satisfied the allowance for Republicans in the Obama administration.

But nope! The Republicans are special and privileged, you see. If they don't get at least 3 major appointments in a Democratic administration, they might cry. And their faces might freeze that way.

So now Obama has selected right-wing Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. (pictured here) to serve as ambassador to China.

Huntsman is no competition for Chris Buttars in the contest to see who can be the most despicable major Utah politician. But he still doesn't belong in any position of public trust.

I can't wait until Obama appoints a Green to some important post!

There's a reason the Republicans lost, folks.

(Source: http://www.abc4.com/content/news/top%20stories/story/Governor-Huntsman-to-resign-and-accept-Obama/M9g_XHw4nECKmfUlKTw3UQ.cspx)

Have no fear, ish #452 is here!

Let's hear it for tradition!

Tradition is why The Last Word (the long-running populist newsletter) remains in business even after blogs have become dominant. People remember the days of curling up with a nice printed Last Word, as fits of rage over the latest right-wing tyrannies bubbled to the surface.

The Last Word marches on with issue #452. In the latest ish, you'll read about:

• The local cult that's trying to recruit 3-year-olds.

• Library patrons urinating on books.

• How to talk like a genius!

• Another legendary rock band conquering a Holiday Inn!

• A local university's attempt to wipe out a residential neighborhood to build more athletic facilities.

• The "vandal-proof" restroom that isn't.

• And more! It's not sold in any store!

So peep, weep, and oggle-beep:

http://bunkerblast.info/lastword/lw090515

Senate rejects credit card interest limits

This is a Democratic Senate???

Credit card companies enjoy gouging folks by levying confiscatory interest rates. (That's when they don't discontinue their cards altogether and take customers' signup fees with them - which VayaCard still owes me for.) Interest rates now run as high as 41%. To combat these ripoffs, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) introduced a measure to cap interest rates at 15%.

How did the 1½-party system react to Sanders's reasonable proposal?

Why, it throwed a big fitty-poo!

The Senate rejected the proposal 60 to 33 - in an obvious cave-in to the banking industry.

And some of these 60 are Democrats? Of course, most of the Democrats who opposed Sanders's proposal are the usual DLC suspects.

No wonder I switched to the Greens.

The states need to step up to the plate and start regulating credit card rates.

(Source: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/13/senate-rejects-limit-on-credit-card-interest-rates)

GOP blocks important Interior nomination

The U.S. Senate has got to be the only legislative body in any supposedly democratic country where the majority does not rule.

As another example of the evil that fills the hearts of Senate Republicans, now they've completely blocked President Obama's appointment of David Hayes to the #2 position in the Department of the Interior. This despite the fact that the GOP doesn't even have a majority of senators anymore!

Why did the Republicans dash Hayes's chance of being confirmed? It was in retaliation for the Obama administration canceling oil and gas exploration near national parks. So the right-wingers THREW A FIT like the BIG BABIES they are!

Americans had every right to expect Obama to cancel the illegal oil and gas leases. And that he did. It was Bush who approved the leases in the first place, because of influence by greedy energy companies.

Naturally, Harry Reid voted with the Republicans to maintain the filibuster against Hayes. Some Majority Leader he is, huh?

Energy drilling near national parks won't even come close to solving the country's energy crisis. The Republicans know it. The future is in renewable energy - not fuel sources that will be gone in 30 years anyway.

(Source: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/13/senate-republicans-block-no-2-interior-nominee)

Pinchin' an inch since the age of 5!

Ooweep!

I burst out laughing when I finally found this old commersh on YouPube! That's because it's based on such an idiotic premise that you just can't help being entertained by it.

It's an ad for Kellogg's Special K cereal from 1979. The gimmick of this commersh is the "Special K pinch." If you could "pinch more than an inch" of belly fat, you were considered by this ad to be pretty much at death's door:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9lTRfh0gcU

Of course, I had to try the "Special K pinch" myself back when this series of ads aired.

I was only in kindergarten, yet I could easily pinch an inch. Because of the commercial, kids at school kept going around pinching each other, and they could all pinch an inch too! The only person I knew who couldn't was the family dog.

Some have said that the "Special K pinch" is only a valid test for adult females. Thus, because I am male, and because I was not an adult in 1979, these observers believe it shouldn't apply to me. But the ad doesn't say that. In fact, both of the skinny adults in that ad use this test - including the man who bears a slight resemblance to Gomer Pyle.

Nonetheless, the fact that the lanky characters in that ad get so bent out of shape over pinching an inch, and the fact that a skinny 5-year-old (as I was at the time) could easily pinch an inch, proves only one thing. By using the "Special K pinch" to define almost EVERYONE as too plump, Kellogg's was exaggerating everybody's weight just to induce them to buy gobs of Special K. Which of course is the whole point of advertising, I guess.

This commersh actually encouraged people to drink skim milk? Who in 1979 drank skim milk? Nowadays, that's all schools will serve, but back in 1979, America was the world's envy, as skim milk gathered dust on grocery shelves.

Ooweep!

Derby beatdown caught on video!

Festivals like Mardi Gras or the Kentucky Derby - where authorities used to be fairly lenient - are now mere shadows of their former selves, as their respective locales have cracked down on people daring to have a good time. You can even say the same of Cincinnati's Riverfest, though Riverfest was hardly that lax to begin with.

This happens for one reason: Some people in high places just absolutely cannot stand it when others have fun, no matter how harmless their fun is.

These crackdowns have gotten more and more severe.

But now this unfortunate attitude has been caught on video and posted on YouTube for countless viewers to see. And if there isn't at least a lawsuit, I'll eat my hat.

This happened at the recent Kentucky Derby:



This clip, shot at the infield of Churchill Downs, shows police arresting a man for allegedly being drunk. One of the cops repeatedly punches the man, even though he isn't resisting the arrest or doing anything violent. When the man is laying on the ground, the officer grinds his knee into the man's neck.

The cop repeatedly yells, "Quit fighting!" - even though the man wasn't fighting.

What excuse is the right-wing brain trust going to conjure to defend the police's behavior? The officer was caught red-handed, so their library of excuses has got to be getting pretty empty.

Somebody ought to be doing hard time. Not the allegedly drunken reveler - but the cop who punched him.

Then again, don't expect justice to prevail. We all remember the "Don't tase me, bro!" incident in which police were cleared despite their violent conduct being caught by numerous people with video cameras.

I'm also reminded of an incident about 15 years ago in my area in which the unprovoked police beating of a young man was caught on video. Outrageously, the victim of this attack was sentenced to a boot camp-style prison, even though he did nothing criminal.

To be fair, if someone alleges police brutality, you have to weigh both sides to see who is telling is truth. But when a cop is caught on video beating a man for no defensible reason, it's pretty damning evidence - no matter the lengths some will go to in order to deny it.

(Source: http://www.kypost.com/news/local/story/Derby-Beat-Down-Caught-On-Tape/3jQtfSNnvUCxZH0k1wemnA.cspx)

When right-wing papers talk, legislators listen

Must be nice being right-wing.

All you have to do if you're right-wing is just jot down some gibberish, publish it, and public officials are hooked on every word you say. You don't have to provide facts or statistics to back up your claims.

If a right-wing newspaper says something, that's considered as good as having a million cameras proving it.

For several years, Massachusetts has had a popular program that lets unemployed welfare recipients find jobs. It provides recipients with donated cars and state-funded car insurance so they can get to work.

The state only spends a few thousand bucks per person - but saves more than that in the long run.

But the far-right Boston Herald cried foul. The Herald's story was dutifully picked up by Drudge Report.

After seeing the articles blasting the program, lawmakers are now trying to eliminate the program entirely, despite its successes.

The Herald's reason for criticizing the program isn't any outrageous waste associated with it - because even the Herald failed to find any. The paper criticized it because the poor were benefiting, period.

Legislators are letting the Boston Herald and Drudge Report shape their agenda?

Drudge Report??? Seriously?????

This is like in 2004 when the mainstream media let Free Republic and Power Line shape their coverage of the Bush National Guard memos. (For the record, the memos are real.)

A right-wing yip flaps open, and the media and lawmakers call it gospel truth.

School board violates open meetings law?

Sigh.

A 35-year-old man shouldn't have to spend his prime years fighting school uniforms - but the other side keeps bringing it up, so I keep fighting.

Folks in Granite City, Illinois, are outraged at public school officials' attempts to require students to wear uniforms. So school bored members decided to unleash a new weapon in their arsenal against the community.

At a recent meeting, parents and students unanimously opposed uniforms. At least one parent warned she would sue the school. So the school board decided to continue discussion of the proposal in private - behind closed doors, with no attendance by the public.

Does Illinois not have an open meetings law?

This is like when one of the school districts in my area held a private meeting to institute a year-round calendar - in violation of Kentucky's open meetings law.

I think we might be at the point where America's educrats are so terrified of facts that they can only deal with it by cowering.

(Source: http://www.bnd.com/homepage/story/766599.html)

Flooding rains damage apartments

If you're a northern Kentucky peep who's been out of town all week, you might be interested to be apprised of the weather you missed out on.

Northern Kentucky has had so much rain lately that storm drains on the roof of an apartment building in Florence were overloaded, forcing water to sluice into apartments, causing serious damage.

More heavy downpours are expected.

Still going to insist climate change is a "hoax", conservos?

For the past several years, it's been the same story. We receive flooding rains, and the rightist brain trust denies it all. And it seems like the area receives more floods every single year.

What does the cult of climate change denial have to say now?

(Source: http://www.kypost.com/news/local/story/Morning-Downpour-Damages-Florence-Apts/qPdZgy4YgUOVTCc_P99wAw.cspx)

The Conservative Fool Of The Day is...Kim Hendren!

