FORE!

Good grief, Obama sure seems to play a ton of golf and attend a lot of political fundraisers, certainly much more than Bush ever did (link below). Of course, Bush must have set set some kind of modern record for presidential vacation days, and so he had his own problems. My only point is this: During a period when we continue to lose American lives in Afghanistan daily, and when commanders in the field have been waiting and waiting on a decision from Obama about the commanders' requests for more troops, these stories about excessive fundraising and golfing (not to mention finding time to campaign for Olympics and run attack campaigns on solitary media outlets and other organizations) tend to make Obama look very bad, at least in my eyes. I think I know why he's stalling, as discussed previously in this space -- politics, i.e. put the likely controversial decision off until a health care bill can be passed and/or the upcoming gubernatorial elections are over. But I continue to say, Afghanistan is an issue that's so important that politics must be put on the backburner. Obama needs to be spending every waking hour and minute of free time devoting himself to the formulation of a coherent and adequately resourced strategy in Afghanistan or else he needs to get us to the hell out of there. Enough of the politics and golf games already.

http://www.politico.com/click/stories/0910/obama_ties_bush_on_golf.html

Pelosi Pushes for a "Robust Public Option." Say what?

Tell me, will the "robust public option" follow a "robust debate" on said "robust" option? Who talks like that, anyway? Well, dems and repubs do, and perhaps that's a small window into why both parties are so out of touch these days. I mean, can you imagine if we went around talking like dem and repub politicians in our every day lives? "Look at that blonde hottie at the end of the bar. I'm going to march right over there and engage her in some robust conversation!" "Damn, I'm running out of gas. I better get to the next gas station for a robust fill-up." "I got my fourth DUI last night. Time for some robust self-examination!" "If you look at my gal one more time, I'm gonna clock you a robust one!" OK, now I think I have a very robust headache. Trying to listen to these politicians will do that to a person.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/64515-pelosi-calls-emergency-meeting-reiterates-pledge-for-robust-public-option

They'll Be Boozin' in the Street, With Their Panties at Their Feet.

"And the morals that they worship will be gone." Welcome to the wild, booze-fueled, insanity-ridden night-time world of Britain's "ladette" culture (link below). But now the cops are crackin' down! Party poopers.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1222090/Reveller-pictured-knickers-ankles-shocking-scene-UKs-streets-shame.html

Ouch. Bad News Today for Republicans. But Is It Any Better For Dems?

A new ABC News/Washington Post poll reports that 83% of Independents surveyed said that they do not trust the republicans to make the right decisions. Place yours truly squarely within that 83%, but place me also into what is almost certainly a similar percentage of Independents who do not trust the far-left-controlled dems to make the right decisions. The poll also reports that only 20% of those surveyed identified themselves as republicans -- apparently the lowest number in 26 years. (Link below discusses these poll results in the context of the White House's current crusade against media outlets that it views as not being favorable to Obama).

But, as posited at the top, are things really much better for the dems? I notice that current Rasmussen polling still has Obama's job disapproval rating at around 47%. The poll numbers for the democrat-controlled Congress are abysmal. It gets back to a point that I've made several times in this space in recent months: While Obama & The Dems' poll numbers aren't very good, that has not meant that the repubs are picking up any significant degree of new support nationwide. As I've discusssed, this might just be the so-called "perfect storm" from which a slew of non-liberal dems, non-conservative repubs, and Independents may be able to win elected office in the next few years running as either Independents or third party candidates. I think it's in the wind. I just hope that wind keeps a blowin'.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28532.html

"I'll Have a Diet Coke With That": The Top 10 Worst Fast Food Items You Can Place Into Your Piehole.

