Fighting Glad

Say it ain't so Nigeria

2006-04-09T09:18:00.000-07:00

[I know, it's been a loooong time, sue me.]

Well, they found the so-called forgers of the document our President proffered to convince us that War with Iraq was necessary. The story appears here.

First off, can I say how dismayed I am to learn that it was members of the Nigerian consolate in Italy that produced these documents. What a stain on these people's hard earned reputation. Never let it be said that Nigerians have a reputation for anything but absolute honesty. I hope this forgery doesn't change that. Hopefully two bad apples can't spoil it for the whole bunch.

Second, F-ing Glad has obtained a transcribed copy of the actual forgery. Without further adieu:

Dear Sir/Madam,

My name is Lulu Peple Jumbo. I am the head of the uranium depository in Nigeria. I write you in respect of a foreign customer who has a Domicilliary accuont with our department. His name is Late Engr. Armen A. Seginian who died eight years ago in a plane crash in an island in Iran. The name of the island is, Kish Island located in Iran and it is about 45 minutes to UAE. By air. Since the demise of this our customer, Late Engr. Armen A. Seginian, who was an government contractor, I have kept a close watch of the records and accounts and since then nobody has come to claim the yellowcake uranium in this a/c as next of kin to the late Engineer. He had only 500 tons of yellowcake in his a/c and the a/c is coded. It is only an insider that could produce the code or password of the deposit particulars.

As it stands now, there is nobody in that position to produce the needed information other than my very self considering my position in the department. Based on the reason that nobody has come forward to claim the uranium as next of kin, I hereby ask for your cooperation in using your name as the next of kin to the deceased to send this material out to a foreign storage facility for mutual profit between you and I.

At this point I am the only one with the information because I have removed the transaction file from the safe. By this doing, what is required of you is to send an application laying claims of the shipment as next of kin to the late Engineer. I will need your full name and address, company or residential, so that i can computerize them to tally with next of kin column in the certificate of deposit.

Finally i want you to understand that the request for a foreigner as the next of kin is occassioned by the fact that the customer was a foreigner and for that reason alone a local cannot represent as next of kin. When you contact me, then we shall discuss on how much money will be required.

Trusting to hear from you,

I remain Respectfully yours,

Mr. Lulu Peple Jumbo.

As you can plainly see, this is a very official looking document. Clearly the President had every indication that this crucial transaction was imminent. That this turned out to be a Nigerian forgery is as big a surprise to me as anyone.

Vatican Gets It Right on ID

2006-01-19T10:08:00.000-08:00

The Official Vatican Newspaper just announced that Darwin's evolution is science and ID is not. (Here)

I think the Christian Fundies ought to listen to the Vatican here. The Catholics have been in the game a lot longer than the Baptists or Methodists and know a little something about opposing science. After all, they did lock up Galileo for suggesting that the Earth was not the center of the universe. (oops)

So the lesson to be leared is this: Science doesn't care what your magic book says. For a scientist, the hypothesis is only the beginning. You can base your hypothesis on the bible, but that is where it ends. Then you are on your own and must rely on empirical evidence. That evolution is proved and re-proved every time a biology paper is written, is evidence that the hypothesis is true.

I love how IDers talk about macro and micro evolution. They say ridiculous things like "We've never seen a mouse evolve into horse." Of course you haven't. It never happened. It is as if they have never seen a taxinomic tree before. It is as if they didn't understand that lots of small evolutions add up to a big one. A million little changes in some prehistoric animal and you end up with horses and mice and people.

They can't believe this for three reasons. They don't like to admit that we are animals. (they would say "just animals" as if the word were an insult) They don't like to admit that the planet has been around for more than 7,000 years. And they don't like to admit that the guy who wrote Genesis is about as factually uninformed on the way things work as could possibly be imagined.

But none of those reasons are rational.

At least the Vatican understands that. At least the Vatican has admitted that you can't actually take the bible literally. They ought to know. They put the Bible together. They selected the books that made the cut and the ones that didn't. They supposedly have the originals. They did most of the translations. They know it is a crock of shit as far as a scientific or historic instrument. Does it have intersting parables? Yes. Is it filled with ridiculous rules that NO ONE follows? Yes. Is it a collection of books written by men? Yes. The Vatican knows this. They had it put together.

The fundies need to stop with the ID. It really makes them look stupid. If you beilieve that Jesus is coming back soon, fine. Believe it. Just don't expect me to feel confident in your ability to make long term decisions on things that effect us all. Things like Climate change. Unlike you, I am unwilling to depend on Jesus to bail us out if we start a chain reaction we can't stop.

