Things come into my life at the strangest time.
Two weeks ago I was sitting in my living room watching a fundraier for public television, and they were selling the T Rex DVD, "Mark Bolan: Born to Boogie." I didn't know much about T Rex except Get It On and Jeepster, and man am I glad.
For whatever reason I started watching Bolan do his thing, and just got so into it. He is completely comfortable in his own skin like no one I've ever seen, and it just got me totally fired up. Zappa was close, but not like this guy.
I've been comfortable in my own for most of my life, but lately so much shit just seems to pile on top of the next that I started to feel off center, or weighed down. Between the radio show (fighting for a scrap, when you know full well you can and have done it as good as anyone ever has), life, and all the other garb, things have just taxed me. Going to Vegas so much doesn't help ;)
Anyway, seeing this guy energized me like nothing I've ever known. I fucking love it.
Fact is, Bolan lived like there was no tomorrow, and then one day, THERE WAS NO TOMORROW! He died in a car accident; went straight though the windshield. I'd feel like I shortchanged not only myself, but everyone I've ever known if I didn't live like today was my last.
I seriously used to be that guy to a fault, and then one day I had to reel it in. Somewhere along the way I took in way too much, and may have crossed over to a different side. While not completely a bad thing, it's just not how and where I want to be.
I say "Fuck" a lot. I think I need to say it even more.
Cheers, Mark Bolan.
(I think I know what band is going to intro my first show back tomorrow...)
Saturday, February 11, 2006
Friday, February 10, 2006
Why Isn't That Nice
Nothing like going back to your old place of employment, running into the horrible sales lady with the stank-ass perfume, who approaches you with the screeching jewish lady voice, jabba the hut arms, and caked on makeup, with open arms. "OH MY GOD, DAVID, YAW BACK!!!"
"Yeah, hold on. I have to run outside and get something."
Only to return to her waiting there, wanting that hug.
"So how are you?"
"I'm fine."
"So good to have you back!!!!"
I'm thinking, "Really? Oh, I must have you confused with the other bitch who announced that letting me go was a good thing when the boss confronted the whole company. I heard you were the first one to stand and back him up. Yeah, so overall, I think you suck ass, bitch."
But afterall, I can't burn the bridges too quickly...
"Yeah, hold on. I have to run outside and get something."
Only to return to her waiting there, wanting that hug.
"So how are you?"
"I'm fine."
"So good to have you back!!!!"
I'm thinking, "Really? Oh, I must have you confused with the other bitch who announced that letting me go was a good thing when the boss confronted the whole company. I heard you were the first one to stand and back him up. Yeah, so overall, I think you suck ass, bitch."
But afterall, I can't burn the bridges too quickly...
Dick's Gettin' Soft
And Libby is going down:
Former vice presidential aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby has told a federal grand jury that his "superiors" authorized him to leak highly sensitive intelligence to journalists, including a New York Times reporter he allegedly tipped off to the name of an undercover CIA operative.Further down in the article is this nugget:
The revelation is contained in a Jan. 23 letter from Special Prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald to lawyers for Libby, who was indicted in late October in connection with the leak of the operative's name. In the letter, Fitzgerald recounts testimony in which Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff admitted circulating portions of the National Intelligence Estimate to reporters in June and July 2003.
"It is our understanding that Mr. Libby testified that he was authorized to disclose information about the [National Intelligence Estimate] to the press by his superiors," Fitzgerald wrote.
The letter did not identify those superiors. The National Journal reported on its website Thursday that Cheney, who was Libby's direct boss at the time, had authorized the disclosures.
Noting that Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales had appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday, Cheney added: "As the attorney general pointed out this week, it's easy to imagine America's enemies shaking their heads in amazement that anyone would disclose this information, thereby giving notice to those enemies and [endangering] national security, putting our citizens at risk. But that is what happened."Right. Because while terrorists can mastermind plots to hijack planes and crash them into buildings, after having spent time in flight school, etc., they could never imagine that we'd actually tap their phones.
Thursday, February 09, 2006
Here's Why
The reason Kanye West won the Grammy is because "George Bush hates black people..."
Similarly, the reason Brokeback Mountain will win an Oscar is because George Bush and Dick Cheney hate gay people.
The entertainment industry, where everyone nods together.
Similarly, the reason Brokeback Mountain will win an Oscar is because George Bush and Dick Cheney hate gay people.
The entertainment industry, where everyone nods together.
The Great One
As much as I thought I wanted Janet Jones-Gretzky to be banging Rick Tocchet, I realized I do not. I like Wayne Gretzky too much.
Here's my take on the whole thing.
Having spent serious time with compulsive gamblers, bookies, drug dealers, and other shady people, I feel I have an insight to how people get caught in these webs. Wayne and Janet, and I'd bet even Tocchet, got their skates caught.
Okay, here we go.
Janet Jones-Gretzky (JJG) likes to place wagers on sports, and other things. She's a gambler. She's someone who made her way to fame, and along the way probably took some risks. She's the bored housewife of a man who overshadows EVERYONE. So what does she do? She likes to bet on games. I know couples where the girl likes to gamble much more than the guy.
Rick Tocchet and Wayne are good friends, and RT was primed to take over the Coyotes coaching job in the near future. Must say that I've always LOVED Rick Tocchet. Can honestly say part of the reason I wore #22 in soccer was because it was Tocchet's number on the Flyers. I just loved his intensity. There it is, something no one ever knew about me. Anyway, Tocchet and Wayne are close, and therefore he's also close with JJG.
So maybe JJG watches a few sporting events with Rick, or Rick sets up the Superbowl pool at a party they're at, or takes bets, whatever. Somehow JJG finds out that Rick takes bets, something Gretzky has always known. But to Wayne it's not really a big deal since he trusts Rick would never bet on hockey, and that so many people are gamblers. Because Tocchet probably says, "Yeah, I gotta guy, he'll take your bet..." people just assume it's a low key, no big deal kind of thing.