And these are just the worst examples that I'm currently aware of! (The numbers following each item denote Fat Grams/Calories/Carb Grams):

10. Pizza Hut: 6-inch Veggie Lovers Personal Pan Pizza. Since it's "veggie," it must be healthy, right? Wrong. (35/960/118)

9. Burger King: Double Whopper w/ Cheese. I think I'll "have it my way" and never order this item. (64/980/49)

8. Taco Bell: Chipotle Steak Fully Loaded Taco Salad. Fully loaded with what? Lard? (59/950/76)

7. Sonic: SuperSonic Cheeseburger w/ mayo. Add on a large Fritos chili cheese pie, and double your pleasure! (The sandwich only: 64/980/58)

6. Subway: Spicy Italian Footlong. Eat Fresh, and therefore eat something other than this. (64/1044/40)

5. McDonald's: "Deluxe Breakfast". Can you think of a more deluxe way to start your day? I can. (60/1150/116)

4. Wendy's: Bacon Deluxe Triple Burger. More like Bacon Deluxe Triple Bypass. (71/1140/47)

3. Steak 'n Shake: "Frisco Melt". SNS is celebrating its 75th year. Eat this sandwich regularly, and you'll never reach yours. (93/1173/43)

2. Hardees: 2/3 Pound Monster Thickburger. I'd rather eat a Monster Truck. (95/1320/46)

1. Captain D's: "Catfish Feast". Feast your way right to an early grave. (141/1990/46)

Now, most of these restaurants do offer much healthier alternatives, and so I'm not going to bag on them too much. But some of those numbers above are just mind-numbing. But I guess you can always tell them to hold the mayo, right?

Good to See That An Obama Administration Priority Over Making a Decision on Afghanistan Is a Choreographed Attack on a News Organization.

Read below about how the Obama administration has put a priority in time and resources recently on attacking FoxNews and sending out the clowns (such as Axelrod and Emanuel, pictured above) to do the bidding (link below). "Not a real news organization" seems to be the theme and talking point of these people in reference to FoxNews. On their face, I agree with their comments: FoxNews is slanted to the right and, as a journalistic organization, should absolutely not be and should be ashamed of itself. But the utter gal and disingenuousness of these people to complain about FoxNews, when they have the overwelming majority of the national media (which is left-slanted) in their back pocket is purely slimey and, frankly, insulting to my intelligence. It's indicative of the "we want it all, we want everything" mentality of Obama & The Dems, as noted in this space previously: They completely control the federal government at the moment, and they have almost all of the national media onboard with them, but that's not enough for them. Sorry, but that kind of thinking smacks of an authoritarian-leaning outlook which I'm very much concerned about and which I very much fear from this current regime. But that aside, I must comment: When I was a young journalism student at the oldest and greatest journalism school in the country -- The University of Missouri-Columbia -- I was very much instilled with the spirit and belief that it was the job of the press and media (as the so-called "Fourth Estate") to incessantly keep an eye on the powers-that-be, to keep a close eye on the government officials who wield so much power over us, regardless of their party affiliation. Where has American journalism gone so utterly wrong?! At least on the national level, it's all slanted one way or the other, including FOXNEWS. That's not journalism, it's pure advocacy. And bottom line: What I see on a daily basis from these national news organizations makes me sick. OK, I'm done ranting & raving for one night, and I leave you in peace. ;)

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/18/weekinreview/18davidcarr.html?hpw

It Seems Very Clear to Me Why Obama Keeps Stalling on Adopting an Afghanistan Stategy. In a Word: Politics (What Else?).