I'm not saying we are the next Venus quite yet. (where greenhouse gasses make the planet 400˚c hotter than it should be, hotter than Mercury even which is much closer to the sun) But messing with the climate of this planet is not a good idea. Unless of course the magical Jesus is just waiting for some temple or such to come and bail us out.

Freedom Isn't Free!

2006-01-11T08:55:00.000-08:00

I saw a pick up with one of those "Freedom Isn't Free" bumper stickers on it the other day. Of course it also had other stickers that suggested the driver was a conservative.

Even putting aside the fact that conservatives seem oh so willing to trade freedom for the possibility of increased security, (which is tough to put aside) it suddenly occurred to me that this is still a ridiculous bumpersticker for a republican to have on their car.

Here is a proposed revision that more adequately describes the true Republican sentiment as it pertains to freedom and its cost:

Freedom: actually less expensive than most people think. Cut taxes now.

John Saves Halloween! (Not Really)

2005-11-03T23:14:00.000-08:00

From: seattleslough@gmail.com
To: cavuto@foxnews.com
Cc: waronchristmas@johngibson.com, myword@foxnews.com
Subject: Halloween
Dear Neil,

You wrote:

Halloween. The thrill of simply walking up to a door, yelling "trick-or-treat," and seeing someone give you something for nothing. Something good. Something special.

It was a tough day to take off, what with all that was going on in the news.

But looking at their cowboy-hatted heads — yes, theirs fit — somehow this day, it mattered more than any of that news.

As a father and former boy myself, I too recall the joys and excitement of this holiday.

Therefore, I am asking you, a Fox News personality, to talk to John Gibson about expanding his Christmas crusade to all endangered holidays. This article from the Christian Science Monitor explains how much danger Halloween is actually in.

So far, Mr. Gibson has ignored my pleas.

A traditional American Holiday is to be protected, regardless of whether it is the ACLU or the Christian Coalition that is doing the damage. Right?

Sincerely,

A concerned citizen in Seattle, Washington

Me and John

2005-10-25T22:06:00.000-07:00

OK, I confess. Not only do I post occasionally here, and not only do I make snarky comments on other people's blogs, I also send snarky emails to various Fox News personalities. Yes, I am that pathetic. My favorite one-way friend is John Gibson. (Though I seem to remember one of my better missives being sent to O'Reilly in which I apologized to the poor underling that had to read it and commiserated with them about what a cheap bastard their boss must be, what with the 25% discount on Factor Gear™ they likely get as a Christmas bonus every year.

Of course, in the dozen or so messages I have sent to these clowns, I have only gotten two responses. One from Mike Straka (the Grrrrr guy) and one from my boy John. And I truly love John Gibson. He really doesn't get the attention of a Hannity or O'Reilly, but he is easily worthy. He is just as nutty. Anyway, his big obsession is The War on Christmas and he doesn't disappoint.

So here's what I recently wrote to my friend John:
(slightly edited for clarity)

To: waronchristmas@johngibson.com
From: seattleslough@gmail.com
Subject: Why a war?

John John John. . .

Someone has obviously been hitting the egg nogg early.

First you claim that Christians are 84% of the Country*. Then you talk about the "less than ten percent of this country that is not Christian." Huh? Percentages are based on the number 100 last I checked. 100 - 84 = 16 which is greater than "less than ten."

But that is just a dumb mistake. The really ridiculous thing you do is to basically fail to point out the difference between private and public displays. Christians are allowed to celebrate Christmas, Easter, Lent, Ash Wednesday and whatever other important religious holidays they think are significant in whatever way they want. Just like Jews, and Muslims, and whoever the hell celebrates Kwanzaa. It is when you somehow require the acquiescence of public institutions that problems arise.

Why are Christians so uniquely fragile that they need the State's recognition? We don't live in a country that recognizes Ramadan. Yet Muslims are thriving here. We don't live in a Kosher country, yet Jewish families are happy as the clams they can't eat. So why do Christians need more? What makes Christianity so much less able to sustain itself on its own? Why do Christian parents, for instance, need their children to pray during school? Isn't prayer twice daily at home enough? Why do Christian parents need to have a society that supports their beliefs? Can't they, like any Hindu family, do it as a family, and not lean on the government to help with the brainwashing?