Here we have JJG, placing bets through Tocchet, and no one thinks anything of it. Granted, she's made bets totalling over a million dollars, but all in all, she's probably close to even, or just below. It doesn't really matter to the Gretzkys since they're LOADED. If the cost of JJG having fun is $50,000-$75,000 a year, that's no big deal at all. Let her have fun, as long as she's off my nuts.
Meanwhile, Tocchet is sending his bets into some shady guy/cop/mob-ring in New Jersey. The cop has known Tocchet for years and was probably taking his bets at some point face to face when he was on the Flyers. As Tocchet became wealthier he'd place more bets. He's a gambler; that's his thing. Then JJG starts placing bets through Rick, and others as well. Rick's guy, "can handle it. Don't worry about it..." The cop on the other end can handle whatever comes through since he's working for much bigger fish than probably even Tocchet is aware of. Plus, they love this kind of action. Tocchet's not going to ask questions of his bookie. You don't do that. Tocchet probably gets serious leeway on when he pays since he probably doesn't skip on bets, etc. A very comfortable relationship.
Even if these assumptions are wrong, and Tocchet knows more than this, i.e, if Tocchet knows who the cop works for, or that there is laundering, etc., that's fine too. That's Tocchet's issue. It's not JJG's issue, and it's certainly not Wayne's issue. Now sure, you do something illegal, no matter what it is, you run the risk of getting tangled in a bad situation. Especially when you're dealing with hundreds of thousands of dollars. To the Gretzkys that's not really a big deal, but to the government, the district attorney, and the public, that's a lot of money. So guess what? You're fucked. Guitly by association.
I would be willing to bet myself that Tocchet didn't know who he was totally dealing with, but is now sorta screwed. I'd bet my life JJG had no idea, and would take it even further that Wayne had little clue. He may have known Tocchet was a big gambler, but I'd be shocked to know he was aware of a money laundering scheme, or some other illegal activities, and still let his wife deal with Rick. In fact, they wouldn't deal with Rick if they knew what he could be connected to. And jeopardize their lives? Please, they'd get a house in Vegas first, so she could move there to place bets!
We'll see what happens here. I've been wrong once, or twice. Wait, no. Just once.
As for Wayne putting the whole thing on her and Rick, hey, I'd do the same shit. No reason to tarnish the name you've worked your whole life to build. If your wife was doing something illegal behind your back then she has to deal with it. If not, and he knows she's innocent, I'm sure he'll be there to support her, and anyone else wronged in all of this.
Afterall, he's the great one.
Here's my take on the whole thing.
Having spent serious time with compulsive gamblers, bookies, drug dealers, and other shady people, I feel I have an insight to how people get caught in these webs. Wayne and Janet, and I'd bet even Tocchet, got their skates caught.
Okay, here we go.
Janet Jones-Gretzky (JJG) likes to place wagers on sports, and other things. She's a gambler. She's someone who made her way to fame, and along the way probably took some risks. She's the bored housewife of a man who overshadows EVERYONE. So what does she do? She likes to bet on games. I know couples where the girl likes to gamble much more than the guy.
Rick Tocchet and Wayne are good friends, and RT was primed to take over the Coyotes coaching job in the near future. Must say that I've always LOVED Rick Tocchet. Can honestly say part of the reason I wore #22 in soccer was because it was Tocchet's number on the Flyers. I just loved his intensity. There it is, something no one ever knew about me. Anyway, Tocchet and Wayne are close, and therefore he's also close with JJG.
So maybe JJG watches a few sporting events with Rick, or Rick sets up the Superbowl pool at a party they're at, or takes bets, whatever. Somehow JJG finds out that Rick takes bets, something Gretzky has always known. But to Wayne it's not really a big deal since he trusts Rick would never bet on hockey, and that so many people are gamblers. Because Tocchet probably says, "Yeah, I gotta guy, he'll take your bet..." people just assume it's a low key, no big deal kind of thing.
Here we have JJG, placing bets through Tocchet, and no one thinks anything of it. Granted, she's made bets totalling over a million dollars, but all in all, she's probably close to even, or just below. It doesn't really matter to the Gretzkys since they're LOADED. If the cost of JJG having fun is $50,000-$75,000 a year, that's no big deal at all. Let her have fun, as long as she's off my nuts.
Meanwhile, Tocchet is sending his bets into some shady guy/cop/mob-ring in New Jersey. The cop has known Tocchet for years and was probably taking his bets at some point face to face when he was on the Flyers. As Tocchet became wealthier he'd place more bets. He's a gambler; that's his thing. Then JJG starts placing bets through Rick, and others as well. Rick's guy, "can handle it. Don't worry about it..." The cop on the other end can handle whatever comes through since he's working for much bigger fish than probably even Tocchet is aware of. Plus, they love this kind of action. Tocchet's not going to ask questions of his bookie. You don't do that. Tocchet probably gets serious leeway on when he pays since he probably doesn't skip on bets, etc. A very comfortable relationship.
Even if these assumptions are wrong, and Tocchet knows more than this, i.e, if Tocchet knows who the cop works for, or that there is laundering, etc., that's fine too. That's Tocchet's issue. It's not JJG's issue, and it's certainly not Wayne's issue. Now sure, you do something illegal, no matter what it is, you run the risk of getting tangled in a bad situation. Especially when you're dealing with hundreds of thousands of dollars. To the Gretzkys that's not really a big deal, but to the government, the district attorney, and the public, that's a lot of money. So guess what? You're fucked. Guitly by association.
I would be willing to bet myself that Tocchet didn't know who he was totally dealing with, but is now sorta screwed. I'd bet my life JJG had no idea, and would take it even further that Wayne had little clue. He may have known Tocchet was a big gambler, but I'd be shocked to know he was aware of a money laundering scheme, or some other illegal activities, and still let his wife deal with Rick. In fact, they wouldn't deal with Rick if they knew what he could be connected to. And jeopardize their lives? Please, they'd get a house in Vegas first, so she could move there to place bets!