It looks like he's going to stall this thing out as long as he possibly can until the Congress can (he hopes) pass some kind of health care reform bill. Because if he actually purports to adopt a coherent strategy for Afghanistan for the first time in his administration (which he should have done back in January), it will be controversial either way, and Obama does not want that gumming up the health care reform works. Smart politically? Probably. But who gives a rat's behind about politics where the lives of American boys (and ladies) are at stake? Obama needs to put politics aside (although I concede that's virtually impossible for just about any dem or repub president during my lifetime) and make a freakin' decision already -- you are the Commander in Chief, after all, Obama! I've been clear on this issue for months -- we have not had any kind of articulated or coherent plan in Afghanistan during the entire Obama administration (nor during much of the Bush years), and as a result, thousands of American lives have been lost while the politicians at home (both Bush and Obama) pay scant attention to Afghanistan. Well, I for one am SICK OF THIS $HIT. Obama needs to stop playing politics and put the lives of American troops above his petty political goals and aspirations. Period. Make a damn decision, for crying out loud! Either commit, with a coherent plan, to the new troops the commanders in the field say are necessary, or get us the hell out of there. Just do something!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6879511.ece

I Called This Shot the Day of the Balloon Boy Debacle...

Looks like the parents have an appointment with the hoosegaw. And deservedly so. CNN reports that charges are soon expected for perpetrating a hoax. And BTW: SHAME ON THEM for making every parent of a young child nationwide feel horrified as they watched that balloon speed through the air. I personally hope they both rot in hell someday.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/10/17/colorado.balloon.boy/index.html

"I AM NOT A SLUT!"

...says Meghan McCain (link below) in her best Richard M. Nixon impersonation. Apparently the above picture that McCain posted this week on Twitter has been raisin' quite the ruckus. But why? People need to loosen up. It reminds of the Super Bowl that I believe involved the Steelers and Seattle. Everyone went absolutely ape**** over Janet Jackson's nipple popping out, but no one had any problem with some of the extremely crude and tasteless commercials that aired during that broadcast, nor did anyone care about the rather pathetic taunting the Steelers were aiming at their opponents once the game was in hand. But I digress. And BTW -- If the McCain pic above offends you, be sure to scroll down to my Ladies Panel on the right side.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/16/meghan-mccain-dont-call-me-a-slut/

Idiot of the Year Nomination!

It goes to the Dad, and for that matter the Mom, of the 6-year-old who was supposedly flying over Colorado today as the nation watched and prayed for a safe outcome. Best case scenario: That this story is actually bona fide on its face -- meaning that Mom and Dad just happened to have a makeshift hot air balloon tethered in their backyard to which kiddos had unfettered access, such that situations like that which was presented could conceivably occur: Kiddo untethers the line, gets in the balloon, and heads for the moon -- even though he was told not to do that. That's the best case scenario -- and even that draws into question the competency of these parents to be caring for minor children. BUT HERE's the thing: I think that's a huge farce. Here we have a family that has recently appeared on a reality television show, so they come into this whole equation with a certain mindset. And then all of a sudden, we have an event that captivates the nation's attention, allegedly because the parents just happened to have a hot air balloon available in their backyard that the kids were told to stay away from?!? Smacks of the biggest and most idiotic publicity stunt since, well, I e-mailed the White House and told them to take note of me for having "fishy" opinions. Bottom line: Either these are the two worst parents in the country OR they totally orchestrated this event for the publicity. I suspect it's the latter, but either way it's rather sickening.

http://www.kdvr.com/news/kdvr-balloon-boy-found-101509,0,6905331.story

The Best TV Segment I've Seen in Awhile!

Check out the YouTube video below. On tonight's Hannity, sports (and general) commentator Stephen A. Smith and Michael Meyers from the New York Civil Rights Coalition appeared to talk about race issues. What followed was a very funny, highly entertaining exchange between two dudes who both struck me as very independent-minded (which I adore). If Hannity is smart (which I openly question, but in a joking fashion), he will bring back these 2 as a regular weekly segment, because the two of them together are quite unlike anything I've seen in awhile -- extremely entertaining, and they make you think at the same time. Check it out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8B-bJbxRBu0

Rest in Peace, Captain Lou.