What gives? Isn't the fact that Christmas displays are already in every department store, mall, restaurant, private club, private school, and 84% of the nation's living rooms and front yards enough for you? Do you really need to add courthouses and city hall? What does that say about you and your security in your own beliefs?

Don't get me wrong. I love the secular Christmas holiday. I decorate a tree every year. But I can't see how, for the life of me, having public institutions making similar displays helps me at all. Get over it dude. There are real problems in this country. This ain't one of them.

How many pieces are you going to waste on this non-story? It is two so far and we aren't even past Halloween. I know you have a book to shill, but who do you think you are, Bill O'Reilly?

Sincerely,
Seattle Slough
Seattle, WA

* I disagree here. The City University of New York's ARIS study, conducted in 2001, has Christians at about 76% of the population and they called over 50,000 Americans. Plus you'd have to concede that lots of people would claim to be Christians but are only saying so because of social pressure. As they say, there is an Atheist in every choir.

Plus, many Christians don't like or celebrate Christmas. Mostly because there is nothing Christian about it. The colors red and green, the symbol of the stag, the hanging of mistletoe, the burning of a decorated log, the jolly fat man - all come from the Pagan ritual of Yule, which was celebrated at the winter solstice long before the Romans brought Christianity to Northern Europe. Jesus wasn't born on the 25th of December. No one knows the date he was born. (Heck, no one knows the date he died, and people at least knew who he was then)

--
I will let you all know if I get a response. And I will surely post it here, no matter how thoroughly this renown and published Christmas Expert refutes my logic. Not saying he will. But just in case.

Thanks Fox! Yet again.

2005-10-24T14:20:00.000-07:00

From Fox News' Junk Science column comes this feeble attempt to debunk some recent global warming = bigger hurricanes claims:

"And as far as Wilma being the “strongest” hurricane on record, chief meteorologist for weatherunderground.com and former Hurricane Hunter flight meteorologist Jeff Masters told Reuters that similar storms could have occurred before the 1960s.

“Back then we didn't have satellites and we didn't have aircraft reconnaissance. So it's quite possible that a lot of those hurricanes [were as strong, or stronger than Wilma].We just weren't around there to see,” said Masters."

Let me get this straight. The statement is false because why now? No one claimed Wilma was the strongest hurricane ever. They said the strongest hurricane on record. Which this idiot seems to think includes storms not on record. Junk Science? How about that junk you're shooting into your arm dude. Wake the fuck up already.

Quite possibly the weakest debunking ever.

Half Mast

2005-10-22T09:00:00.000-07:00

BACKGROUND (PART I): I generally don't listen to right wing radio. Those brave souls at places like mediamatters.org have much tougher constitutions than I for putting up with hours and hours of this crap.

However, while my little pick-up's crappy radio still works, it's (high-tech for 1992) display is no longer functional. So I have to find radio stations by sound alone. Thus I caught, and am now paraphrasing, this exchange from Mike Gallagher's show. Gallagher was discussing the phoney uproar about a column which has the right all a titter.

BACKGROUND (PART II) Apparently, there is so little for the right to complain about that is not of their own making, they are resorting to picking on local columnists. In this case, a Dallas Morning News columnist responded to the vociferous concern of some of Georgia's finest about the proper way to display flags, which to them seemed more pressing than the unbelievable tragedy that led to the gesture in the first place.

Of course, Bill O'Reilly, who was named in the column, attacked the colunist first on his national television show. So a day or two later, I was not surprised to see that Mike Gallagher, an O'Reilly fill in, is tackling the same pressing issue on his national radio show:

Gallagher has some woman on the line who is expressing her concern (talking point) that if we fly the Mexican flag at half mast, do we have to do the same for all the other countries? Etc. Etc.

Gallagher says (again I am paraphrasing): "But aren't you offended that this columnist suggested that you and others were more upset about the flag issue than about the murder of those migrant workers?"

Woman: "Oh yeah, my aunt lives right across the street from where those murders happened. It could have been her!"

No shit. She wasn't concerned that five human beings were beat to death with aluminum baseball bats, another was shot, and another raped beyond than the fact that it could have been her aunt. What a horrible, horrible bitch that woman must be.

Gallagher thanked her and moved on. How bad are these people?

Not really off topic: If you haven't read this piece by Bill McKibben from Harpers about the so-called Christian right, you must. Immediately.

Balls and Strikes

2005-10-16T11:35:00.000-07:00

Been awhile. No excuses.