We'll see what happens here. I've been wrong once, or twice. Wait, no. Just once.
As for Wayne putting the whole thing on her and Rick, hey, I'd do the same shit. No reason to tarnish the name you've worked your whole life to build. If your wife was doing something illegal behind your back then she has to deal with it. If not, and he knows she's innocent, I'm sure he'll be there to support her, and anyone else wronged in all of this.
Afterall, he's the great one.
Wednesday, February 08, 2006
Baba Bushey
CNN covered Bush live today as he unveiled his Budget:
I'm telling you today's speech was one for the ages. Maybe CSPAN has it online, but it was like the biggest crock of shit to ever hit the airwaves. I'm trying to think of the last time that I heard such a...oh, uhhhh, oh yeah. I remember. His last BUDGET. Has it been a year already?
Anyway, this one was just loaded with gems such as, "I make decisions all the time...that's what I do." As if no one knew this! Actually, we know he doesn't which is why he's always stressing that he does.
Holy shit. Am I onto something here? For another day.
It's amazing what happens when the speech isn't a big deal that the whole nation is going to turn in to watch. No one prepes him for days on end. There's fewer handlers. And the resulst? He's so bad. And by bad I mean, he's so frigggggin GOOOOOOOOD!
The war is coming. Wait, who am I kidding? The war has already begun. The war over American Global Dominance has been runnning strong since World War II, and the Bush crowd has only jacked it up another level.
Terms like "pro-growth", "capitalism", "competition", all these things meant to convince you that cutting the deficit, aka, benefits for the poor, and ripping resources away from struggling countries, is a good thing. In and of themselves, those terms are fine. As used to ruin this country, terrible.
Of course capitalism, as it's defined, is fine. Capitalism as it is put to action by absurdly pro-business world leaders, and pushed by politicians who roll into government and back into the corporate and back into government (Cheney, McNamara, Snow) world is bad.
Just so you know, on 9/11 almost 3,000 people were killed because millions were frustrated with the way America treats the world. The America that lives in "fear" and whose leaders use this fear of terrorists to push their world agenda. So on 9/11 when all these people died almost 25,000 other people died. Of what you wonder? 25,000 people died of HUNGER!. That's right, on the same day.
How would you rather die? In an instant, jumping because you're forced, or in a field, over days, of hunger, when you're only 24 years old and next to you is your baby, also dying of hunger, who is 4.
It's called the "Budget Reduction Act of 2006." We're reducing payments for Medicare, Medicaid, and Children's Health Insurance Programs (CHIP). He's compassionate. He's a conservative. He's a great American.
When Bush dies I pray it's off starvation. I'm hoping he'll forget that eating satisfies hunger and no one will be around to tell him to do it, or to feed him.
"You will hear the argument during the budget debates and, you know, all the noise coming out of Washington, that you need to raise taxes in order to balance the budget," Mr. Bush told the state's Business and Industry Association in Manchester."Nahh, nahhh. None of that needs to be done. All we need to do is cut programs that help the poor, and we're all good!!!"
I'm telling you today's speech was one for the ages. Maybe CSPAN has it online, but it was like the biggest crock of shit to ever hit the airwaves. I'm trying to think of the last time that I heard such a...oh, uhhhh, oh yeah. I remember. His last BUDGET. Has it been a year already?
Anyway, this one was just loaded with gems such as, "I make decisions all the time...that's what I do." As if no one knew this! Actually, we know he doesn't which is why he's always stressing that he does.
Holy shit. Am I onto something here? For another day.
It's amazing what happens when the speech isn't a big deal that the whole nation is going to turn in to watch. No one prepes him for days on end. There's fewer handlers. And the resulst? He's so bad. And by bad I mean, he's so frigggggin GOOOOOOOOD!
"I strongly reject the notion of becoming a protectionist nation," he said. "I don't think this country ought to fear the future. I don't think we ought to fear competition. I know we ought to shape the future with good policies out of Washington, D.C., and make sure that we're the pre-eminent economy in the world."Who fears the future? I know who. Conservatives. They fear everything. They fear death like no one's busines, hence why kids need to go die to protect their lives. I don't fear the future. In fact, I don't fear competition at all. I don't fear China. I don't fear, hmmm, who else is there? Hey, I'll say it again: I don't fear China, and uhhhh...hmmmm....ummmmm...China...
The war is coming. Wait, who am I kidding? The war has already begun. The war over American Global Dominance has been runnning strong since World War II, and the Bush crowd has only jacked it up another level.
Terms like "pro-growth", "capitalism", "competition", all these things meant to convince you that cutting the deficit, aka, benefits for the poor, and ripping resources away from struggling countries, is a good thing. In and of themselves, those terms are fine. As used to ruin this country, terrible.
Of course capitalism, as it's defined, is fine. Capitalism as it is put to action by absurdly pro-business world leaders, and pushed by politicians who roll into government and back into the corporate and back into government (Cheney, McNamara, Snow) world is bad.
Just so you know, on 9/11 almost 3,000 people were killed because millions were frustrated with the way America treats the world. The America that lives in "fear" and whose leaders use this fear of terrorists to push their world agenda. So on 9/11 when all these people died almost 25,000 other people died. Of what you wonder? 25,000 people died of HUNGER!. That's right, on the same day.
How would you rather die? In an instant, jumping because you're forced, or in a field, over days, of hunger, when you're only 24 years old and next to you is your baby, also dying of hunger, who is 4.
It's called the "Budget Reduction Act of 2006." We're reducing payments for Medicare, Medicaid, and Children's Health Insurance Programs (CHIP). He's compassionate. He's a conservative. He's a great American.