Arkansas State Sen. Kim Hendren is one of the Republican leaders of the Arkansas legislature.

Hendren's foolishness has until now largely been unremarkable by today's standards. Although he introduced a bill to establish a statewide "Ronald Reagan Day", rumors that Hendren wanted to replace the Christ of the Ozarks statue's head with that of Reagan are unfounded. (Incidentally, that statue is already controversial because of the views of the man who had it built.)

Hendren is the only announced Republican challenger to Democratic U.S. Sen. Blanche Lincoln. (And believe me, I sure as hell hope DLCer Lincoln has some Democratic or Green challengers, after she abandoned the Employee Free Choice Act.)

What does Kim Hendren think about prominent Senate Democrats? Well, at a recent Republican forum, Hendren referred to New York's Charles Schumer as "that Jew."

What's Hendren's defense of this statement? When asked about it, he said, "At the meeting I was attempting to explain that unlike Sen. Schumer, I believe in traditional values, like we used to see on 'The Andy Griffith Show'."

That's odd, because folks who grew up in the '60s tell me they don't remember Sheriff Taylor or Barney Fife ever referring to anyone as "that Jew."

What speaks volumes about Hendren's so-called defense is that he defines "traditional values" on the basis of someone's religious affiliation. He tries implying Schumer is less moral all because he has a different religion from him.

Kim Hendren's not exactly a model of tolerance, is he?

He's more like a model of old-fashioned conservafoolery! Congrats, Kim. You're the Conservative Fool Of The Day!

(Source: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/5/14/731353/-AR-Sen:-GOP-candidate-calls-Schumer-that-Jew)

Florida lockup statistics

New facts are emerging about Florida's official state sport of locking schoolchildren in psychiatric wards for no defensible reason.

About 3½ out of every 1,000 young people in Florida were involuntarily committed by their schools in 2007 (the most recent year for which numbers are available). That doesn't sound like a huge number. But that's no comfort if you happen to be one of those locked up.

To put it in starker terms, there were 3,365 school-initiated involuntary commitments in the Sunshine State that year. These occurred without the parents' consent, and afflicted children as young as 4.

That comes out to about 65 incidents per school day. (I'm assuming the school year is 180 days, but with corporatism ruling the roost in America's schools, you never know.)

What could possibly lead to that many students being locked up? If your school is the same size as the public middle school I attended, odds are you'd have 2 schoolmates being dragged away. Clearly, these students aren't committing deadly acts.

It's because they won't conform to some capricious standard. It's kind of like the problems I had with my high school. I think it's pretty clear that you don't have to be suffering from a major psychiatric disorder to be committed with no court hearing. All it takes is a school's say-so.

Florida children have been committed because they got in minor playground squabbles or skipped a class. That's it.

What's even more astounding is the lack of parental consent.

One state (Nebraska) is so insistent on claiming the age of majority is 19 that it now requires 18-year-old university students who live on campus to call their parents just to be treated by the campus physician. But Florida takes 4-year-old schoolchildren to locked psych wards without parental permission?

That used to be called kidnapping.

I guarantee you that if I was a parent of one of these 3,365 kids, I'd be ripping the doors off the psych ward to get them out. Not unlike the storming of the Bastille.

Mr. Elbow Care politicizes graduation speech

We have to wait another 5 years to defeat this hack?

When bubble gum connoisseur Mitch "Howdy Doody" McConnell was invited to give the commencement address at the University of Louisville's law school, most grads didn't expect him to have the audacity to turn the event into a partisan speech.

Maybe university officials did, and maybe they invited him for that reason. Kentucky's higher education system has been known in recent years for political favoritism benefiting the right wing. But that's another matter entirely.

Politicize the graduation McConnell did.

During the commencement speech, Mitch the Glitch didn't congratulate the grads. Instead he blasted political opponents for closing Guantanamo Bay and for allegedly mishandling the swine flu outbreak. (Incidentally, swine flu was caused more by the Bush regime's inaction and by the deregulation of factory farms than anything.)

Many students were so outraged by McConnell using their law school graduation as a platform for his right-wing views that they almost walked out.

Now the final school memory for University of Louisville law school grads will be Mitch McConnell ruining their graduation. What an idiot.

Whether a graduate ends up working in the law field or not, they'll likely be at McConnell's mercy. In Kentucky, the arrogant McConnell machine operates with few limits. Many Kentuckians can attest to being passed over for jobs because of their party affiliation, and at least one business has been ruined because it wouldn't support McConnell's agenda.

And now Howdy's hackery has reached new highs.

(Source: http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20090514/OPINION02/905140309/1018/OPINION/+Offensive++commencement+speech)

Costco costs neighborhood

Many folks think Costco is a bright spot of America's retail industry - the "anti-Wal-Mart", if you will. But some policies of this store chain call this reputation into question.

For one, Costco doesn't accept food stamps even if you try to buy food - which food stamps usually cover. (That's why they're called food stamps, you see.) This despite the fact that Costco is equipped to install electronic card readers (and even gets readers for free). Even Scam's Flub finally began accepting food stamps early this year - but not Costco!

It gets worse.

In October, the Costco Costers are planning on opening a store in Manhattan - in a neighborhood where 30,000 people rely on food stamps. Most of these food stamp recipients have jobs - but still don't make enough money to get off food stamps.

Who is the new Costco store supposed to serve? Certainly not the neighborhood - considering most locals won't even be able to buy anything there, despite having jobs.

And who's paying for the construction of this store? Why, neighborhood residents, of course. Their tax dollars are being used on government grants to pay for the store's construction. And the store will be eligible for generous tax credits.

Costco is willing to accept corporate welfare, but it won't let you buy anything with food stamps? How hypocritical can you get?

It gets worse still!

Costco just won special permission from the right-wing scuzzpaws who run the city to drive its noisy delivery trucks on the neighborhood's streets between midnight and 5 AM.

One resident said of the Costers, "You're moving to a neighborhood with thousands of people on food stamps, and you don't accept food stamps, and you want to drive on their streets all night to deliver something they can't buy?"

Here's what folks need to do when this Costco opens: They need to get a Costco membership, stop by Costco, load their shopping cart with gobs and gobs of food, and try to buy it with food stamps. When they're told Costco doesn't accept food stamps, they should just walk away and leave the merchandise at the checkout.

It would serve Costco right.

(Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/13/nyregion/13about.html;
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09073/955632-85.stm)

Exurban power grab beat back

I'm glad we can lay this ridiculous effort to rest - most of it, at least.

Campbell County, Kentucky, has such class-charged politics that we shouldn't have been surprised that there was such a trauma over whether its central city should house any county services.

Campbell County has 2 county seats - Newport and Alexandria. Some services are found at both courthouses. The Newport courthouse is more convenient to most urban working-class neighborhoods. The Alexandria courthouse is closer to most wealthy exurbs.

With services at both locations, everyone should be happy, right?

Well, not the Republican exurban intelligentsia. Not unlike Oscar the Grouch, they have to complain about something. So they launched an effort to have all county services removed from Newport.

This would not have accomplished a damn thing - for Alexandria wasn't lacking these amenities to begin with. This effort was especially stinging because the more working-class half of the county centered on Newport had paid a courthouse tax that the other half was exempt from.

Talk about taxation without representation! Bear in mind that the wealthy suburbs control most county offices anyway!

The only thing closing the Newport courthouse would have done would have been for the exurbs to once again lord it over the blue-collar cities. It also would have forced urbanites who can't afford cars to travel 15 miles out of town just to do county business.

Local conservatives have always detested Newport for some reason (ahem), but this is plumb ridiculous.

Anystink, a lawsuit was filed to force county offices in Newport to close. Plaintiffs came up with a new argument: They said Newport isn't really a county seat, even though it is.

But yesterday, a judge laid this suit to rest.

Inexplicably, he agreed with the plaintiffs' claim that Newport isn't a county seat. Why, I don't know, because everyone knows damn well it is.

But the plaintiffs actually lost in their effort to deprive Newport of its county offices - because the judge also ruled that Kentucky law doesn't prohibit counties from putting offices outside the county seat. In fact, the court found that the law says the sheriff still has to have an office in Newport even if it isn't the county seat.

Now that this case is settled, both Newport and Alexandria get to keep their county offices. Be happy.

(Source: http://nky.cincinnati.com/article/AB/20090512/NEWS0103/305120048/Offices+can+stay+in+Newport+)

Google bias!

On Monday, it was Facebook bias. Today, it's bias by another Internet giant: Google.

I keep an eye out for news items that would be of interest to this blog. And I use Google News to assist me with this daunting task. This is my job, you know.

And it's not just a job. It's an adventure!

I've heard stories before of Google not accepting left-leaning blogs as news sources - supposedly because they're opinion sites, not straight-ahead news.

Fair enough - just as long as the same rules apply to explicitly right-wing sites.

Which of course they don't - as I've discovered lately.

One of the items I received from Google's news feature today wasn't from CBS, NBC, ABC, or even Fox News. It wasn't from the Washington Post or the New York Times. It wasn't from the Ashland Independent or the Henderson Gleaner.

It was from the misnamed National Right to Work Foundation, a right-wing organization that supports laws to force union workers to subsidize nonunion employees.

The work-for-less cult is considered a news site now?

Its website is full of nothing but right-wing editorials - not real news stories.

If you think that's bad, you should see its YouTube videos. Others have pointed out before that some of these videos use bad actors to portray blue-collar workers. So the videos are phony and dishonest - like most of the rest of the corporate-backed work-for-less cult.

Via Google's news function, I've also been getting opinion-filled articles from the far-right Mackinac Center for Public Policy - whose hostility to worker rights is about on par with the aforementioned National Right to Work Foundation.