So we all remember way back when our current Chief Justice was entering his confirmation. He assuaged our fears by comparing himself to an umpire, and explained his judicial philosophy by stating:

"Umpires don't make the rules; they apply them. … They make sure everybody plays by the rules. … And I will remember that it's my job to call balls and strikes and not to pitch or bat."

Sounds good. Though I personally think a Supreme Court Justice is more like a member of the Major League Baseball Rules Committee. A low strike call today, is not a low strike call tomorrow or the next day. District and Superior Court Judges can make unpublished rulings, but not the Supreme Court. They make precedent. Every time.

But I digress. I do like the comparison. And using it illustrates how absurd the Miers pick is. If Judges are umpires, then sitting on the Supreme Court is being on the lead crew for the World Series. So here's the problem. Miers hasn't even umped a little league game, to say nothing of three or four solid years at AAA. Essentially, as a lawyer, she is a player, not an Ump.

So it isn't just that we have questions about her Strike Zone. We don't have any evidence that she knows the rules, to say nothing about her ability to apply them fairly.

To extend the baseball metaphor to its logical conclusion, imagine that Miers is a baseball player. A soon to be retired player. One who worked for George Bush and who has a somewhat mixed legacy and rumors of sexual disfunction. I am speaking of course, of Rafael Palmero. Would it be refreshing to allow Rafael to call a game or two? I don't know. Maybe. Maybe not. Would I want to see him standing behind the catcher at the outset of the World Series? Would anyone?

Thank God for the Surplus

2005-08-31T21:55:00.000-07:00

It is times like these, when the uncertain fury of nature utterly devestates a major city and the surrounding area; when hundreds of thousands of people are displaced; when looting and panic choke the waterlogged streets; it is times like these you are glad that we have a conservative in charge.

A liberal would have spent the trillion dollar surplus left over from the Clinton era and would have our National Guardsmen off somewhere on some cockamamie nation building exercise. Thank Jesus for GWB. The surplus will come in handy.

F-ing Glad is Back!

2005-08-13T20:26:00.000-07:00

First off: A hearty hello to all my visitors that come by searching for "lingeriemodels.com" on Yahoo. You peeps have been my most consistent and solid crew. Also a big hello to mister "italian solution" + "anal sex" who also found this site via Google. (in that particular search I am number two out of three on the entire internet, maybe me and Norman Mailer are wrong about the meaning of that term) Who knew that a post about porn would generate so much interest? Perhaps I should make more posts about porn.

After studying for and taking the Washington State Bar exam, I am finally done. I am tanned, rested, and ready to get back to posting. During my hiatus, I only posted occasionally on other sites. I even got myself banned from redstate.org for reasons I cannot fathom. (see comments to the "Thank's Again Fox! (sic)" post below for my feeble response.

So I am back, and there is much wingnuttery to tackle. Expect a new post at least once a week. In the meantime: How stupid is Neil Cavuto you ask? This stupid: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,165451,00.html

Can you believe something so stupid was actually put on the air on a nationwide broadcast? I can.

Thank's Again Fox!

2005-06-08T20:57:00.000-07:00

ressam
Originally uploaded by Seattle Slough.

The photos on the right are purported to be the recently captured al Qaeda cell which was discovered in Lodi, California. Recognize the guy on the right? I did. He is Ahmed Ressam a.k.a. the Millenium Bomber. He was captured while crossing into my home state in 1999.

Fox is such a bush league outfit. Why do I get the feeling that there are only like twelve people who work at Fox. That's why they are all opinion and no actual reporting. Reporting takes work. That's why I don't do it. Posting baseless opinions is so much simpler.

Makes you wonder who the guy on the left is.

Can Stem Cells Cure Stupidity?

2005-05-31T23:29:00.000-07:00

So our glorious leader is a bit miffed that the House of Reprentatives, last week, voted handily to provide federal funding for stem cell research.

You see, he came up with this ridiculous compromise that only allowed the use of existing stem cell lines while not allowing those extra embryos that are routinely discarded to be used for anything other than, well, garbage.

Sure these folks are encouraging the "adoption" of embryos, and I am all for it, however, only a tiny fraction of extra left-over embryos are "adopted" and a majority of those that are "adopted" die during implantation anyway.

So when the Republican controlled house votes 238-194 in favor of not falling any further behind South Korea in the area of curing diseases than we already are, Bush gets mad.

He says the bill "violates the clear standard I set four years ago."

Um. No it doesn't.

Our glorious leader seems to forget that he doesn't get to make the laws, and that Congress doesn't have to follow his standards, no matter how clear they are. You see, we have this little thing we like to call separation of powers. The Legislature writes the laws, and the President enforces them. Just like we learned in the sixth grade.