When Bush dies I pray it's off starvation. I'm hoping he'll forget that eating satisfies hunger and no one will be around to tell him to do it, or to feed him.
Must Be Nice
To be completely scared of a man who derives his power from an idiot:
The White House has been twisting arms to ensure that no Republican member votes against President Bush in the Senate Judiciary Committee’s investigation of the administration's unauthorized wiretapping.Read on.
Congressional sources said Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove has threatened to blacklist any Republican who votes against the president. The sources said the blacklist would mean a halt in any White House political or financial support of senators running for re-election in November...
Hawkey
I'm waiting for the videos of Rich Tocchet banging Janet Jones-Gretzky.
But there's something I don't understand:
But there's something I don't understand:
The State Police opened its investigation in October after receiving a tip that the trooper, Mr. Harney, was suspected of involvement in a gambling operation. Mr. Harney, 40, has been a trooper for eight years. He was arrested late Monday and charged with official misconduct, promoting gambling, money laundering and conspiracy. Officers who searched Mr. Harney's home in Marlton, N.J., said they found $27,000 in cash, Rolex watches worth $250,000 and nine plasma television sets, including two in a bathroom.What's the big deal? All the ritzy hotels have plasmas in the bathroom too.
Tuesday, February 07, 2006
Huh?
Are people really trying to make the argument that Darrell Jackson didn't push off when Seattle scored their first touchdown? I saw the play happen and immediately thought it was PI. Then I saw it again and confirmed it. Then I told some Seattle fan to walk next to, and I reached back and put my hand on his shoulder the lunged forward. I pointed out to him that I just created 3 feet of pass, which is what Jackson did.
Upon feeling the firm, but not overly forceful push of my palm, he ceeded to me that I was right.
That was CLEARLY pass interference.
At that speed, and when the player is trying to stick with the Wideout, pressure on the shoulder completely holds off the player, if even for a second. That was all Jackson needed to score.
Did you see the reaction of the two players after it happened? Jackson knew he did it, and the CB went ballistic. That's usually all the indication one needs to know if someone wrong went down.
Darrell Jackson gave the guy a stiff arm, and changed his momentun. Sorry, but that's a flag.
Next time Darrell Jackson should stay in bounds for a TD, which he was unable to do at another point.
Seattle didnt make plays, and that's the end of the story.
Upon feeling the firm, but not overly forceful push of my palm, he ceeded to me that I was right.
That was CLEARLY pass interference.
At that speed, and when the player is trying to stick with the Wideout, pressure on the shoulder completely holds off the player, if even for a second. That was all Jackson needed to score.
Did you see the reaction of the two players after it happened? Jackson knew he did it, and the CB went ballistic. That's usually all the indication one needs to know if someone wrong went down.
Darrell Jackson gave the guy a stiff arm, and changed his momentun. Sorry, but that's a flag.
Next time Darrell Jackson should stay in bounds for a TD, which he was unable to do at another point.
Seattle didnt make plays, and that's the end of the story.
Just Words
There's no chance in hell I would spend even half a second looking at the budget, so I leave to folks like Jonathon Weisman to do it for me.
Here are some choice cuts from his analysis:
What a fucking joke.
Now they discuss cutting the AMT, if only for a year. If I were a betting man I'd guarantee they will cut the AMT in 2007 for ONE YEAR. Why one year? Because it's the one year before the election of 2008. Ahh, but if they were to do it any longer their budget numbers, ONCE AGAIN, would not stick.
But seriously, who cares about budget numbers sticking? No one wakes up and says, "Man, I really hope there's good news today about the budget..." Well, Wall St does that, and some hardcore fiscal conservatives do as well, but overall, no one gives two dumps. In fact, Wall St will be more excited by the idea of lowering the AMT, and supposed fiscal conservatives have already proven they don't care about budgets, cuts, or even spending increases, since they voted for the man who has lied time and time again about the budget. Even still with these people caring, no one cares.
Conservatives will want to use the idea of an AMT cut in the races for 2008, so that's all that matters. Even if it has to rise, or be changed the following year. They will say "the Democrats want to raise your taxes..." Yeah, they do. But when they say "you're" they're referring to the richest people in America, the ones the Bush Administration gives the biggest free pass to.
Then there's the PBGC, which is where we're going to trim the budget. Good one.
All in all, they're just deceitful. They don't have the guts to propose their measures, like removing the AMT completely, or extending the Bush tax cuts beyond their sunset provisions. If they did the numbers would be too real, and that must be avoided. Slow cuts in programs is the way to go. Not letting people know their true intentions, that's the way to go.
If a program like Medicaid or CHIP is just getting by, they'll cut a little cash from it (like they proposed doing this past week with Medicare reimbursements), and say, "This program will not be affected. We're streamlining costs, and becoming more efficient..." It's the biggest bunch of crap.
Slowly cutting programs is the way to make a program fail, slowly. It may just be getting by now, so you take a program people support and make it worse. If you were to remove the program completely people would be up in arms about it, since they support the programs. They don't have the guts to do that. Instead they choose to make the programs fail, then introduce "competition" through privatization. They'll call this "adjusting" the program, or "fixing it to make it better," when the entire time they were doing everything possible to make it fail. We saw/see this with Social Security.
This is the conservative way. Basically, they conserve programs to make them available for private companies to get involved in. Then they talk about tax cuts for businesses, who then completely support Republicans, which helps keep them all remain in office. They create business opportunities within government for these people, while at the same time saying, "Government is not the solution..." Well, it's the solution for a lot of these people to make money. Of course, all this is also exactly the same reason the Conservatives don't want reforms on lobbying.
It's all one big shell game.
(not editing)
Here are some choice cuts from his analysis:
Those factors led Goldman Sachs economists to tell clients yesterday that the deficit forecasts are "unrealistic."and
"This budget is not going to happen," said Stanley E. Collender, a federal budget analyst at Financial Dynamics Business Communications. "Of all the budgets I've seen recently, this is the one going nowhere the fastest."Wow, nice. We spend $475 billion on the military and I'm supposed to get stiff over a possible savings of $3.6 billion? Okay. Good one.
