Holy mother of GAWD - I'm not a fag hag but I swear I'd still hit it!
I'm not quite sure what I have to say about this. Other than, well, yuck.
It's safe to come out now. She's gone.
*cue "Ding Dong the Witch Is Dead"*
Today Sarah Palin gave another speech that she CLEARLY wrote herself ("..suggesting American apologetics...")(huh?) and invoking the troops for no apparent reason other than to give herself cover.
And it just wouldn't be Sarah Palin if she didn't invoke patriotic sacrifice in order to whine about how mistreeeeeeeeated she is by the press.
How 'bout, in honor of the American soldier, ya quit makin' things up.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Here's an interesting note I ran across this morning. It seems physicians are starting to get their little feelings hurt by people who comment about them on rate-my-MD-type websites. To the extent that some of them are starting to ask their patients to sign agreements promising not to make any such comments on the interwebs "without prior consent."
Some doctors advocate an aggressive response. Retired neurosurgeon Jeffrey Segal of Greensboro, N.C., is the founder of Medical Justice, a company that for a fee starting at $495 provides sample privacy agreements and monitors online comments for its 2,000 members. He said the agreements enable doctors to ask Web sites to remove comments by patients who have signed privacy agreements, and to take legal action against patients.
Three cheers for Rachel Maddow! Last night when she teased that she had a follow-up to last weeks heated debate with Grand Dragon Pat Buchanan, I was sure she was about to make some apology to the old bastard for making him look like a total asshole on her show. Y'know, something the corporate heads at MSNBC (who seem totally in love with Pat for some reason) forced down her throat.
Instead, she DISMANTLED him! It was awesome.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Sarah Palin resigns as Governor of Alaska - but is it really a surprise to anyone that this woman
is not a serious politician? I mean, come on - all Sarah has ever wanted is her cute little mug to be featured in HD on 72-inch plasmas all over the good ol' US of A. She's a shallow airhead who wants to be a celebutante, and now that she's got her chance? You betcha she's done playin' Governor of Alaska! Darn tootin'.
Can you believe this woman was nearly a heartbeat away from the Presidency? We'll be seeing her on Fox News following Huckabee in 5,4,3,2...
Hat tip: CNN
Just feeling compelled to add my 2 cents to KC's post about the Lori Drew case FINALLY being thrown out.
This is a case that should never have gone to trial. Because, as the judge correctly (albeit way too belatedly) pointed out, Lori Drew is certainly not the only person ever to have violated the MySpace terms of service. In fact, millions of people on Myspace lie about their identities, their ages, their genders, etc. There are people on MySpace impersonating food items, cartoon characters, even celebrities.
Who is that masked bandit? Should this guy get 3 years in jail too?
The statute under which Ms. Drew was prosecuted is a hacking statute, intended to punish someone who unlawfully gains access to a computer network. Meaning, getting in and destroying files, or accessing personal information, business trade secrets or government secrets, etc. The statute was not intended to punish people who impersonate someone, or something, else on social networking sites, although an overly ambitious prosecutor - who used this case as a tool to get publicity - attempted to twist the hacking statute to fit the facts of the Lori Drew case. It was referred to as a "novel" legal theory. (Here's a tip: when prosecutors assert "novel" interpretations of the law? They're overreaching.)
The problem with this "novel" theory was that, if allowed, it would criminalize the behavior of anyone who lies about any bit of information they provide in order to participate on any kind of web site -- IF (and this is a big if) the website in question requires you to provide that information and to promise that the information you provide is true. In other words, it's ok to provide false information on some websites, so long as you don't have to check a box at the bottom of the registration page indicating that you filled out the form truthfully. As even Judge Wu recognized:
It basically leaves it up to a website owner to determine what is a crime...And therefore it criminalizes what would be a breach of contract.
The law simply cannot let the same behavior be legal in some instances and illegal in others, depending solely on the whims of "Tom." The law has to apply equally to everyone, and has to be clear enough so that everyone understands what is and is not acceptable, lawful behavior. To that end, the emotional argument - the outrage - regarding the result of Ms. Drew's conduct here is misplaced. If lying about your personal information, thereby violating a website's terms of service, is a crime, it's a crime - regardless of the outcome. If you point a gun at someone and pull the trigger and miss, you're just as guilty of the crime of attempted murder as you are if you shoot the victim in the head and cause permanent brain damage.
The prosecutor attempted this ridiculous theory in order to make a name for himself, and to appease public outrage that there was no criminal statute under which Lori Drew could be prosecuted in the state where all the events occurred - Missouri. What I don't understand is why the family of Megan Meier has never brought a civil lawsuit against Lori Drew for the tort of Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, which seems to fit these facts perfectly. The Meiers could prevail in such a lawsuit if they could show: (1) Drew acted intentionally or recklessly; (2) Drew's conduct was "extreme and outrageous"; and (3) the conduct was the cause (4) of severe emotional distress. The kind of "extreme and outrageous" conduct needed to support this kind of claim is more than just insults and hurt feelings, but rather must be "so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community." Although this is a high standard, there seems to be so much outrage about Lori Drew's behavior that I think a judge would let the case go to a jury, and I think the Meiers would have a good chance of winning. This would be a much better use of judicial resources - not to mention the emotional resources of the Meier family - than the pursuit of a criminal conviction under a flawed legal theory.