When the President lays out a standard, assuming it isn't violative of a statute or the Constitution, administrative agencies like the NIH are supposed to follow it. He can tell them what to do. Thus, they can presumably violate it.

No, Congress writes the laws. The law in this case is the 1996, Dickey Amendment passed by Congress and signed by Bill Clinton which seemingly outlawed the spending of federal funding on any research that would lead to the death of an embryo. Later, once it was discovered that stem cell lines could be isolated and replicated, Clinton (in true Clintonian fashion) found some wriggle room and the NIH started funding aspects of stem cell research which led to the sixty some cell lines we are stuck with today. (they just made sure it was private funding that did the killing and federal funding which did the replicating)

Bush crafted his compromise from this framework. His "clear standard" is merely his own squishy interpretation of the Dickey Amendment. Just as squishy as Clinton's. But it isn't like President Einstein understands that. He apparently thinks he wrote the law, and furthermore, that Congress, in passing a bill, somehow violated his law. It would be funny if it weren't so pathetic.

Sorry Mr. President. You don't get to tell Congress what it can or can't pass. You can veto it, and we all expect that you will (because Mr. Dobson told you to), but you cannot say they violated anything.

In a perfect world, the Senate companion to this bill will pass the Senate and it will become law (despite your inevitable veto) and then someone uses federal funding for stem cell research to discover a cure for stupidity. Then we will never have to endure another president like you.

Dare to dream.

That Silver Ring Sting

2005-05-22T20:29:00.000-07:00

Great.

I visited the website.
I went to the concert.
They told me that condoms don't work.
I took the pledge.

Like 88% of my fellow pledge-takers, I broke that pledge.
Of course I didn't use a condom. Now I have that Silver Ring Sting* when I pee.

Not really. You see, at my highschool they didn't teach us that condoms don't work. If we asked about the proper way to use a condom, they were allowed to tell us. They told us that when condoms were used properly, they almost never fail (which is true). They didn't play up the "emotional devastation" that follows from premarital sex because they knew that we had friends that had already had sex and weren't devestated by it. They didn't base our health education on a book written by long dead jews. They didn't waste our tax dollars spreading this nonsense.

This bullshit is as useless as Dare at getting kids to not have sex. 88% fail. Which means 12% succeed. (See, I rock at math) Heck, 12% probably couldn't get laid if they chose to.

And, those that do "succeed" are more likely than the rest of us to keep their "virginity" by employing the Italian Solution (which, for those of you not Italian is anal sex). Even if this nonsense wasn't a violation of the establishment clause, it is a public health disaster.

Remember, 88% break the pledge. That's 88% having sex. 88% who have never been taught how or why to use a condom.

Those that stay with the program? They are more likely to be married young and to have kids early in a young marriage. If that isn't a recipe for lots of future custody battles, I don't know what is. As these kids realize getting married at 19 isn't such a good idea. They will have lots of nice kids to divy up.

Thanks Christian Right. Yet again with the smart policy decisions based on that special book you claim God wrote but that you never actually read all the way through. (I mean really. If I thought that God himself had actually written a book, I would have read it. Honestly. If I thought Stephen King was God, I wouldn't have stopped reading The Dark Tower after book two.)

*As far as Google can tell me, I have coined the term "Silver Ring Sting." Feel free to use it, just give F-ing Glad a shout out when you do. And if you get it, don't blame me. And see a doctor and get rid of it. If you can.

James Dobson Was (nearly) Right

2005-04-27T21:51:00.000-07:00

File this under B for better late than never.

I wrote about this months ago on some other site. Possibly FreeRepublic, to which I belonged for about three days until I was kicked off and all traces of my existance wiped from the earth.

Anyway even though the fire over this has died down, it remains relevant. James Dobson, he of Focus on the Family, made an absolute laughing stock of himself when he challenged a pro-tolerance video sent to elementary schools. He was (mis?)quoted as saying Spongebob Squarepants was gay. He later denied saying this on Scarborough. Too bad he denied it. Spongebob IS gay. I have proof.

By all-accounts Spongebob is an animated representation of an anthropomorphic sea sponge. A sea sponge is a primative animal of the phylum Porifera. Almost all sea sponges fit into one of four catergories, though there are something around 15,000 species of sponge. However, even though there are thousands of varieties, a vast majority of them are, in essence, asexual.