Carrying one explicitly right-wing source (but none from the left) is an accidental oversight. Carrying 2 or more is a deliberate pattern.

I don't remember ever receiving through Google News an article from an explicitly pro-labor website.

What's this about Google News not carrying left-wing blogs while it carries right-wing anti-worker sites? Who at Google is making these decisions?

Government may subsidize aspartame

If those on the right oppose this idea because it's an "eeeeevil" tax, and we on the left oppose it because it subsidizes toxic chemicals, why does it have any chance of passing?

The Senate Finance Committee has been hearing proposals on how to pay for health care reform. Personally, I'd rather pay 3 cents more for a can of Grape Crush than keep going without medical care, so I'm not urgently worried about a soft drink tax per se.

Unfortunately, however, this proposed tax would exempt diet soda. Of course.

If the tax exempts that diet shit that includes poisonous artificial sweeteners, I have every right to raise hell.

Hell, let me pay 30 cents more per can of regular soda, if it means diet soda is taxed just as much. In fact, I think diet soft drinks should be taxed more than regular, as they are far more dangerous.

Taxing regular soda but not diet is a subsidy to the aspartame industry.

Official favoritism towards artificial sweeteners is nothing new. The government approved cancer-causing aspartame in the first place because future war criminal Donald Rumsfeld ran the company that made Nutra-Sweet.

It's also safe to say that the double standard embodied in the latest tax proposal is driven in part by elitism: Diet soft drinks are consumed more by higher income groups. Can't have the well-off paying as much taxes as we do, can we?

What can we do if this double standard is enacted? We'd have to destroy the product being subsidized. We're almost inclined to seize shipments of diet soft drinks or sugarless bubble gum. If a Diet Pepsi delivery driver has their back turned outside Kroger, we'll have to grab an unattended crate of the stuff for its eventual destroyment. That's how Bo and Luke Duke would do it.

Don't threaten or rob the driver. They're just doing their job. In fact, the driver doesn't even have to know you're there. Just take the soda when they're not looking. Nobody will ever miss it.

Bear in mind that even such peaceful seizure of diet soda is legally questionable, so I'm not seriously encouraging it. Certainly, however, soda we legally acquire will be destroyed in a peaceful, safe public spectacle.

In the meantime, I think products that feature aspartame should be required to carry a giant skull and crossbones sign - the universal symbol for poison.

(Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/05/12/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5009316.shtml)

Election strategy, GOP style

Oh noes! I bet the Democrats and the Greens are really quaking in their boots over this - not!

Here's the Republican National Committee's idea of election strategy: Instead of rebranding their own failed party, they're trying to rebrand other parties.

At a special RNC meeting that looms next week, party big shots plan to rename the Democrats to the "Democrat Socialist Party."

So the Republicans think they can win elections again by making the Democrats rename their party. They call that strategy.

Go look up socialism in your 'Charlie Brown's 'Cyclopedia', Repubs. Do the Republicans even know what socialism means? They try to make people think it's the same as communism, but nobody's buying that schtick anymore.

The Republicans are about at the point the Dixiecrats were at 40 years ago. Even if the GOP isn't getting any more extreme than it was, their ideas are already so out of date that the party is no longer nationally viable, and probably never will be again.

(Source: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22445.html)

Can you tell me how to get to Plaza Sesamo? ('Sesame Street' Wednesday)

Can you???

'Plaza Sesamo' is a Spanish-speaking version of 'Sesame Street' produced in Mexico (but it also has a large U.S. following). It debuted in 1972.

Although Mister Rogers once criticized the throwing of pies, this comic device wasn't completely absent from 'Sesame Street'. But it always had an educational purpose, like teaching children numbers or the "surprise!" thesis.

Even though human characters were hit by pies in the U.S. version of 'Sesame Street', I don't remember Muppets ever enduring this spectacle. I guess it's something about the pie filling not being good for felt.

However, it seems to be a different story with 'Plaza Sesamo' - where Enrique and Beto filled in for Ernie and Bert:



Like the unembarrassable Number Painter, Enrique is more than happy to spend the rest of the day with a smashed dessert caking his face.

So - just like Ernie always did - Enrique wins!

How's that for an amazing international coincidence?!

Utilities may raise rates for product they didn't deliver

What hath deregulation brung?

We all know Kentucky is a rubber-stamp state when it comes to regulators letting utilities raise rates. The fact that regulators allowed Duke Energy to use the September blackout that it took a week to fix as an excuse to apply for a rate increase is indicative of that.

But now folks in other parts of the state are being greeted with a big stinking repeat that's splatting them right between the eyes.

Louisville Gas & Electric and Kentucky Utilities have filed for a rate increase - using the January blizzard blackout as a pretext.

Even if the outage wasn't the utilities' fault, what gives them the right to demand that customers pay more? During a blackout, electricity is not delivered - so why should folks pay more for being delivered less product?

Unregulated capitalism means paying more for less.

The larger picture is that now every utility knows it can create a blackout and use it as a reason to charge higher rates.

(Source: http://www.kypost.com/content/news/commonwealth/story/Utilities-May-Increase-Rates-To-Pay-For-Ice-Storm/ECndDcoARUKKrvxBaZZEbA.cspx)

Town forced to pay for roads it can't use

This story gives us a glimpse of what life would be like under a Sarah Palin bureaucracy.

The GOP claims to be the party of reducing red tape and taxes, but this item should silence these boasts.

Alaska law says motorists in isolated communities are exempt from the state's car registration and insurance requirements. This law is sound, for the only car travel by residents of these places is on town streets. These communities have no roads leading out of town and are not linked to the state highway network.

The towns own the streets. The state doesn't.

But now some bureaucrat from the Palin administration has decreed that the town of Kotzebue - a hub of the Inupiat people since at least the 15th century - no longer gets these exemptions.

According to my road atlas, Kotzebue has not a single road leading out of town - which means motorists there only use town streets.

But Palin's bean counters say one street in Kotzebue has too many vehicles for the exemption. I find this rather fishy, because this figure - 3,300 - is greater than Kotzebue's population.

The Palin administration has nothing better to do than count cars in isolated villages just so it can squeeze more money out of residents?

It sounds like somebody's been doing that already. The average income in Kotzebue is about the same as it is in my working-class town, and most families there rely on subsistence hunting and fishing just to survive. Yet a gallon of milk in Kotzebue costs $9.49. A gallon of gasoline will run you $7.25. Electricity bills can be as high as $500 monthly.

And residents are unable to even comply with statewide registration requirements. That's because there's no insurance office anywhere in town. Further, the local DMV is only open part-time, because the state won't invest in that.

The Palin administration is changing a community's way of life in a manner that a majority of residents don't want. Transactions that would require a bank account elsewhere are made with cash in Kotzebue. That's going to change all because of GOP bureaucrats' ignorance and insensitivity.

And the new fees imposed on Kotzebue will pay for the state highway system residents can't even use!

Why won't the state investigate the price-gouging that's been going on instead of imposing another burden on a village that lives on subsistence hunting?

Several years ago, similar price-gouging was discovered in eastern Kentucky - yet the Bush regime wouldn't lift a finger to go after those who were responsible for it.

With the Republican base becoming more rural, you'd think they'd understand small communities. But they don't. This ignorance is intentional. And GOP leaders are laughing to themselves right now that they think they can exploit rural voters by making them think they care. Luckily, there are rural counties that aren't buying Republican demagoguery, and never did.

(Source: http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/rural/story/790230.html)

Crybabies protest Janeane Garofalo

When comic and actress Janeane Garofalo pointed out the link between the recent Tea Party farces and militant racism, the wingnutosphere went bugfuck ballistic.

But Garofalo was right. In Cincinnati, Tea Party participants led racist chants - a fact that was swept under the rug by the right-wing media.

Following Garofalo's observation, the response by the Tea Party terrorists was as idiotic as one might expect. To protest Garofalo, the BTPers planned on buying tickets to her shows just so they could heckle her.

Apparently, however, they scrapped this plan when someone pointed out that Garofalo makes money when people attend her shows. They had actually thought one of the most famous comics in America works for free!

But that didn't stop the LOSEianne crowd entirely!

Right-wing talk show host Ken Pittman of WBSM radio in New Bedford, Massachusetts, organized a protest against a Janeane Garofalo appearance near Boston.

Pittman said of Garofalo, "She has exposed herself as a bigot."

And the racist chants in Cincinnati didn't expose the BTPers as bigots???

The right-wing protest against Garofalo's show drew all of 20 people - despite being touted on a station in a nearby mid-sized city. The spur-of-the-moment protests I participated in against abusive teen confinement cults drew almost that many people despite having no media promotion beforehand.

Amazing how the right-wing brain trust can go from dangerously out of control to laughably pathetic in less than 5 years.

It's great to be an American these days!

9th Circus shields Yahoo! from lawsuits

How does the media manage to claim the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is so liberal, when it comes up with bizarre rulings like this?

When an individual sues a corporation in the 9th Circus, you can almost bet your life savings what the outcome is going to be. This is the same 9th Circuit that gutted the judgment against Exxon that resulted from the Valdez oil spill, after all.

Corporations hold a special place in what passes for the 9th Circuit's brains.

Despite all the criticism here of Yahoo! lately, the Internet giant was once respected, during its early years. These days, however, Yahoo! is shorthand for a sad world of online capriciousness.

Recently, an Oregon woman sued Yahoo! after her former boyfriend allegedly used Yahoo! to post nude photos that were taken of her without her consent and create a phony account to pose as her in a chat room to solicit sex. This resulted in strangers visiting the woman in an attempt to have sex with her.