What is included may prove equally unrealistic, Collender and other budget experts said. The budget includes a crackdown on tax cheats that is supposed to net more than $1.5 billion over the next five years and $3.6 billion over the next decade. But if such a crackdown is in the offing, the Internal Revenue Service has said very little about it.
After a difficult political struggle that badly divided congressional Republicans, lawmakers muscled through savings from Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), federal child support enforcement and the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. Before Bush has even signed that legislation, he is coming back for more. His budget proposes to wring out $4.9 billion more in savings from Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program, $17 million from child support enforcement and $16.7 billion from the federal pension insurance program through 2011.Oh, now I get it. We cut costs by ringing out savings to the health programs that cover the most needy and children, while also getting our savings from the PBGC as more and more businesses start to declare for bankruptcy. Nice. I like that. Cool President. Cool country.
What a fucking joke.
Douglas Holtz-Eakin, the recently retired director of the Congressional Budget Office, gave credit to Bush for putting entitlement cuts on the table. But the problems with the budget -- especially in not confronting the effects of the AMT and the war in Iraq -- have cropped up time and again, Holtz-Eakin said.Afterall, these are their "priorities," for now at least. See these weren't their priorities for the first 4 years when they would spend on every program possible while paying lip service to the idea of cuts. They were buying the electorate, which was way to selfish to care.
"There's lots of this we've seen before, and that's what Bolten said today: 'We're going to take our priorities and stick with them,' " said Holtz-Eakin, a former Bush White House economist. "This seems familiar because it is familiar."
Now they discuss cutting the AMT, if only for a year. If I were a betting man I'd guarantee they will cut the AMT in 2007 for ONE YEAR. Why one year? Because it's the one year before the election of 2008. Ahh, but if they were to do it any longer their budget numbers, ONCE AGAIN, would not stick.
But seriously, who cares about budget numbers sticking? No one wakes up and says, "Man, I really hope there's good news today about the budget..." Well, Wall St does that, and some hardcore fiscal conservatives do as well, but overall, no one gives two dumps. In fact, Wall St will be more excited by the idea of lowering the AMT, and supposed fiscal conservatives have already proven they don't care about budgets, cuts, or even spending increases, since they voted for the man who has lied time and time again about the budget. Even still with these people caring, no one cares.
Conservatives will want to use the idea of an AMT cut in the races for 2008, so that's all that matters. Even if it has to rise, or be changed the following year. They will say "the Democrats want to raise your taxes..." Yeah, they do. But when they say "you're" they're referring to the richest people in America, the ones the Bush Administration gives the biggest free pass to.
Then there's the PBGC, which is where we're going to trim the budget. Good one.
All in all, they're just deceitful. They don't have the guts to propose their measures, like removing the AMT completely, or extending the Bush tax cuts beyond their sunset provisions. If they did the numbers would be too real, and that must be avoided. Slow cuts in programs is the way to go. Not letting people know their true intentions, that's the way to go.
If a program like Medicaid or CHIP is just getting by, they'll cut a little cash from it (like they proposed doing this past week with Medicare reimbursements), and say, "This program will not be affected. We're streamlining costs, and becoming more efficient..." It's the biggest bunch of crap.
Slowly cutting programs is the way to make a program fail, slowly. It may just be getting by now, so you take a program people support and make it worse. If you were to remove the program completely people would be up in arms about it, since they support the programs. They don't have the guts to do that. Instead they choose to make the programs fail, then introduce "competition" through privatization. They'll call this "adjusting" the program, or "fixing it to make it better," when the entire time they were doing everything possible to make it fail. We saw/see this with Social Security.
This is the conservative way. Basically, they conserve programs to make them available for private companies to get involved in. Then they talk about tax cuts for businesses, who then completely support Republicans, which helps keep them all remain in office. They create business opportunities within government for these people, while at the same time saying, "Government is not the solution..." Well, it's the solution for a lot of these people to make money. Of course, all this is also exactly the same reason the Conservatives don't want reforms on lobbying.
It's all one big shell game.
(not editing)
Monday, February 06, 2006
I'm Sure Nothing Was Done
I'm sure no one in the White House deleted emails, ever.
And I'm sure people like Republican Dan Burton are going to look into it immediately, like they did with Clinton:
And I'm sure people like Republican Dan Burton are going to look into it immediately, like they did with Clinton:
This delay took on renewed significance last week. The New York Daily News reported that Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor investigating the Plame scandal, told lawyers representing Libby that "many emails from [Vice President] Cheney's office at the time of the Plame leak in 2003 have been deleted contrary to White House policy." The computer system at the White House is supposed to automatically archive emails sent by the president and his aides. For reasons that are still unclear, these emails -- which may or may not be relevant to the Plame investigation -- were not preserved."Yeah, we'll get right on that...after we reform lobbying..."
Could aides have used the 12-hour gap to conceal incriminating emails that pointed to staffers' role in exposing the identity of an undercover CIA agent? Prosecutors will no doubt explore this in some detail as the investigation continues, but it's important to note that political observers have understated the length of the delay itself -- by a factor of seven.
That's One Strong Fence
You need to see these photos: 
Had this been a war how fast do you think Politicians would be running to fix this? For how many years do you think Politicians, like Dick Cheney, would use the fear of these images against us? Do you know how much money would be dumped into the Military above and beyond what is already being spent had what happened in New Orleans been the result of a war? Lets not even guess for it's a waste of time. Already 50% of the budget goes to the military.
With all the destruction that has taken place it's no wonder Bush has declared war against his biggest enemy: THE ENVIRONMENT!!!