Asexual, meaning that there are no male or female sponges, rather they can play either the male or female role depending on what is needed for hot spongy sexual reproduction. In a pinch some sponges can even play both roles and will reproduce asexually. So, basically, sponges swing both ways.

Because there is only one "sex" of sponge, by definition, they are homosexuals. They are gay. They engage in sex with animals that are sexually identical to themselves. If I had to pick the type of gay, I would have to say lesbian. No gay male would be caught anywhere near a vagina.

Dobson, in retreating from his non-claim that Spongebob was gay was not only wrong, he also passed up a great opportunity to educate our nation's children as to the fascinating reproductive nature of one of the oldests creatures on the planet.

Help Wanted

2005-04-22T21:22:00.000-07:00

I need a pornography enthusiast (or just a pornography tolerator really) who uses a Windows based system (I'm on a Mac, otherwise, believe me, I'd be all over this) and who wants to annoy Christian Fundamentalists.

The Story:

Xxxchurch is an anti-porn ministry. (Note that I have no problem with what they do. I am sure lots of people suffer from porn addiction and I'm sure the industry takes advantage of women. Hot young sexy women.)

This ministry offers a downloadable program that you can install to your windows based PC. Once installed, it monitors your browsing habits and records all the naughty sites you go to. Ho hum you say? Well this brilliant little program then notifies two "accountability partners" that you get to designate of your transgressions. Boo Ya.

So What Is The Plan?

In short, download the program and assign famous right-wing personalities as your accountability partners* for laughs.

Send them an introductory email. Use a gmail or yahoo account that you've specially made for this purpose. Try to sound totally on the up and up. Say that you've had some problems with pornography, that it is breaking up your marriage, but through Christ's love , you are working it out etc. etc. Tell them you have found this great program and want them, your hero, to hold you accountable. Reassure them that they won't have to do anything, because you will not possibly break down with them involved. Tell them that between you and your mother (your other accountability partner), you will have the strength.

Then be a good boy for a few weeks. After a while though, give in late one night. Nothing too raunchy. (and by the way, I think it sends them a list of domain names, so regardless of the actual content, it is the domain name that matters), something like www.lingeriemodels.com will be fine for the first slip. (As you may have noticed, lingeriemodels.com doesn't even have any porn. The first link is to Sears for crissakes.)

Immediately (well, ten minutes later) send them an email. Apologize. Maybe even make up a lame excuse. Reassure that you have prayed over it and that you realize how this is hurting you and your family, and you won't let them down again yadda yadda yadda.

Be a good boy for another week or so.

Slip-up again. Only a bit worse this time. Now there are multiple domain names, and they are getting a little more explicit. www.sexpix.com might be about the right tone. And instead of a few page views, there is a good half hour worth of clicking around.

Apologize profusely again. You shame is palpable.

Keep up this cycle about once per week. Only each time, the slip-up gets worse. The domain names should be overtly nasty by now. In other words, start giving them the good stuff. The following words should now be regularly appearing in their (now weekly) report: Ass, Sperm, MILF, Cock, Asian, Black and so on.

Keep up the guilty apologies as well. Each time. Possiby even explain that once-a-week is a big improvement for you, and that you are convinced that the fact that he (right-wing asshole) is there is keeping you from doing it every night, etc. etc. This might be a good time to mention that Mom is having some difficulties with the types of sites you have been ostensibly looking at.

Now we move into the final phase. If they are still on board, the domains should be getting more and more deviant. The words Teen, Gay, and Gang are with us, and are being joined by She-Male, Gag, and DP which are now sprinkling into the mix. (This could be followed by the inevitable movement into site names that suggest things that are downright illegal, which I am not suggesting at all, though it could be funny if done subtly enough. I.e. No on Kids. Yes on Horses.)

See how long you can string it out. See how long before they realize you are just fucking with them. If anyone does this, and relates an intersting story to me with proof (send to seattleslough@gmail.com), I will post it here. I promise.

Good luck, and if your porn habit is starting to have a negative impact on your life, may I suggest www.xxxchurch.com?

*Obviously you aren't going to get the actual email address of a Tom DeLay or James Dobson. (if you do, gimme gimme) However, columnists usually have e-mail addresses. All the Fox guys do.

Blue States

2005-04-20T23:03:00.000-07:00

In an article on Seattle area resident, and right wing columnist Michael Medved, a Seattle Weekly reporter apparently stumped Medved with the following question:

"If conservative ideas are so good, why is it that all the good places to live are so liberal?"