Although the alleged behavior of the former boyfriend is outrageous, you may be asking what Yahoo! did wrong. Well, here's the big mistake Yahoo! made: Yahoo! failed to remove the fake account for months after the woman complained. Even with media attention, Yahoo! still didn't remove it. Yahoo! is so quick to remove mailing lists if someone mentions bubble gum, but it took months to get rid of a harassing user?

The woman had every reason to sue Yahoo! If there ever was a reason to sue an Internet company, that would be it.

But now the 9th Circus has shielded Yahoo! from lawsuits like this. The court says Yahoo! and other Internet companies are generally protected from being sued for their own idiotic failure to remove fraudulent accounts that are designed for the purposes of harassment and revenge.

Judge Diarmuid O'Scannlain (a Reagan appointee) decreed that the fascist Telecommunications Act of 1996 shields Yahoo!

What's that again?

Supporters of this theory have long argued that Internet companies should be immune from liability for users' behavior just as phone companies are immune from liability for private conversations used to plot crimes. That's a bullshit argument, because the phony account on Yahoo! wasn't a private communication.

No real legal theory protects Yahoo! from being sued in a case like this. But in the matchbook law world of the right-wing 9th Circus, laws are seldom an obstacle to the corporate empire.

The plaintiff may still press ahead with suing Yahoo!, but only on breach of contract grounds for not deleting the fraudulent account when it promised to.

(Source: http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Woman-Cant-Sue-Yahoo-for-Posting-Nude-Pics.html)

'Pail this poll!

Is the FairTax cult going to try to sabotage this survey like they did with the 'Pail Poll?

A survey has been posted by the Starkville, Mississippi, public school district regarding - well, guess.

When I started this blog, I had no intention of devoting so much space to fighting against school uniforms. But because the rightists keep trying to implement uniforms (despite proof that uniforms are ineffective), I have to keep an eye on this issue. They're the ones who keep bringing it up, not me.

Anybip, I'm inviting you to take this survey that the Starkville schools posted. You can take it even if you don't live in that town. Mandatory uniforms in public schools are becoming a nationwide scourge, and they're unconstitutional - so it's your duty to take this survey!

Peep and weep, folks, peep and weep:

http://info.rcu.msstate.edu/survey/siam/surveylanding/interviewer.asp?sid=6669E7050FE722B88DEECF5BB0982E7936061DD029FCDB5686B0F1BEC1734D5BE4B32AC292870EDE40FFB5589E499A5957839AECEDF53FB537

At the end of the survey, be SURE you hit "submit", so your vote against uniforms counts!

(Source: http://www.starkvilledailynews.com/content/view/144057/60)

Facebook fails history

Damn that "liberal" media!

Damn 'em all to pieces!

Seriously now, does anyone actually believe this bullshit about the media having a liberal bias?

Social networking sites don't seem to be any more free of this bias than the traditional media.

Take Facebook, for instance.

Facebook has these little happy quizzy parties that you can take part in. One of its surveys is called the Political Idealogy (sic) Quiz.

I took this quiz and noticed a few things that were quite strange in the results. And I don't mean the fact that my results came back as "very liberal." Granted, this quiz's idea of "very liberal" is probably anyone who doesn't favor public flogging of 9-year-olds who throw paper airplanes at school. But that's not the issue here.

When a person's results come back as "very liberal", a photo of what appears to be Nancy Pelosi appears. I think Pelosi shed any pretense of being left-of-center when she refused to allow the House to consider impeachment articles against Bush.

Worse, a "very liberal" result is accompanied by the caption, "You are about as far left as you can be before heading into Stalin's backyard."

That's Facebook's idea of "humor"?

Imagine if you can what the reaction would be if Facebook said to conservatives, "You are about as far right as you can be before heading into Hitler's backyard."

The wingnutosphere would be on Facebook's case in an instant, and Fox News would make a national story of it before the day was over.

Not only that, but that would probably be the end of Facebook. Conservatives drove MP3.com out of business all because it was owned by a French firm (as France opposed the Iraq War), so think what they'd do to a major website that compared conservatives to Hitler. Then again, maybe if Facebook started ratting out dissidents to the Chinese government like Yahoo! did, it would get back in conservatives' good graces. The rightist brain trust seems to have no objection to Yahoo!'s alliance with Red China in tattling on dissenters.

Further, Stalin was not leftist. Many of his policies were in fact on the right wing of the spectrum.

We all love logging on to Facebook and seeing former classmates lambaste incompetent school administrators. (I don't think I've seen this happen yet, but you know it's going to.) But I will correct Facebook's bias and its ignorance of history.

Hospital head honcho fights health reform

Patients waiting months for surgery or not being able to get medications they need is a hallmark of the modern profit-driven American health care system.

But don't tell that to Rick Scott - a multimillionaire former hospital CEO who narrates a new TV commersh attacking efforts to reform America's broken medical industry.

The ad cites alleged long waits in Canada and Britain that Scott blames on those countries' government-run health systems. Uh, Rick? Have you paid attention to the U.S. health system lately? If I needed surgery or a drug, I'd much rather live under the British or Canadian medical system. I and most other folks would probably die before we could get treated under the American system.

In the United States, if we don't die waiting for an insurer to approve our treatment or for us to make enough money to pay for it, we'd probably die at a cubicle in the hospital lobby while being interrogated about our insurance.

But again, don't tell that to ol' Rick Scott. In addition to narrating these ads, he's founded a group called (drum roll, please) Conservatives for Patients' Rights. You can't make this stuff up, ladies and gentlemen. He's spending $5,000,000 of his own money to fight health reform.

Must be nice having $5,000,000 to throw away like that, huh?

His campaign is being coordinated by the same group that was behind the discredited swiftboat ads against John Kerry. This is also reminiscent of the mid-'90s when the insurance racket funded commercials attacking health care reform efforts then.

Scott isn't a doctor. He's a wealthy right-wing investor and executive. He thinks we're supposed to listen to his greed-driven ravings instead of to our doctors who follow the Hippocratic Oath?

Will people believe his ads? Most Americans are so frustrated by the health care system that they'll know better. I think everyone knew the swiftboat ads were bullshit, and this campaign is about on par with that.

Right-wing websites keep complaining about bad health care in places like Canada or Britain - but if you read further, it's always because some wealthy socialite can't get cosmetic surgery quickly enough to please them.

There are no reports of TV stations or networks declining Scott's ad. This despite the fact that they kept rejecting ads placed by antiwar groups at the height of the Iraq War - often using the excuse that they didn't accept issue ads. Of course, Scott's issue ad is accepted without question.

Plenty has been posted here to counter Rick Scott's propaganda. Unfortunately, there will certainly be more chances to do so - unless the American health care system is fixed pronto.

(Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/10/AR2009051002243.html)

School system caught lying about uniform survey

You know, it's one thing when everyone knows a school lied about the results of a survey on uniforms, but you just can't prove it.

But it's a whole other animal when a school district actually gets caught with its shit-caked pantaloons down around its ankles - twice, no less.

And that's what happened in Springfield, Illinois.

School officials are downright determined - determined, I tell ya - to require students to wear uniforms at one of the city's elementary schools next year. They sent out a survey earlier this year asking parents' opinions about the matter. The school district reported that 64% of parents favored an "enhanced dress code."

But this turned out to be an out-and-out lie.

When a parent inspected the surveys, he found that only 48% supported it. And probably not even that many supported uniforms. The poll asked about an "enhanced dress code" - not necessarily uniforms.

I wonder what school officials have to say for themselves after being caught red-handed lying about the survey results.

What was the point in even sending out a survey? It was just so the school district could claim one was sent out. It was nothing but a dog-and-pony show.

What's even more astounding is that almost the exact same thing happened a few years ago! One Springfield public school was caught rigging a survey on uniforms several years back. Didn't the school district learn its lesson from that?

A school lied??? Naaah, we all know that no school would ever, ever lie about anything, right? All this business about schools lying is just our imagination, isn't it?

(Source: http://www.sj-r.com/homepage/x2133277898/Addams-uniform-proposal-causes-controversy)

But what ab0ut 0ur fr33 sp3ach lololololol! (more Freeper Madness)

Regulars of terrorist website Free Republic have lost it, lost it, lost it. They've lost the election, and now they've lost every last tress of sanity they once had (which wasn't much to begin with).

But they're funny. So we laugh at them. They laughed at everyone else in 2004, so they reap what they sow.

Sometimes though you have to be serious about things. When America's young people are in danger, our elected representatives have a duty to act. After online harassment led to the deaths of several teenagers, there's now a bill in Congress to toughen penalties for cyberharassment. This bill is long overdue.

On Free Republic, articles from other publications are supposed to be posted under their original titles - but Freepers can't help but add their own commentaries to the headers.

Like this morning, a Freeper posted an article about the new bill against Internet harassment. In parentheses, they added this:

"Attack on free speech"

Harassing someone on the Internet is free speech now?

Well, it is according to Freepers.

I thought the only people who believed that were those who talked shit about me on the Internet some years back.

That's like if they started treating harassing phone calls as free speech. Wait, they already do.

The amazing do-it-yourself gum commercial! (Bubble Gum Weekend)

When I stumbled upon this clip on YouPube, I thought it was an actual brand-new minute-long commersh for Bubblicious. This video looks quite professional.

But then I realized that it couldn't be - because very few ads from after about 1987 show people blowing bubbles that pop all over their face. Bubbling is one thing - but some self-styled guardians of class seem to take offense when others blow bubbles that burst in their face, so this phenomenon is largely absent from later gum ads.

Investigating a bit more, I found that this isn't an ad that actually aired. It's an "Internet marketing project" - whatever that is. Apparently, some folks made their own professional-looking ad for Bubblicious at their own expense. Why they'd do that is anyone's guess, but here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WL9HvJ5QKI

It's unclear whether people have actually been led by that clip to believe Bubblicious will send them free gum if they enter a contest. However, that offer is fictitious.