The thing is he's now negotiationg with this ENVIRONMENTAL TERRORIST THREAT, as just last week he said we must stop "relying on oil." Can you believe what you're hearing and seeing? Someone needs to get this guy a leather jacket and a set of water skis...
Had this been a war how fast do you think Politicians would be running to fix this? For how many years do you think Politicians, like Dick Cheney, would use the fear of these images against us? Do you know how much money would be dumped into the Military above and beyond what is already being spent had what happened in New Orleans been the result of a war? Lets not even guess for it's a waste of time. Already 50% of the budget goes to the military.
With all the destruction that has taken place it's no wonder Bush has declared war against his biggest enemy: THE ENVIRONMENT!!!
The thing is he's now negotiationg with this ENVIRONMENTAL TERRORIST THREAT, as just last week he said we must stop "relying on oil." Can you believe what you're hearing and seeing? Someone needs to get this guy a leather jacket and a set of water skis...
The Game
This weekend I picked up a book called "The Game" by Neil Strauss. Mr. Strauss penetrated the world of great hookup artists, and apparently took "the game" to another level. Right now I'm about 300 pages in, and frankly, I'm struggling to get to the end.
The book is a joke, not so much for its content, or their accomplishments, per se, but because of their desire to be who they are/became. I guess since I never really had their problem of not being able to meet women I may not understand, but still, it seems retarded.
Basically, it's the story of dorks who change their lives by manipulating women via certain strategies they've devised to make them seem desirable. There's an element to it that's certainly impressive, but to me it's pretty weak overall.
The men in the book have complete disregard for depth in relationships, and that's really where Mr. Strauss lost me. I do give him credit for turning his life around (and profiting from this), if that's what he wanted to do. But still, it's really says so much more about the guys who thought they had to do this than the women they hooked up with.
Anyway, somewhere in the book around page 200 the author discusses one of his strategies for breaking the ice with a woman. It goes something like this:
Guy approaches girl in bar, or elsewhere.
Guy: Hey, let me ask you a question. My friend just got a pair of dogs, and she can't think of what to name, but wants to use an 80s or 90s rock duo. What would you call them?
Gal: Um, I don't know?
Guy: C'mon, you have no ideas?
Gal: Ummm, how about Sonny and Cher?
Okay, where it goes from there is anyone's guess. However, another aspect of the book tells guys to "neg" girls, which if you're familiar with the term means to say something negative towards her, or a backhanded compliment, etc. This is to make her feel insecure, etc., and in the end desire you more. Quality stuff.
Well, it just so happens I was on a date with a girl in August and she came upon one of these tools who was putting this "game" to use. Either the person read the book, or was part of this online community of pickup artists, and was using the material in NYC bars. In my case it happened to be a bar called SRO (Standing Room Only) off of 9th Avenue.
So there I am on a date with a very attractive woman. She goes over to the bar to get us drinks. I notice she's talking to some guys, but I think nothing of it (thankfully, with all the issues I do have, jealousy isn't one of them). After getting us drinks she comes back to the table mortified; about to cry.
Me: What's the matter?
Her: Do I look like a slut to you?
Me: Of course not. Why?
Her: Well, some guy over there just told me I was dressed like a whore.
Me: What?
She gets a bit worked up. I calm her, and she tells me the whole story about this guy having a friend who wanted to name his/her dogs an 80s or 90s musical duet, to which she gave them a good choice. I remember it was a good choice, but do not remember what it was.
I calm her down, tell her to relax, and stay put. I walk over to see what's going on. Now there are 4 guys, and one me. I happened to hit it off with the bartender/owner a bit earlier, so I'm figuring if I punch someone in the face, even if there's 4 of them, he'll at least get involved on some level. I'm never worried about the bartender person except on the level that he too would attack me. As long as I think he'd break it up, at the very least, I'm okay with that. In addition, I had met the couple sitting next to us, and her boyfriend could see she was visibly upset. I felt he may come over as well, but whatever.
Okay, so I ask, "Did someone over here call her a whore?" I point towards her. All the guys turned around away from me.
Me: Really? If one of you wants to say it again I'd be happy to discuss it.
No one said anything. Granted, I was slightly bigger than the 4 of them, and more pissed off, but there were 4 of them. And by slightly, I mean, slightly.
Me: That's what I thought.
I walked away.
Ahh, but guess what? The book has answers for these situations. I am the Alpha Male, and there are ways to "neg" me as well, according to the book. The thing is my girl was with me, and no longer within shouting distance of the situation, so there was no "game" anymore. It was basically this: if someone is going to say something to me, I'm going to challenge, a punch will be thrown (He, I, or she-male), and that'll be that. Now sure, it's barbaric, and you can walk away, but then there's me: I'm not always so good at walking away.
My dad would tell me at a young age that in life "you're going to get beat up, but as long as you really connect across the bridge of someone's nose they'll never want to fight you again. It's best to throw first..." I always figured it's worth sending that message even if you have to pay a price on some level. Granted, people who are looking to fight, I avoid them. Story for another day...
Anyway, no one said a word. I went back to the table, calmed her down, and then we started to leave. On the way out I asked her which guy it was, and she pointed to him. I made some kind of comment. I noticed they were leaving the bar. Now we were outside.
Me: Lets wait here for a second cause I really want to see if this guy says anything.
Her: It's not necessary.
At this point three other guys came out of the bar, so I asked them.
Me: Hey, is that your buddy in there?
Guy 1: Yeah, why?
Me: Well, he had something to say to my friend here and I'd like him to either repeat it, or apologize.
This is bad for "the game" people. According to the book, at least up to this point, violence can be avoided by "negging." I tell you right now, if someone had something to me directly, violence would not have been avoided.
Guy 1: I don't think that's going to happen. (Starts to take his watch off).
Me: Wow, are you taking your watch off because you think me and you are going to go at it?
Other two guys, dressed completely differently, start to back away.
Guy 1 stares at me.