Today I saw the sad news of Captain Lou Albano's passing. Captain Lou was one of the most classic "managers" from the pro wrestling world back when managers were a huge part of the storylines. Captain Lou's character had a rather abrasive edge to it. Best way I can describe it: Barney Frank with facial rubberband piercings, a huge belly, and a big curly mullet. In other words, Captain Lou was very entertaining, and that's the name of the game in that business. But I also fondly recall Captain Lou for the so-called "Rock'n'Wrestling Connection" which was based on his close connection to pop singer Cyndi Lauper. A truly memorable moment from the original MTV era was Lauper's video for Girls Just Wanna Have Fun, in which Captain Lou portrays her dad, starts ranting and raving at her (depicted in second pic above), and promptly gets placed in an arm lock by her. For entertaining me as well as he did for a number of years, my hat's off tonight to Captain Lou.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/TV/10/14/obit.albano/index.html

Let the Civil War Begin.

Today the Senate finance committee approved the so-called "Baucus bill" supported by Baucus the Montana senator (pictured above along with Obama and Pelosi). The bill does not contain a "public option." Other competing bills in the Senate and House do contain the public option. The unions are already lining up against the Baucus bill. So are the radical "progressives," likely including Pelosi based on recent statements she's made. The linked story below says the "war" now begins within the democratic party to see how far leftward the Baucus bill will be taken as the dems in the Senate attempt to merge it with a competing Senate bill (containing the public option), not to mention the House versions of the bill containing the public option. It should be interesting to observe this process from the sidelines. So what's my view on the Baucus bill? I have no idea, since it's 1300 pages long and not much of anyone has read it yet. I can guarantee you that repubs will oppose it about 99%. But to me, the presence of a public option in many of these bills has always been my biggest concern and source of opposition, because I'm convinced that just about any public option is designed to and will result ultimately result in a single payer system, i.e. total government control of American health insurance (which I very much oppose). Put another way, I may well be able to support the Baucus bill once I know more about it, but I highly suspect that the bill ultimately voted upon by the Senate and House is likely to bear little resemblace to the current Baucus bill. The big issue is whether or not the bill voted upon will contain a public option of some type. I think it likely will, but with some kind of "trigger" or other qualification that gives Obama his endgame: Which is that something passes on which he can claim victory and which is ultimately satisfactory to the far left (even if they'd like to see something stronger than what ultimately passes). Stay tuned...

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28256.html

Hilarious Utterance by Hannity Tonight.

I actually did "laugh out loud," although I was laughing at Hannity rather than with him. He said that the typical liberal definition of "peace" is the absence of conflict, and then he went on to provide his alternative definition. Hannity said his definition of "peace" includes a component of having the ability to bring about the "destruction" of your enemy. I'm not so sure that's quite what John Lennon had in mind when he asked us to Give Peace a Chance. But I did have to laugh. Turning the concept of peace completely on its ear: Only from a conservative! ;)

Sounds Like the Organized Aspect of the "Tea Party Movement" Has Just As Small of a Tent as the Republican Party From Which It Claims to be Separate.

In other words, if you're not a dyed in the wool conservative, they have no place for you. The headline story on Politico.com today (link below) talks about the organized aspect of the "tea partyers" and how they are currently looking to attack GOP politicians viewed as not being conservative enough, such as Florida's GOP Governor Charlie Crist. We see the same sort of thing from the far left all the time when it comes to attacking non-liberal democrats. Folks, these are two largely out-of-touch, small-tent parties which are controlled by their extremes. And there is at least 40% of this country that neither party represents in any way, shape or form -- a group just as big or bigger than the individual groups (i.e. liberals and conservatives) represented by the dems and repubs. That 40% needs to make a lot more noise and let these two parties know what we think about them. Until that happens, the dems and repubs will just do what they've always done -- try to get your vote by disingenuously acting more "moderate" during the general election, only to show their true colors once in office. And in the end, it's the same old story: We're not represented by anyone.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28157.html

An Incredibly Outrageous, Hypocritical & Blinded Statement By Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill.