Excellent question. Fact is, most of the well-known, hard-core, multiple-hyphen-earning wing-nuts live in Liberal Blue States. Not in the heartland. Not in the deep south.

Here are all the pundits I could think of off-hand and where the internets tell me they currently reside.

Matt Drudge - Miami (Bluest part of Florida)
Rush Limbaugh - Ditto (Palm Beach) (also used to live in Manhattan)
Peggy Noonan - New York
Michael Medved - Washington State; in King County no less!
Michael Savage - Bay Area.
Sean Hannity - Blue New York (Long Island)
Bill O'Reilly - Blue New York as well.
Bill Kristol - Bluer than blue Washington D.C. (or technically McClean)
Pat Buchanan - Ditto.
Ann Coulter - Manhattan
Michelle Malkin - Blue State Maryland
Hugh Hewitt - Blue California
John Gibson - Blue New Jersey
Charles Krauthammer - Blue Maryland

So what is the deal here? If these people love RedState America so much, WHY DON'T THEY LIVE THERE?

I realize some of these people live in blue cities for their jobs (all the Fox guys), but others, (Medved, Savage, Coulter) have no such excuse. And with technology as it is, most of these people could live in Peru and still write their columns, or do their radio shows.

Fact is, they wouldn't live in Nebraska if you paid them. Not that I am saying there is anything wrong with Nebraska mind you, I just think is it pathetic that these hacks tell me that we don't "get it" here in the liberal blue states, when they choose to live here as well.

Put your money where your mouths are people.
If you like Red America so much, by all means . . .

Cheers! to the New Pope

2005-04-19T17:01:00.000-07:00

Wow. I did not see this coming at all. I had long insisted that Kelsey Grammar was far and away the most successful member of the Cheers cast. While Woody Harrelson was looking like an up and coming star for a while, you can't knock Kelsey's impressive body of work, (even if he is a republican; see post below). But man, John Ratzenberger just up and lapped the field by becoming Pope.

Not only is Ratzenberger the first American Pope, but he is also the first Pope to have been both married and divorced, to hold a black belt in Karate, and to have acted in more than one Pixar film (JPII provided the voice for one of the two acrobatic potato bugs in A Bug's Life).

Congratulations to John Ratzenberger. Pope Clavin the First.

Celebrity

2005-04-18T11:56:00.000-07:00

My favorite recurring theme that I hear again and again from the wing-nuts out there is all the griping about Tim Robbins, or Danny Glover, or Leonardo DiCaprio, or whoever, over their speaking their mind on some issue. Some utter hacks have even written books about it. Here's the funny thing: These people are full of shit.

These people are clearly just jealous that our celebrities are simply better than theirs. They certainly can't claim they don't worship celebrities. After all they are the one's who have elected a movie star President of the United States and President of the NRA. Ahem, Arnold Schwartzeneggar anyone?

Any party who can complain about Sean Penn in one breath and who will then turn around and invite a B-lister like Ron "Timecop" Silver to not only attend the Republican National Convention, but to speak to the delegates has got one of two things; serious balls, or serious issues.

No, the simple fact is, they are jealous. For every Toby Keith or Gerald McRaney they have, we can pull out multiple multiple A-list celebrities such as Bruce Springsteen, or George Clooney, or Willie Nelson, or Johnny Depp, or Julia Roberts, or Tom Hanks, or Robert Redford, etc. etc.

Look at how the wing-nut-osphere embraced Mel Gibson if you still don't believe me.

I was remided of this by the recent warm response to the train wreck that is former one-hit wonder Ted Nugent at the recent NRA annual meeting. Is there a person alive who thinks this insane asshole would even exist in our collective memories if he weren't an outspoken conservative? Anyone?

What next? "I cede my 10 minutes to the distinguished Senator Larry the Cable Guy"

Thanks Neil

2005-04-13T23:43:00.000-07:00

cavuto
Originally uploaded by Seattle Slough.

God I love Fox News.

Bad Calls

2005-04-11T22:39:00.000-07:00

While there are many, many decisions made by persons or groups that could be considered bad calls, there is a certain type of decision that rises above all others. That is where a person or group spends years, or even decades, building up a reputation for or mastery of something, and then, Poof! in a fit of stupidity throws it all away for a brief period forever tainting all they had accomplished before.

The textbook case of this is New Coke. Other good examples are Michael Jordan playing baseball (as eloquently described here) or Shaquille O'Neil doing whatever the hell this is supposed to be. Double special honoroable mention goes to Swatch for thinking big and dreaming up a world where . . . well you just gotta read this shit for yourself. Could possibly be the stupidest idea ever. Seriously.