Me: Listen, you can choose to get involved, and that's fine, but I'm going to make sure you wished you didn't.
Right now I'm figuring if the first guy comes up the stairs to my left I'm going to approach him before he gets to the top step. I'll ask him to say something then, and if he does I can just kick him down the cement steps, and maybe deal with other guy. I realized the other two guys wanted no part of this because they were half way up the street. So now it'd was just me and Guy 1. Once his friend fell down the steps he would not get up, and I was bigger than the other guy. Although, being involved in ultimate fighting I am aware that size really doesn't matter. But it's a risk I'd take. If you're worried about your watch, well, I'm not that worried about you.
His friend didn't come out of the bar.
The girl I'm with starts to drag me away, and says, "Just forget it." So we leave.
Me: Hey, listen, I wouldn't leave with your friend here because I may come back.
Guy 1: You do that.
I walked her to the Subway, and never one to avoid challenges, I of course went back to the bar. Everyone was gone. I asked the bartender who they were. He told me he'd only seen the one guy before, the one who made the initial comment.
I wasn't even wasted, or worked up, etc. In fact, I'm more likely to avoid confrontation if I'm really worked up about something. I think I just wanted this guy to show respect for women in general. I've got a mom, and I've got sisters, and to think that someone would say that to one of them drives me nuts. I've always said on the radio, "If I can change one person, I'm doing a good job..." I figured I could change that guy.
Back to the book. These two guys were putting the "game" to work, and the two guys who were with them were watching them in action. The book discusses how pickup artists train other guys to do this. It was only upon reading the book that I realized this was the case.
Hopefully I can get Mr. Strauss on the air in two weeks because I think it'd be an interesting discussion. I can't even imagine how many guys have purchased this book, being that it was right up front at the aiport bookstore. I feel bad that I purhased it, so much so that I'm going to give away my copy on-air to any woman who wants it. I advise women to actually read this book. Not men.
The book is a joke, not so much for its content, or their accomplishments, per se, but because of their desire to be who they are/became. I guess since I never really had their problem of not being able to meet women I may not understand, but still, it seems retarded.
Basically, it's the story of dorks who change their lives by manipulating women via certain strategies they've devised to make them seem desirable. There's an element to it that's certainly impressive, but to me it's pretty weak overall.
The men in the book have complete disregard for depth in relationships, and that's really where Mr. Strauss lost me. I do give him credit for turning his life around (and profiting from this), if that's what he wanted to do. But still, it's really says so much more about the guys who thought they had to do this than the women they hooked up with.
Anyway, somewhere in the book around page 200 the author discusses one of his strategies for breaking the ice with a woman. It goes something like this:
Guy approaches girl in bar, or elsewhere.
Guy: Hey, let me ask you a question. My friend just got a pair of dogs, and she can't think of what to name, but wants to use an 80s or 90s rock duo. What would you call them?
Gal: Um, I don't know?
Guy: C'mon, you have no ideas?
Gal: Ummm, how about Sonny and Cher?
Okay, where it goes from there is anyone's guess. However, another aspect of the book tells guys to "neg" girls, which if you're familiar with the term means to say something negative towards her, or a backhanded compliment, etc. This is to make her feel insecure, etc., and in the end desire you more. Quality stuff.
Well, it just so happens I was on a date with a girl in August and she came upon one of these tools who was putting this "game" to use. Either the person read the book, or was part of this online community of pickup artists, and was using the material in NYC bars. In my case it happened to be a bar called SRO (Standing Room Only) off of 9th Avenue.
So there I am on a date with a very attractive woman. She goes over to the bar to get us drinks. I notice she's talking to some guys, but I think nothing of it (thankfully, with all the issues I do have, jealousy isn't one of them). After getting us drinks she comes back to the table mortified; about to cry.
Me: What's the matter?
Her: Do I look like a slut to you?
Me: Of course not. Why?
Her: Well, some guy over there just told me I was dressed like a whore.
Me: What?
She gets a bit worked up. I calm her, and she tells me the whole story about this guy having a friend who wanted to name his/her dogs an 80s or 90s musical duet, to which she gave them a good choice. I remember it was a good choice, but do not remember what it was.
I calm her down, tell her to relax, and stay put. I walk over to see what's going on. Now there are 4 guys, and one me. I happened to hit it off with the bartender/owner a bit earlier, so I'm figuring if I punch someone in the face, even if there's 4 of them, he'll at least get involved on some level. I'm never worried about the bartender person except on the level that he too would attack me. As long as I think he'd break it up, at the very least, I'm okay with that. In addition, I had met the couple sitting next to us, and her boyfriend could see she was visibly upset. I felt he may come over as well, but whatever.
Okay, so I ask, "Did someone over here call her a whore?" I point towards her. All the guys turned around away from me.
Me: Really? If one of you wants to say it again I'd be happy to discuss it.
No one said anything. Granted, I was slightly bigger than the 4 of them, and more pissed off, but there were 4 of them. And by slightly, I mean, slightly.
Me: That's what I thought.
I walked away.
Ahh, but guess what? The book has answers for these situations. I am the Alpha Male, and there are ways to "neg" me as well, according to the book. The thing is my girl was with me, and no longer within shouting distance of the situation, so there was no "game" anymore. It was basically this: if someone is going to say something to me, I'm going to challenge, a punch will be thrown (He, I, or she-male), and that'll be that. Now sure, it's barbaric, and you can walk away, but then there's me: I'm not always so good at walking away.
My dad would tell me at a young age that in life "you're going to get beat up, but as long as you really connect across the bridge of someone's nose they'll never want to fight you again. It's best to throw first..." I always figured it's worth sending that message even if you have to pay a price on some level. Granted, people who are looking to fight, I avoid them. Story for another day...
Anyway, no one said a word. I went back to the table, calmed her down, and then we started to leave. On the way out I asked her which guy it was, and she pointed to him. I made some kind of comment. I noticed they were leaving the bar. Now we were outside.