As reported on Politico.com, the statement from yesterday to which I refer (from McCaskill's Twitter): "I feel that I'm in an alternative universe. For eight years some people called anyone who disagreed with the President's foreign policy or war in Iraq unpatriotic. Then in the course of two weeks, those same people cheer when the United States does not get selected for the Olympics and boo when our President is the unanimous choice for the Nobel Peace Prize. Go figure."

First a preface: Ma'am, you're correct that republicans did act outrageously when they were giddy about Obama's Olympics failure and when they exploded into a venemous frenzy (as I described it yesterday in this space) of outrage over Obama's absurd, yet unsolicited Nobel Peace Prize award. However, as a member of the democratic party, where in the you-know-what do you get off accusing anyone of living in an "alternative universe" or of lashing out at people who disagree? Ma'am, we just spent an entire summer in which members of your party used rhetoric conjuring up images of nazis, right-wing extremists and racists to describe anyone who disagreed with Obama & The Dems' health care reform desires, sweeping into their vile allegations all of the many Independent, non-liberal and non-conservative throngs who attended the town hall meetings. Ma'am, your party acted just as disgracefully, over and over and over again last summer, as republicans on their worst day. You are either completely blinded by political persuasion and ideology or you are completely disingenuous. Either way, you're out of touch, and your statement above is disgraceful given the conduct of your party last summer.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/1009/McCaskill_GOP_living_in_alternative_universal.html

Keep an Eye Out for a Hot New 2010 Series Called THE CHILLI PROJECT on VH1...

Starring Sandra “Pepa” Denton of Salt-N-Pepa, Chilli from TLC, and Tionna Smalls (pictured) the Legendary Big Apple Blogger! Check out the below link, although it reports that the new series remains un-named (and since I just revealed the name, I'm at least more up on things than that site!). I for one can't wait to watch Tionna & Company doing their thing on this new series!

http://blog.vh1.com/2009-06-29/more-sober-house-fit-club-pepa-and-chilli-on-the-way-from-vh1/

I Guess All the Vague Apologies for Past American Transgressions At Least Bought Him One Thing.

Barack Obama wins the Nobel Peace Prize today for his 9 months as American President. And of course the far right is immediately whipped into a venemous frenzy. Yawn, predictable, tired, same old story. Myself? I think awarding such a prize to a 9-month president is absurd, but I also couldn't really give a rat's behind. I think we have much bigger things in the country and internationally to be worrying about these days. So why a blog post from me on the issue? (1) Because this is what everyone's talking about today; and (2) I've got nothing better at the moment. And will I continue to ask myself questions and then proceed to answer them? No, this post is over.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28129.html

Another Day, Another Example of the Tiny Little Tents Which House the Republican & Democratic Parties.

Today's example comes from the Empire State, where New York conservatives are beating up one of their moderate fellow republicans (link below). This sort of thing, to me, always begs the question of why someone who is non-liberal or non-conservative would ever want to join either one of these two parties in the first place? Especially since the two parties are completely controlled by their extremes and have no place for you if you are not a part of that extreme. It also speaks to the need for Independents, non-conservatives and non-liberals to start uniting with a view towards running viable independent and/or third party candidates for elected office. The climate in the country right now is perfect for this to start occurring (dems continue to lose popularity, while repubs aren't exactly making huge popularity gains). It continues to be a crying shame how so many people never question or rebel against the far right and far left dominated two-party system that we allow to control this wonderful country. But regardless, I'll continue to make it a devoted principle.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28071.html

Can the Far Left Really Tolerate No Federal "Public Option"?