But the folks in that video did bubble with extreme efficiency.

Court orders dogs killed

The pendulum has swung too far when you see stories like this.

In Theresa, New York, a court has ordered 3 dogs (including a puppy) killed because they reportedly attacked a woman.

Just one incident - and that was the end of the dogs. The family that owned the dogs lost their beloved animals all because of the rigid, irrational dictates of therapeutical correctitude.

Again, I don't know the dog owners or the victim of the dog attack - so I don't know who is really at fault. Clearly, however, the dogs were not.

But America has been forced to live under a system in which every dog is presumed guilty.

(Source: http://www.newswatch50.com/news/local/story/Judge-orders-dogs-put-down-after-attack-on-woman/u24It7DJG0OrXF2G2G4VQg.cspx)

Right-wing German politicians to ban paintball

Just because America has its share of "let's-ban-everything" types like Jim DeMint doesn't mean the U.S. and A. has a monopoly on idiotic ideas. Right-wing stupidity is worldwide in its scope!

In Germany, the conservative administration of Angela Merkel has agreed to new legislation to ban paintball. Officials say this ban will help curtail school shootings like the one recently in Winnenden. Participating in paintball would carry a fine of up to €5,000 (about $6,700).

Banning paintball stops school shootings???

Merkel administration officials say paintball should be outlawed because they say it "trivializes violence."

Seriously, they said that. You can't make up bullshit like this, folks. At least not under any licit substance.

Meanwhile, Green Party officials criticized the ban, because the ban is just so incredibly moronic.

Is the American media satisfied now that it helped get conservative administrations installed in Germany, Canada, France, and Italy?

(Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/08/germany-paintball-school-massacre;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8041320.stm)

School ruins prom over pot smell

Keek! Ruin!

Three things in life are certain: death, taxes, and the drug warriors becoming more out of control by the day.

This is illustrated by what happened recently at a prom held by a high school in Brighton, Colorado. An 18-year-old student tried attending the prom with her 20-year-old boyfriend. But then a guard or a police officer refused to let them enter, claiming that the young man smelled of marijuana.

On its own, this would border on the absurd. But it turns out that the authorities were much more out of line than it would appear from that. The young man was legally allowed to use marijuana because of pain from a car accident. So if he had been using the herb, it was because it was perfectly legal for him to use it.

Somebody is passing the buck: Police say a school employee stopped the pair. The school says the police did.

Either way, the student now wants the school to pay for her dress, her dinner, and her prom tickets after barring her from the prom.

Predictably, the wingnut intelligentsia is invading the comment section of the Colorado paper to defend the school. Oh well. Wingnuts are background noise now, so screw 'em.

Anyone who defends the school for turning away the student and her boyfriend should try living with chronic pain. Then maybe they'd appreciate why their illogical ravings are out of line.

(Source: http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_12316600)

City won't fix door drug warriors smashed

Another day, another story of the drug warriors raiding the wrong house.

While I think there should be stiff mandatory prison sentences for drug agents who raid the wrong home, this story underscores the arrogance of right-wing city officials who won't even take steps to clean up the mess the failed War on Drugs has made.

In Baltimore, police rammed the door of the wrong house during a botched drug raid.

Now, the man who lives there is trying to get the city to pay to replace the door they broke. But the city refuses to fix it.

It gets worse. When the man discarded the broken door in his back yard for the city's public works department to take, the department refused to take it. Then, a city inspector fined him $50 for having the smashed door in his yard - which was only still there because the public works department wouldn't pick it up like it was supposed to!

But it's a War. On Drugs, you see. So that means the city thinks it never has to say it's sorry, let alone fix the damage - even though the man whose house was raided is innocent.

(Source: http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/crime/blog/2009/05/cops_ram_wrong_door_city_wont.html)

Yahoo! may have to GOFA itself

A Republican member of Congress has decided to act normal for a change.

At long last, Rep. Christopher Smith (R-New Jersey) has introduced a much-needed bill called the Global Online Freedom Act. GOFA would forbid Internet companies from helping totalitarian foreign regimes find and convict citizens for daring to promote human rights.

This follows a mid-decade scandal in which Yahoo! was found to have ratted out journalists to the Chinese government - an act that resulted in draconian prison sentences for the dissidents.

In 2007, Congress asked Yahoo! to provide the names of dissenters who they had snitched on and to say whether Yahoo! was still aiding China's repression. Yahoo! promised to answer Congress, but never did.

Republicans have prevented legislation like GOFA from passing before. Lawmakers have feared that GOFA may hurt the pwecious widdle feewings of dictators they befriend. To these legislators, I say tough shit. American companies should not be turning folks in to foreign dictatorships just because they advocate democracy.

(Source: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3868084)

City cracks down on converted garages

As homelessness and foreclosures reached record highs under Bush, America thirsts for affordable housing. This is especially true in expensive areas like Cincinnati or southern California.

But officials in Compton, California (in the state's high-cost southern region) don't see affordable housing as a high priority. (I've blackballed the L.A. Times here because of its GOP bias during the presidential campaign, but I'm lifting that restriction for this entry.)

So the city is clamping down on garages that have been converted into living space. Officials call it "blight."

People who lose their homes as a result of this crackdown are not being provided with replacement living space.

In other words, instead of doing anything about high housing costs, officials are going after those who are forced to live in converted garages because of these exorbitant costs. Only in BushWorld.

The $64 gabillion question here is...WHY??? Why is the city going after converted garages? A lot of things might be considered "blight", but that doesn't mean cities don't let them remain standing. A lot of homeowners converted their garages if they had a child, and officials never batted an eye at them. The city only cares if the garage is being used as an apartment for a poor family.

It's classism. That's what this is about.

Officials want a gentrified city so badly that they don't even care how it affects residents. Kind of like what happens in my area a lot. Of course, in my area, officials would do something like this precisely because it affects residents.

For the record, what Compton is doing is illegal. Cities have to be welcome to all economic groups. The city has to either build affordable housing or stop its war against converted garages.

(Source: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-compton-garages6-2009may06,0,7137858.story)

Bunning supports Diaper Dave's flag amendment

Almost every year of the past 20 years, the exact same thing has happened.

Some demagogue in Congress always gets the brilliant idea that if they introduce a constitutional amendment to outlaw desecrating the flag, then people will start listening to them. Inevitably, the amendment fails to pass. In the meantime, any lawmaker who dares to oppose the amendment gets raked through cess - rivulet by awful rivulet.

This year's hothead is none other than Louisiana's right-wing Sen. David Vitter. Vitter's flag amendment is backed by Kentucky's very own Sen. Jim Bunning (pictured here).

Talk about futile! If this amendment didn't pass under the Congresses of 1995 through 2006, which were the most conservative in the country's history, it's unlikely to pass now.

The minimum wage is lagging, corporate power is out of control, and America may be having its worst flu epidemic in 20 years - yet Diaper Dave and Jim Bunning are trying to pass an amendment to fight all 3 flag burnings that might occur in this century?

Courts have ruled that desecrating a flag is protected under the First Amendment (no matter how offensive it is). And no portion of the Bill of Rights has ever been specifically repealed by a later amendment.

Let's keep it that way. Look up 'entrenched clause' on Wikipedia. I think we may have to pass a constitutional amendment to entrench the Bill of Rights - which would mean that nothing in the Bill of Rights could be repealed by new amendments. Ask yourself this: Is there ever any justification for repealing any part of the Bill of Rights? I think not.

If Vitter and Bunning are going to make exceptions to the Bill of Rights, then we're no longer on a slippery slope. We're at the bottom of it.

(Source: http://nky.cincinnati.com/article/AB/20090507/NEWS0103/905080325/Bunning+backs+flag+amendment)

Right-wing meanness launches international incident

Recently, a woman from Owosso, Michigan, was invited by friends to spend 3 days at their home not far away in Clinton, Ontario - at her friends' expense.

An international boundary should have been no major obstacle to this outing. But it turns out the woman had been receiving government benefits because she was low-income.

So Canadian customs agents launched class-charged tirades before turning her away at the border. This happened twice in the same weekend.

Canadian border authorities cited a new policy by the Harper regime that forbids foreigners who get assistance from entering.

Granted, no foreigner has an automatic right to enter a country where they are not a citizen. But since conservatives keep defending Michael Savage's so-called "right" to enter Britain after his hateful harangues, where are they now?

Where are the "free trade" thought guardians who think there should be no trade restrictions between countries? How can they support unfettered trade while not defending the movement of an innocent person trying to visit friends?

Is it because they're lying shitsack hypocrites? Why, yes, as a matter of fact, it is.

What about the Harper regime's policy itself? The right to be free from such economic discrimination isn't limited only to countries that write such a right into law. This right is a natural right, and it is universal and applies to everyone regardless of country. No regime gets to ignore this right, any more than they get to say 2 plus 2 is 5.

Stephen Harper of course has already taken the unprecedented step of dissolving Parliament because it refused to reinstall him as Prime Minister. That's exactly like if the elder Bush had dissolved Congress because he lost the 1992 election.

The response by the U.S. government to the recent border incident should be severe. There should be tough sanctions against any foreign government that treats U.S. citizens in the manner the Michigan woman was treated. Stephen Harper is worse than Fidel Castro, by far.

In the meantime, the Harper regime isn't getting a penny of my tourist dollars. So it looks like I'll be leaving my royalty check stubs at home.

(Source: http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2009/05/07/9380031-sun.html)

Boy Scouts ban "overweight" volunteers

What self-styled genius came up with this policy?