Me: Lets wait here for a second cause I really want to see if this guy says anything.
Her: It's not necessary.
At this point three other guys came out of the bar, so I asked them.
Me: Hey, is that your buddy in there?
Guy 1: Yeah, why?
Me: Well, he had something to say to my friend here and I'd like him to either repeat it, or apologize.
This is bad for "the game" people. According to the book, at least up to this point, violence can be avoided by "negging." I tell you right now, if someone had something to me directly, violence would not have been avoided.
Guy 1: I don't think that's going to happen. (Starts to take his watch off).
Me: Wow, are you taking your watch off because you think me and you are going to go at it?
Other two guys, dressed completely differently, start to back away.
Guy 1 stares at me.
Me: Listen, you can choose to get involved, and that's fine, but I'm going to make sure you wished you didn't.
Right now I'm figuring if the first guy comes up the stairs to my left I'm going to approach him before he gets to the top step. I'll ask him to say something then, and if he does I can just kick him down the cement steps, and maybe deal with other guy. I realized the other two guys wanted no part of this because they were half way up the street. So now it'd was just me and Guy 1. Once his friend fell down the steps he would not get up, and I was bigger than the other guy. Although, being involved in ultimate fighting I am aware that size really doesn't matter. But it's a risk I'd take. If you're worried about your watch, well, I'm not that worried about you.
His friend didn't come out of the bar.
The girl I'm with starts to drag me away, and says, "Just forget it." So we leave.
Me: Hey, listen, I wouldn't leave with your friend here because I may come back.
Guy 1: You do that.
I walked her to the Subway, and never one to avoid challenges, I of course went back to the bar. Everyone was gone. I asked the bartender who they were. He told me he'd only seen the one guy before, the one who made the initial comment.
I wasn't even wasted, or worked up, etc. In fact, I'm more likely to avoid confrontation if I'm really worked up about something. I think I just wanted this guy to show respect for women in general. I've got a mom, and I've got sisters, and to think that someone would say that to one of them drives me nuts. I've always said on the radio, "If I can change one person, I'm doing a good job..." I figured I could change that guy.
Back to the book. These two guys were putting the "game" to work, and the two guys who were with them were watching them in action. The book discusses how pickup artists train other guys to do this. It was only upon reading the book that I realized this was the case.
Hopefully I can get Mr. Strauss on the air in two weeks because I think it'd be an interesting discussion. I can't even imagine how many guys have purchased this book, being that it was right up front at the aiport bookstore. I feel bad that I purhased it, so much so that I'm going to give away my copy on-air to any woman who wants it. I advise women to actually read this book. Not men.
Back
Just got back from Vegas. So tiring.
So lame were the Seattle Seahawks. No one on their team made a real play except the one interception. Just a lame game.
It was a game of fewest mistakes.
Where do all the people come from down on the field during halftime? Were they previously in the stands? The stands looked pretty packed still, while girls who are so young their moms may not be of legal age to bang Ron Wood, are dancing inside the Rolling Stones tongue.
And lets talk about Keith Richards? Time has finally caught up to him, but in a different way. See, KR used to look like he was 62 when he was 35, and now he still looks the same as he did when he was 35. It's amazing. He's grown into his age, and actually looks almost normal.
Mick Jagger is one ugly MFer.
Didn't notice any great commercials, but probably because I wasn't paying attention.
I wonder if anyone asked Stevie Wonder his thoughts on the game.
Madden and Michaels, first Superbowl together? Haven't heard either of their voices during the big game in as long as I can remember.
ABC's production was pretty bad as well. Didn't show enough of player statistics during the game. Alexander had two decent runs in a row during the third and his stats weren't displayed. I only picked up on this because every fan in Vegas has a bet on every aspect of the game, Ex. Over/Under 89 Rush Yards Alexander. Apparently he went over.
In addition to the stats, ABC also posted "Beginning of 3rd Quarter" at the end of the period. Not a good job.
That game should have been called the "Rain Bowl" or the "Misery Bowl." Those two cities seem to be covered in rain, cold, clouds, whatever, all the time. Plus the game was in Detroit. Who wanted to be there? Expect more crap sites in the future.
Alright, alright. This should be a good week. Less than 6 days til finally back on the air...Word to do.
So lame were the Seattle Seahawks. No one on their team made a real play except the one interception. Just a lame game.
It was a game of fewest mistakes.
Where do all the people come from down on the field during halftime? Were they previously in the stands? The stands looked pretty packed still, while girls who are so young their moms may not be of legal age to bang Ron Wood, are dancing inside the Rolling Stones tongue.
And lets talk about Keith Richards? Time has finally caught up to him, but in a different way. See, KR used to look like he was 62 when he was 35, and now he still looks the same as he did when he was 35. It's amazing. He's grown into his age, and actually looks almost normal.
Mick Jagger is one ugly MFer.
Didn't notice any great commercials, but probably because I wasn't paying attention.
I wonder if anyone asked Stevie Wonder his thoughts on the game.
Madden and Michaels, first Superbowl together? Haven't heard either of their voices during the big game in as long as I can remember.
ABC's production was pretty bad as well. Didn't show enough of player statistics during the game. Alexander had two decent runs in a row during the third and his stats weren't displayed. I only picked up on this because every fan in Vegas has a bet on every aspect of the game, Ex. Over/Under 89 Rush Yards Alexander. Apparently he went over.
In addition to the stats, ABC also posted "Beginning of 3rd Quarter" at the end of the period. Not a good job.
That game should have been called the "Rain Bowl" or the "Misery Bowl." Those two cities seem to be covered in rain, cold, clouds, whatever, all the time. Plus the game was in Detroit. Who wanted to be there? Expect more crap sites in the future.
Alright, alright. This should be a good week. Less than 6 days til finally back on the air...Word to do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