It would appear, at least with respect to the so-called "Baucus bill" currently in the final stages of development in the Senate, that things are heading the way of a bill that does not include a federal "public option," but rather only a "public option" administered by individual states or groups of states (see link below). I find it hard to believe that the far left would sign off on this, and if it appears that they are doing so in the days to come, I for one will be highly suspicious of what's really contained in this bill. But in the meantime, I'm not going to worry about it too much, since the senate finance committee hasn't been sharing any bill language with you or me at any recent juncture. (As resolved in this space several weeks ago, I'm not inclined to debate the merits of theoretical constructs such as "cooperatives" and "state options" until there's actually a concrete written bill available to the public and which appears to be a serious bill that will actually get to the senate or house floor). Stay tuned...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/07/state-run-health-insurance-plans-gain-support/

Strange Bedfellows.

The two ideologues from opposite political extremes squared off tonight on Hannity's show. It was actually a fairly calm, somewhat rational, and generally civil exchange. For being able to express themselves without anger, bitterness, name-calling or hatred -- i.e. what you typically see from these types of people (although perhaps not as much when you get a couple of them together in same room) -- I give them credit. As for the "debate" itself -- a bit bland since they talked almost the entire time about mortgage and lending industry issues (the subject of Moore's current documentary), which was interesting for about two minutes. I would have liked to have heard more about some of the other hot issues of the day, such as health care reform and Afghanistan, but that's only a small complaint.

I've Heard of the Bunker Mentality, But This Is Ridiculous!

The latest accusation in the sordid David Letterman scandal: That he had a "bunker" at the Ed Sullivan theater where he would take young staffers to have sex. Although it was referred to by staffers as "the bunker" (allegedly), apparently it was actually a makeshift bedroom high atop his show set. I wonder if Biff the Stagehand (if that guy's even still on the show) guarded the door? Regardless, sick stuff from a much older boss in relation to his much younger underling employees (these weren't some gals that he met in a bar). And this guy actually has had the nerve on a weekly basis to run a monologue asserting that Sarah Palin is deranged?

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv/2009/10/04/2009-10-04_untitled__4dave04m.html#

Weird Stuff from TV Network ABC.

Related two-part strangeness from television network ABC:

1. ABC's decision in the first place (which I'm just hearing about) to remake the obscure 1980's series "V" -- which concerned an extraterrestrial alien invasion of the world. "V" wasn't exactly the greatest example of 1980's television. It wasn't terrible, but it was fairly bland and mediocre. As such, it would seem odd to pick that series for a remake.

2. But hold on! A rumor being reported on the first link below is that the remake series, which is currently scheduled to start airing in November, is running into hesitancy at ABC because the series deals with "aliens," even though apparently the show's characters are not allowed to use the "A" word on the show. And if there's any truth to that, then why did ABC send the show into production in the first place (as the same link also notes)? Weird, weird, weird.

http://io9.com/5373641/is-v-in-trouble-because-abc-is-scared-of-aliens

http://www.seattlepi.com/tvguide/410544_tvgif25.html

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

Look at the GOP Non-Conservatives Raisin' a Ruckus!

In the past few days, both John McCain and NY Times columnist David Brooks (pictured second above) (both of whom I very must respect) have been seriously pissin' off the conservatives, including fellow Missourian Rush Slimebaugh (links below). The way I look at it, if you're getting under Slimebaugh's skin, you're doing something right. Couple this with how the democratic Blue Dogs have been angering and enraging to no end the ultra-radical-left-wing of the democratic party (they call themselves "progressives"), and we have the makings of some very nice stuff goin' on 'round here! Now, here's the next step we need to see: Some of the non-conservative repubs having some very serious discussions with the non-liberal dems, and realizing they have a ton of common ground, both amongst themselves and with a huge swath of the population of this country. I'm looking for a starting point for a very viable, very serious, very groundbreaking, centrist third party. I think the conditions are ripe for it, if only the political players will realize what they could accomplish if they went down the road I outline above. To quote one of my favorite rock stars and songwriters of all-time -- you may say I'm a dreamer, but [hopefully] I'm not the only one. I'm very encouraged by a lot of what I'm seeing out of the non-extreme-positioned politicians and pundits nationwide these days.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/27832.html
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/27844.html