Even if you aren't particularly great at something, that doesn't give you the right to expect us to appreciate you trying something else, or to even have an open mind about it. Take me, I write a seldom updated blog which sucks. Does that mean I can assume you want me to post songs from my band? Of course not.

All of which brings us to the topic of the week.

Remember when you could depend on the Republican Party? Sure they were mean, and heartless, and both penny-wise AND pound foolish. But you could count on them for one thing. They respected the rule of law. They were the real law and order types. If some judge said you were a felon, then by gosh, you were a felon. Even if you were actually innocent.

Well those days are long past. Now Republicans far and wide are suggesting outright treason against our federal courts. Expressing their desire to impeach judges for the content of their opinions, to ignore court orders, to deny the constitutionality of judicial review. Some are even suggesting that we rewrite the Constitution to reflect our "true christian founding" (I use quotes to signify that this is a "lie").

This is the Republican Party's New Coke moment. Trust me. Soon enough, the reasonable conservatives will look around them and say, "what the hell is going on?" Where's the Classic Coke I know and love? New Coke didn't last that long. Neither will this shit.

Next you are going to tell me that Republicans are ringing up defecits and supporting the Catholic Church . . .

By Popular Demand: Dead Popes!

2005-04-05T14:42:00.000-07:00

I really don't have a whole heck of a lot to share about the Pope. I mean, I don't think that he was evil, or that all Catholics are going to Hell or anything.

At the same time, I am not a huge fan of them telling people in Africa that condoms don't work. So, really I am torn. I'm certainly not happy that the Pope is dead, but it wasn't like he was going to live forever.

Thus, I will focus my energy on the ridiculous coverage surrounding the utterly foreseeable death of this extremely rich and powerful man.

So I just looked for the first story I could find, which was this glowing piece on CBS news.

Now, am I the only one out there that thinks it probably isn't such a good idea to start off talking about the Pope's "special connection with young people?" Especially in light of this. (Like the source? I do.)

Hmmm. Who else is noted for having a "special connection" with young people? Oh yes, this guy.

And it isn't just CBS. I have heard lots of people noting JP2's "special connection" with the young-uns. I wonder if this is just innocent stupidity, or a back handed way of reminding us of the Church's recent problems. I actually suspect the latter.

Along that same line, and also in the CBS article, is this line: "Ninety percent of priests are holy, decent men, and they've done nothing wrong[.]"

Gee, only 10% are child molesters? And to think I thought this was a big problem. Heck, that's only 40,000 child molesters!

Wouldn't be a blog without some Schiavo

2005-04-05T01:22:00.000-07:00

OK, I have to post this. All the other blogs have Shiavo stuff. Frankly, I'm fairly certain that Blogger will automatically deactivate any blog that doesn't contain the word Shiavo as a means of eliminating dead blogs. So, without further adieu . . .

Lots of the right to lifers, have expressed their wish that the Schiavo tragedy never be repeated. (Of course us 'death cult(ers)' can't wait for a chance to kill our own PSV wives) They claim that everyone has the right to live (it's in the freakin' Declaration of Independence for Crissakes!). They even say that even if no one had been willing to foot the bill to feed poor Terri, we as a 'culture of life' should have 'sided with life' and fed her anyway.

So, does this mean that the Right to Lifers are willing to state, on the record, that all Americans have a right to food? Good news for all homeless people! Free food for all. Of course it goes futher than that. Much further.

Ms. Schiavo's food was actually a food paste that was forced through a tube which was surgically implanted in her stomach. Hmmm. That sounds like medical stuff. Does that mean that all Americans have a right to health care? Sure seems like it. If poor braindead Terri deserves free hospitalization, (as some right to lifers have suggested) so do the rest of us. Socialized Medicine here we come! Boo Ya!

Thank's Terri Schiavo. You single handedly turned the Christain Right from 'personal responsibility' spouting assholes into Canadians. Congrats.

Debut Post

2005-04-04T21:45:00.000-07:00

Tired of being a thorn in other people's blog's sides, it is finally time to forge out on my own.

Yawn.

After determining that a new blog was, literally, the last thing the world needed, I decided that now was the perfect time to strike - when nobody was paying attention.

Way I see it, writing on this blog is like yelling into a well.

An empty well.

Not like this one:

If I yelled into that well, I would hear some echoey gibberish coming back at me.