The Boy Scouts of America plans to institute a new weight requirement barring "overweight" volunteers. (I've generally eschewed ABC as a source for this blog, because of its Republican bias that approaches the Fox News level - but I'm making an exception for this story.) Volunteers would even be restricted from teaching archery because of their weight.

These volunteers have dedicated their lives to the Boy Scouts to enrich the lives of millions of America's young people. And this is what they get in return?

What's so irritating about the new weight requirement is that it's not even being implemented for the safety of the volunteers or the scouts. The reason for the new policy is to (you guessed it!) set an example. Even some volunteers who have passed a doctor's checkup would now be banned.

Naturally, Freeper types are flooding ABC's comment section to defend this new rule.

Something tells me the country is in the throes of a witch hunt against the "overweight" much like the ongoing official massacres against dissidents and the poor.

(Source: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=7508870&page=1)

Drug tests for school activities tossed out!

At long last, a court finally gets it.

Calling someone a stoner or a "dry druggie" has been like the punch of death in postdemocratic America. The U.S. Supreme Court has been eager to feed this witch hunt, as activist right-wing Justices concoct legal theories out of whole cloth to run roughshod over constitutionally guaranteed freedoms.

This was evident in 2002 when the court ruled that public schools could violate the constitutional right to privacy by requiring students in extracurricular activities to take a drug test.

But this drug war bully run may be winding down in California.

A school in Redding, California, was recently sued over its drug testing requirement for school activities like the chess club or Future Farmers of America. But a judge has now thrown out this policy.

This was accomplished by noting that privacy protections appear to be stronger under the California Constitution than under the U.S. Constitution. Remember, the U.S. Supreme Court had absurdly ruled that there's no right to privacy in the federal Constitution - even though there is.

Naturally, the school district is threatening to waste more of the taxpayers' money by appealing the new ruling against drug tests.

It's tempting to endorse an amendment to the U.S. Constitution guaranteeing the right to privacy, to settle this once and for all. But that right is already found in the Constitution, for it is embodied largely in the Fourth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment. The U.S. Supreme Court has chosen to ignore this right.

(Source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/05/06/BAQP17G3S6.DTL&tsp=1)

Flu traced to U.S. factory farms

Factory farms are driving family farmers out of business, polluting the environment, mistreating animals, and producing inferior food.

So it was par for the course when it was discovered that conditions at a factory pig farm led to the current swine flu outbreak. But it initially could not be traced anywhere beyond the farm near Mexico City.

Now the virus has been traced further - to U.S. factory farms. This influenza virus is the progeny of one that emerged in 1998 at farms in the U.S.

The emergence of that strain immediately followed the Republican Congress allowing factory farms to proliferate at a level never before seen.

Scientists warned that the virus would mutate to infect humans and touch off a pandemic - unless it was contained. Did government officials listen? Of course not.

Bob Martin of the Pew Commission on Industrial Animal Farm Production said factory farms "are super-incubators for viruses." Crowded conditions force pigs to stand in feces and spread disease.

In 2003, the American Public Health Association urged the government to ban contained animal feeding operations like those that characterize factory farms. The Bush regime ignored this plea.

After the government sat on its hands for years, the list of prosecutions of public officials ought to be long. But ending the proliferation of factory farms is an even more urgent priority.

(Source: http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/05/swineflufarm)

NAMI funded by drug companies

The National Alliance on Mental Illness has received criticism over the years for its links to questionable individuals and policies. For instance, it has supported right-wing laws to allow court-ordered druggings of the so-called "mentally ill."

(Incidentally, the media - including the right-wing Los Angeles Times - has generally supported such laws, and has tried to imply that the only opponents are Scientologists. This is an outright deception - or in plain English, a lie.)

Now - to nobody's surprise - a Senate investigation has uncovered the fact that most of NAMI's funding comes from makers of psychiatric drugs. Since 2005, 56% of the organization's funding has come from this racket.

NAMI is a living example of ongoing corruption by Big Pharma.

(Source: http://www.mindfreedom.org/kb/psych-drug-corp/nami)

GOP commish arrested for indecent exposure

There ain't nothin'-nothin' like a "family values" kind of Republican - who are among the biggest hypocrites ever to tread the planet.

Kim Capello is a Republican county commissioner in Oakland County, Michigan.

He faces indecent exposure charges after police say he was naked and had sex on a public sidewalk. The woman he had sex with was reportedly not his wife. Capello and the woman were described by a bystander as "2 naked females."

One of these days, we need to post a list of all the recent Republics who have been busted for things like this. Kind of puts the kibosh on the GOP's preaching to everyone else about "family values", doesn't it?

(Source: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3863231)

Buffy Sainte-Marie is cool ('Sesame Street' Wednesday)

Buffy Sainte-Marie is a well-known singer and musician who was a regular on 'Sesame Street' from 1976 to 1981.

Her music was the target of U.S. government censorship in the '60s and '70s because of her political views. Radio stations blacklisted her, and entire shipments of her records mysteriously vanished.

'Sesame Street' was likely at its peak in the late '70s. Instead of overplaying the same bland segments, each episode always featured a healthy dose of new material alongside creative recurring sketches rotated in an unpredictable fashion. The Number Painter and "'B' Is For Bubble" still made frequent appearances.

Folks cite Buffy Sainte-Marie as central to the show's late '70s dominance. For instance, everyone enjoys this 1977 musical appearance:



That segment was so popular that viewers waited for months on end for 'Sesame Street' to rerun it so they could record it with a tape recorder.

I'm pretty sure I saw this segment once when I was about 4. I was so impressed by that twangy instrument that I was inspired to try to build one. One day, while digging in the dirt behind my house, I found a small piece of a broken clay flowerpot that I planned on using as the pick. When I had to go inside for dinner, I promptly lost my pick. I think I accidentally flushed it down the toilet, because it was never found.

You'd never see a segment like this on 'Sesame Street' today, unfortunately.

Diaper Dave blocks FEMA nominee

Our instructions for Sen. David Vitter (R-Louisiana):

1) Grab lower lip.

2) Pull it over head.

Vitter - one of the Senate's leading hypocrites - is blocking the confirmation of Craig Fugate, who was nominated by President Obama to head FEMA. Vitter has placed a hold on Fugate for 2 months.

Uh, Dave? Your side lost. Get over it.

The U.S. Senate must be the only legislative body in a supposedly democratic country where the majority does not rule, if Vitter can singlehandedly hold up important business like this.

With hurricane season lurking, FEMA needs someone to run it this instant - instead of being held up by Vitter's one-man tantrum.

Perhaps what a user of another website said was true: It does appear as if David Vitter thinks you can just pack the flood-prone zones with super-absorbent diapers. Maybe Vitter can get a bulk discount.

(Source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/05/05/national/w120203D23.DTL)

Michael Savage barred from Britain

The Wiener got his wiener spanked!

Has-been talk radio loudmouth Michael Savage is now one of 16 people publicly named as barred from entering Britain. Savage, host of a right-wing talk show based at KNEW in San Francisco (one of several explicitly conservative talk stations in that city), appeared on the Home Office's list because he has used his show to incite hatred.

Other Americans now banned from Britain include far-right pastor Fred Phelps and his daughter Shirley Phelps-Roper. The list also includes various unsavory characters from other countries.

What's Michael Sewage's reaction to being barred? He's gonna sue 'em to court!

Aw, did the poor widdle baby get offended?

(Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/16-banned-from-britain-named-and-shamed-1679127.html)

Media finally realizes suburbs have gangs

Gee, ya think?

I knew this in 1984, and it took the pop-up media this long to figure it out?

An interesting article in the Star-Tribune of Minneapolis reports that gangs are no longer limited to just central cities but have now expanded into well-to-do suburbs.

But I've got news for the Star-Tribune: Gangs have long been just as out of control in some suburbs as they are in the inner city - if not more so. I attended a suburban Catholic high school 20 years ago that had far more gang activity than the inner-city public school I graduated from.

(This factoid doesn't exactly prove the effectiveness of dress codes either, as this was years before the urban school instituted its right-wing uniform policy. If there was any school that was zealous about dress codes back then, it was the suburban private school.)

Some have speculated that the suburban gangs aren't even real gangs, and are just coddled brats who act tough until they push their luck too far and face the threat of jail. But gangs took my county to its very knees. They started fights just for its own sake, and innocent people were terrorized.

That doesn't mean gang activity hasn't increased nationwide. A Justice Department report says gang membership in all American communities soared by more than one-third between 2002 and 2007. (Doesn't exactly say a lot for the Bush years' alleged glory, does it?)

Maybe if we had all stopped pretending years ago that the suburbs are perfect, this wouldn't be an issue now.

(Source: http://www.startribune.com/local/west/44332242.html)

University may punish students for off-campus acts

The alarming trend towards trying to keep students in suspended animation festers.

Regents for the University of Wisconsin system (a public university system) are considering asking state lawmakers to allow students to be punished by the university for off-campus conduct unrelated to school.

Wisconsin law already has reasonable provisions allowing institutions of higher book-learnin' to penalize off-campus conduct IF SUCH BEHAVIOR IS RELATED TO SCHOOL - for instance, online harassment of a schoolmate or professor.

The latest proposal though would institute unreasonable provisions to expand this power. For example, students who violate minor city ordinances or who receive a minor drug charge may be punished, even if their transgressions were not on campus and had nothing to do with school.

This isn't the first time something like this has been attempted in this fine nation. I attended a community college in Kentucky several years ago where the student handbook threatened disciplinary action against students who had minor drug offenses nowhere near campus. (The school seems to have since repealed this policy.) Ironically, no other off-campus offense was punishable by the college - which proves again how Kentucky education officials are so paranoid that they think there's a stoner or "dry druggie" hiding under every bed.

(Source: http://www.madison.com/wsj/topstories/449839)

Right-wing cult sees crime surge

In the wake of the failure of Tom Monaghan's Ave Maria cult to attract more than 500 followers, it now appears that the community must have one of the highest rates of serious crime in America.

An article from December describes the shameless daytime robbery of the local jewelry store. Sheriff's office statistics showed there were about 2 crimes a week in the immediate Ave Maria area.

Two crimes a week might not sound like much - but in a community of only 500?

To comfort prospective residents and deter criminals, the community's website claimed there was a police substation in town to keep folks safe. But it wasn't true: There was no substation. Despite this claim being wrong, it appeared on the website for at least 10 months.

This was after it was revealed that the director of the private security team used by Monaghan to guard his cultish fiefdom refers to Monaghan as "our king." This security team also roams the halls of the community's private schools.

Is Ave Maria going to be another parallel universe where up is down and where no ill is ever acknowledged no matter how bad it gets?

(Source: http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2008/dec/21/ave-maria-officials-discuss-ways-improve-public-sa;
http://avewatch.com/2006-2007/files/65be33fa083e2382b14cbf2713bbb228-157.html)

Domino's founder starts cult that draws only 500 members

Tom Monaghan is the founder of Domino's Pizza and a longtime right-wing activist.

Several years ago, Monaghan announced plans to build Ave Maria - a "city of God" in southwestern Florida based on his interpretation of "Catholic law." He invested hundreds of millions of dollars in this endeavor.

There's general agreement that the community founded by Monaghan is actually a cult - about on par with a Catholic high school I once attended. One observer also blasted Ave Maria as "country club Christianity." But Monaghan pressed ahead with his plans for the community, which is designed to hold 11,000 households.

Officials in Collier County actually lured the pizza tycoon's development, gave him everything he asked for, and praised its theocratic touches.

When it was first proposed, the plans were for Ave Maria to pass ordinances to outlaw condoms and the reception of adult TV broadcasts. Apparently, Monaghan backed down when civil liberties groups pointed out that basing city ordinances on religious law would be unconstitutional. He also realized he had to broaden the community's appeal, so he began using the town's physical layout (rather than its intolerance and theocratic rule) as a selling point.

Unfortunately for Tom Monaghan, his cult hasn't quite lived up to his grandiose expectations. Although he expected tens of thousands of residents, Ave Maria has drawn only about 500 inhabitants from all over the country and beyond.

Its population probably consists of all of Free Republic's remaining users.

Reminds me of how my former high school kept squandering money on new buildings and boasting of how its enrollment was going to double in 5 years. The new classrooms ended up sitting empty for years with the chairs flipped upside-down on the desks.

Whoever said religious extremists are as much of a threat at home as they are abroad was right. But at least now there's 500 who have isolated themselves in this kooky cult instead of staying in your town to yank library books off the shelves at your kids' school or drive video stores out of town for carrying R-rated movies.

(Source: http://www.tampabay.com/news/business/realestate/article997884.ece)

One of my few major regrets

"I asked this post to be removed before, yet it was not. Also, this post is stalker bait, and is outdated."

Got that, Google?

I'm pretty sure I asked the post in question to be removed from Google's archive several years ago. Assuming it ever was removed, it's obviously another that reappeared. The quote above is my message to Google asking them to remove it - again. (I've mentioned before the problem of Google's failure to remove posts that the author of the posts wants deleted.)

I've had a very good public track record over the past 15 years. In general, I'd do the same things all over again - only I'd fight back much harder.

But one of my greatest regrets is publicly appearing to support the wrong joker in an election. I don't get hung up much on political parties, but it's still a concern.

Candidates for public office often raise important issues, but if they're not willing to deliver, I feel like a fool for even defending them. I'm wiser now, but - as a voter - I feel like I was used by political candidates for their gain.

The Tim of the 2000s is not the Tim of the 1990s, so I'm more wary now. Throughout the '90s, I never truly fought back against anyone - and I was seldom in a position to, especially later when I was tired and in a daze.

Let me give you an idea of how much I was browbeaten: In the first incarnation of the message board on what was then my main website, I had to start moderating all the posts because of the assholes talking trash about me. When one of them kept it up, I approved his post, because I was afraid he'd keep trying if I didn't. That shows how out of control things were.

If a public official or anyone else knows they can bully someone, they will. So in the past few years, I started fighting back. Hard. And it's worked.

I regret trusting some of our officials, I regret possibly taking the wrong side in a row between interests I didn't care for to begin with, and - perhaps more than anything else - I absolutely cannot believe I spent an entire decade not fighting back against anything.

But like I said, I'd do almost everything else exactly the same. From Tantrum 95.7 to The Last Word, I have few other regrets. If that offends people, they can kiss my ass.

Grade your government!

I've discovered an interesting website, and it's brand spang-new.

It's called Grade Gov, and it lets you grade your U.S. Senate and House members on their shitty performance.

So point your pooper here:

http://www.gradegov.com

Utility uses our money to fight climate change rules

The wingnut world is one that sees everything through a haze of superstition and greed. Science is alien in that parallel universe.

So they're sure to be cheering the latest efforts by utility giant Duke Energy - which has a monopoly in Cincinnati and other areas.

Duke is now asking local governments in northern Kentucky to oppose the Obama administration's efforts to fight climate change. Dook claims that new rules to limit carbon dioxide would raise customers' rates by almost 40%.

Nice try, Duke, but this information is simply wrong. I have no idea where the company gets this statistic from. But it isn't so - because power companies elsewhere that have already taken steps to limit carbon dioxide haven't seen their rates go up.

Duke claims that if the new rules are passed, Kentucky would no longer be known for inexpensive energy. Well, it isn't now - thanks to Duke and rubber-stamp so-called regulators.

Regulators give the energy giant almost every rate hike it asks for - so really Duke is using our money to lobby local governments against the new rules. And they're doing it with regulators' blessing. When you pay your power bill, this is where your money goes.

The Campbell County Fiscal Court hasn't decided yet whether to jab the serrated knife of greed and bad politics even deeper into our rib cages. After prodding by Duke, commissioners are considering drafting a resolution to use our tax dollars to lobby Congress against climate change rules.

Such a resolution should be rejected out of hand. But of course, our merry fiscal court was also known for using our tax dollars to establish a one-time county holiday honoring a certain right-wing private school (after the school had been criticized by others for years for encouraging student bullying). So Campbell County isn't exactly a progressive stronghold.

Corporatism means monopolies have regulatory bodies do their bidding by letting them charge us higher rates - then use this money on lobbying efforts for public officials to stall progress on fighting climate change. The wingnutosphere basks in this corruption.

(Source: http://nky.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/AB/20090502/NEWS0103/905030347)

New hope for gum advertising? (Bubble Gum Weekend)

There may yet be hope for the world of bubble gum advertising.

I've long lamented the sad state of affairs of commercials for gum - and other goods, for that matter. But especially gum, an industry that had some of the most creative ads 30 years ago, but is now known for commercials that almost make you want to staple your eyelids shut. Maybe it's for the better that there don't seem to be as many gum ads as there used to be.

The state of bubble gum advertising is a bit like the late '80s decline of the motif that accompanied MTV VJ's. Up until then, MTV used a friendly setting that looked like the attic of a neighborhood record shop. But following this change, VJ's instead appeared in front of forgettable film sequences.

It's also of reminiscent of what Moe did to his tavern in a certain episode of 'The Simpsons': In that installment, Moe converted his working-class bar into a boring yuppie nightclub. The TV screen with the giant eyeball reminds one of the downfall of gum advertising images.

But I've just found a recent gum commersh that indicates that there might be a future after all for gum ads.

This entertaining ad for Hubba Bubba Glop appears to be from just last year:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0ILkHQ9uOI

That commersh starts out somewhat appealing, with the animated jellyfish and all. But that's not what makes it reminiscent of the great bubble gum ads of old. Nor is the fact that one of the jellyfish bubbles.

The highlight from my nostalgic perspective is that catchy jingle at the end. It sounds like the old Hubba Bubba jingle from the Gum Fighter ads! It also sounds a bit like the Care-Free gum ads of the late '70s.

Maybe since we now have a real President like we had in 1979, jingles that sound like those from 1979 are making a comeback.

Onetime Republican VP candidate Jack Kemp dies

I've just been informed that former football player and GOP congressman Jack Kemp died today at the age of 73 after a long illness.

Kemp, as you'll recall, was Bob Dole's running mate in his ill-fated 1996 presidential campaign.

Kemp was often considered a charismatic counterweight to the dour Dole. But this was overshadowed by his extremely conservative views on economic matters.

More information about his death here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3859231

Government won't give Social Security recipients their increase

Elderly and disabled Americans have worked hard their whole lives paying into Social Security. It's a system that's supposed to provide the economic security they need and have earned.

But now it looks like they're going to see much less of their money coming back to them.

The government now says that those of you who receive any type of Social Security benefit won't be getting a cost-of-living increase next year - and probably none the year after that either. Because all that (whoosh...whoosh) inflation over the past year, you see, is just our imagination (according to the government).

This will be the first year since the low-inflation '70s with no cost-of-living increase. Because all the later inflation is all in our heads, you see.

An AARP official said that if there's no cost-of-living increase, and if drug premiums go up as expected, "millions of beneficiaries will see their Social Security checks reduced for the first time."

If drug premiums go up, how can the government stand there and insist there's no inflation?

What warmed-over Bushbot bureaucrat is calculating the inflation rate? Nobody hired by the Obama administration could possibly be stupid enough to say there's been no inflation in the past year. Indeed, the numbers come mostly from the Congressional Budget Office (not the White House), and anyone who reads this blog knows Congress is led by the Republican wing of the Democratic Party.

You can almost bet your bottom dollar Congress will get its annual pay increase (despite it being unconstitutional). They wouldn't deny themselves that.

Nor will it deny the entitlement monarchs of AIG another $30,000,000,000.

All this after the cost-of-living increase for Social Security was being undercounted in the first place!

I think Congress ought to increase Social Security anyway, regardless of what official cost-of-living numbers suggest. To claim there's been no inflation in the past year borders on the psychotic.

(Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/03/us/politics/03benefits.html)

AIG to get billions more

I've said it before and I'll say it again: You caaaaan't make this shit up!

After AIG has received $150,000,000,000 in taxpayer-funded bailout money since September - and squandered much of it on bonuses for wealthy execs - did you really think AIG was done fleecing the American taxpayers?

Now AIG has finished a deal to get another $30,000,000,000 in bailout dough.

Let AIG fail already. If AIG is so mismanaged that it wastes taxpayer money on bonuses for those who mismanaged it, what good is another bailout going to do?

(Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSTRE53J4N620090420)

St. Nowhere

This is the mesmerizing story of the amazing, magical hospital that's never been quite sure what city it's in.

This entry is not a critique of the hospital's quality of medical care. I trust that they know much more about medicine than they do about geography.

But the nickname St. Nowhere is bound to stick, because the hospital won't even confront which city's limits it rests in. Because I was born at this hosp, I take this denial very seriously. The biographical information of anyone born there remains clouded because of this matter.

Recently, the St. Elizabeth and St. Luke hospitals in northern Kentucky merged. They've opted to continue each location under the St. Elizabeth banner - with the city or county name added. Of particular concern is the facility in Campbell County. Long known as St. Luke East, it's now being renamed to St. Elizabeth Fort Thomas.

I take umbrage at that, because only part of the hosp is in Fort Thomas. I checked the city boundaries on Google Earth, and I have confirmed that part of the facility is in Fort Thomas, part of it is in Newport, and part of it is in a tiny unincorporated wedge.

But as far as I know, the hospital has always insisted it's in Fort Thomas - never Newport. I'm about 80% sure this is because Newport is working-class, and Fort Thomas has a reputation of being more affluent. The hospital's new branding carries an unfortunate elitist air.

A similar story unfolded when the nearby Graeter's ice cream shop opened. The entire business is in Newport, but it initially advertised itself as being in Fort Thomas. Newport officials countered this elitist appeal by placing a prominent city limit sign near Graeter's.

Since it's hard to imagine me and Fort Thomas as being in even the same solar system (due to the economic difference), I list my birthplace as Newport. My belief that the hospital's maternity ward in 1973 was not on the Fort Thomas side of the line gives me comfort in knowing I'm right. But for decades, the hospital has lived in denial over the fact that any part of the building is outside Fort Thomas.

If LeftMaps gets around to making maps of either city, you can wager that there's going to be a clear note of the fact that the hospital's new official name is wrong. (The hosp is getting off easy, because LeftMaps never would have recognized the name Cinergy Field at all.)

But the hospital's denial over straddling the city limits has forever earned it the sobriquet St. Nowhere.

(Source: http://www.kypost.com/content/news/859/story/St-E-St-Luke-Hospitals-Announce-New-Name/eq5q5DSqIUS62_ntnnmIsQ.cspx)

Utility accused of shutting off power just so it can charge fee

Instead of just parroting press reports, this blog often gets good tips that pan out. And we may have unearthed yet another display of corporate greed.

I have been told that Duke Energy - the North Carolina-based utility giant that has a monopoly on electricity in the Cincinnati area - has discovered a nifty way of Making Money. (In addition to using power outages as an excuse to raise rates.)

It seems that when people relocate and transfer their power bill to the building's new occupants, Duke shuts the power off - instead of leaving it on as per the customer agreement.

Why is this significant? For one, Dook doesn't need to shut it off, because no power is being used anyway until the new occupants arrive. More importantly, it has been said that Duke charges $25 to $75 as a fee to turn the power back on. In other words, Duke turns the power off just so it can charge the new occupants a fee to turn it back on.

Duke reportedly turns off the power even if the building is only empty for a few hours.

I did some research, and other sources confirm that the fee is indeed $25 to $75 to switch the power back on. So it's only fair to question why the utility company shuts the power off when it doesn't have to.

Is the media going to be on this story like it's been on political opponents' sex lives? Somehow I doubt it. So we have to be on top of it.

Idiot accuses "anarchist agenda" of limiting speech

How illogical is the right-wing brain trust these days?

They think hate crimes are protected as free speech. If you walk up to someone and slug them in the face solely because of their race or religion, the rightists will fight to the death to defend you, as they misread the First Amendment.

Or at least it seems that way, because every time stiffer hate crime laws are proposed, the wingnutosphere screams about its True Free Speach Now (tm). (Bush refused to expand hate crime protections because he absurdly claimed it would have violated free speech.)

In criticizing a new federal hate crime bill now pending, right-wing legal eagle Mathew Staver is proving to be every bit as irrational as one might expect.

Staver is the founder of the misnamed Liberty Counsel and serves as the law school dean at Liberty University (founded by Jerry Falwell). Liberty Counsel bullies organizations that run afoul of its aims. For instance, it threatened to sue a public library because it awarded certificates of accomplishment to kids who read Harry Potter books. (The library backed down.)

Mathew Staver said the new hate crime bill is part of the "radical homosexual anarchist agenda", which he says would involve the government limiting speech.

Mathew, you moron, go look up anarchism in your 'Young Students Encyclopedia'. If it's anarchist, how can it use the government to limit something?

I guess we can't expect logic to stand in the way of right-wing ravings.

For the record, the new bill doesn't limit speech. Complaints about hate crime laws suppressing free speech have been bogus from the very beginning.

St. Louis to lose public schools?

I keep an eye out for fascism like mandatory public school uniforms - but often it exposes other woes in America's slaughterhouse school system.

In a story about a right-wing proposal to introduce uniforms in St. Louis public schools, a rather sinister fact emerged.

I remember back in the '90s when Hartford, Connecticut, hired a private firm to run its so-called public schools. This experiment failed almost instantly because of the mismanagement that went along with it.

It's bad enough that school officials use our children for experiments, but this story should have also highlighted a point that almost nobody else noticed: If this program had remained in place, Hartford would have been a city without public schools.

This is significant because it would have robbed students of the right to attend public schools. And that is important because public schools are so central to any modern society and are often the only means for our young people to advance in life. Private schools can exclude. Public schools - at least in theory - cannot.

St. Louis school officials don't seem to get it though.

In 2003, the St. Louis school bored signed a $5,000,000 contract with a New York firm to take over its schools for a year.

That didn't seem to bring about any improvement. One official said the private firm "was called in to improve the school district, and left it in shambles." The school district declined so spectacularly that the state found reason to take over its management.

For some strange reason, I'm not in the least bit surprised by a private firm mismanaging a school system. I had experiences with both public and private schools, and it would be an understatement to say I'm far less impressed with the latter.

Now St. Louis school officials have approved a $750,000 contract with a private firm to take over 17 of the city's schools. (It's unclear if this is the same business that was hired in 2003.) Didn't they learn from their earlier mistake?

It's unknown what led to the first privatization of St. Louis schools. Even if the school system had performed poorly before this takeover, it couldn't have been worse than the suburban school system in northern Kentucky I grew up in. The media has always carried a whiff of elitism that tends to portray suburban schools as better than those in inner cities, but that's another misconception that I've been able to debunk with my own experiences.

Nonetheless, I'm deeply suspicious of any American school system today. This story only reinforces my suspicion.

(Source: http://www.bnd.com/336/story/752095.html)

Patriot Act nabs teen for crime he didn't commit

Patriot Act idiocy is out of control. It will remain so until we repeal the hated Idiot Act decisively.

A homeschooled high school sophomore from North Carolina is the latest victim of Patriot Act fascism.

A federal criminal complaint says he made a bomb threat from his home computer on the night of February 15. Except he didn't. He was at a church gathering that evening.

It turns out someone spoofed his IP address so he was blamed for the threat. But the FBI and local police didn't buy this, and they raided his house and confiscated his computer, school records, video game console, and other items.

The boy was then hauled to a juvenile detention facility hundreds of miles away in Indiana.

That was 2 months ago. The teen remains in detention - with no trial. That's because the Patriot Act robbed him of due process.

I guarantee you he's not alone in being illegally stripped of due process. Unfortunately, due process has not ranked high in the government's lexicon in recent years. So innocent people sit and wait - with no trial.

Observers say the right-wing Patriot Act works like this: The government claims a person is a threat, so it suspends due process. But the catch is, how do we know a person is a threat unless due process is used?

Someone ought to storm that detention facility in Indiana to release captives who are being unconstitutionally denied due process.

(Source: http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/5049867)

NYPD tries explaining frisking policy - and fails

Thanks to the incompetent "leadership" that's plagued the city over the past 15 years, New York City police have become known for their "stop and frisk" policy.

This controversial hard-line rule means exactly what it says: Cops simply stop people and frisk them.

The policy is now facing a lawsuit because it appears to be selectively enforced based on a person's race.

How is the police department fighting the negative perceptions of "stop and frisk"? Now they've begun handing out small cards to people in which they try to explain this practice. According to these cards, "stop and frisk" is allowed by state law.

Uh, the law allows it only if there's probable cause. One in every 15 New Yorkers was stopped and frisked last year under this policy, so clearly folks are being frisked even with no cause.

This story boils down to this: It's as if the police are saying, "We stopped you, frisked you, humiliated you - all for no reason. Here's this piece of paper to make it all better. Have a nice day."

(Source: http://www.kentucky.com/513/story/780591.html)