Look, it's hard to have any sympathy for Lori Drew. She's clearly a shady character. While I'm not in favor of making loosely defined "cyber bullying" illegal or actionable (and good luck getting that past the First Amendment!), I think a grown woman taking on a 12-year-old girl like that is despicable. And I'd have absolutely no sympathy for her if she were being pursued for civil liability. But she should never have been prosecuted for a crime. And so the real villain in this situation is the coward in the black robe, Judge George H. Wu.
Judge Wu should have dismissed this case early in the proceedings. Instead, he let the prosecutor grand stand. He let the Meier family (and a large chunk of the public) get its hopes up. He let Lori Drew and/or her pro bono attorneys expend vast sums of money, needlessly, in her defense. He wasted judicial resources and he let the law get twisted into a pretzel. Judge Wu knew this result was coming for months, yet he kept putting it off and putting it off, delaying the inevitable because he didn't want to deal with the visceral public outrage that was sure to follow. What's worse, he apparently told the prosecutor that he would have allowed felony convictions under the anti-hacking statute to stand if the jury hadn't acquitted Drew of those charges. WHAT??? Proving that not only is Judge Wu spineless, he's also clueless.
A small victory for the rule of law. But a revelation that there's a lot going on in our justice system that's just, well, rotten.
Even we can be patriotic, see? Happy 4th of July weekend!
Hap tip to the LA Times. My only question is - what took so long?
A federal judge tentatively decided today to dismiss the case against a Missouri woman who had been convicted of computer fraud stemming from an Internet hoax that prompted a teenage girl to commit suicide.
Lori Drew of Dardenne Prairie, Mo., was convicted in November of three misdemeanor counts of illegally accessing a protected computer.
The decision by U.S. District Judge George H. Wu will not become final until his written ruling is filed, probably next week. Wu said he was concerned that if Drew was found guilty of violating the terms of service in using MySpace, anyone who violated the terms could be convicted of a crime.
Drew 50, was to be sentenced in May but Wu had delayed the sentencing until today, saying he wanted to consider the defense motion to dismiss the entire case.
A federal jury convicted Drew in November of the three misdemeanor charges but deadlocked on a felony conspiracy charge that would have carried a sentence of up to 20 years in prison.
The verdict was a blow to prosecutors who indicted Drew on what some called tenuous legal grounds after authorities in Missouri declined to file criminal charges. Drew was widely criticized after the 2006 death of eighth-grader Megan Meier, an acquaintance of Drew's daughter.
Prosecutors said Drew, her daughter and her 18-year-old employee used a fake profile of a teenage boy to flirt with Megan online via Beverly Hills-based MySpace. Megan hanged herself with a belt after getting a message, purportedly from the boy, telling her that "the world would be a better place without you."
At the May hearing, Wu grilled Assistant U.S. Atty. Mark Krause at length about whether the government had prosecuted Drew under the appropriate laws when they asserted that violating MySpace's terms of service amounted to a crime.
"Is a misdemeanor committed by the conduct which is done every single day by millions and millions of people?" Wu asked. "If these people do read [the terms of service] and still say they're 40 when they are 45, is that a misdemeanor?"
Krause argued that Drew's acts were criminal because she signed up for the fake account with the intention of harming Megan by humiliating her. Drew knew her acts were illegal and deleted the account shortly after Megan's death to cover up her crime, he contended.
Prosecutors had asked Wu to impose a sentence of three years. Defense attorneys argued for probation and vehemently criticized the prosecution in court filings, calling its argument "utterly absurd."
Megan's parents, Ron and Tina Meier, made statements in court in May describing their daughter as a loving but vulnerable girl who went fishing with her father and cared deeply for her friends. They asked Wu to impose the maximum prison sentence.
"It just sickens me that it was an adult playing with the mind of a 13-year-old child," Ron Meier said in May.
Sheesh! Now that I've recovered from the tragic and totally unexpected death of Michael "102-lbs of narcotic-plied man-flesh" Jackson, I take a look around the news cycle and see some sad tales, indeed. What the fuck is WRONG with people that they can't pull their heads out of their asses and bow out of public life gracefully.
Today's blog is an ode to those who stayed a little too long at the ball. Where to start?
Ok, let's start with this dude:
Oh yes, the guy who made "Hiking the Appalachian Trail" a euphemism.
OK, Governor. If it had just been a matter of a little infidelity that would be one thing. But you can't hold a weepy press conference confessing your sins but not resigning and THEN let it come out that you'd been fucking your mistress on the taxpayer dollar. Oh, but it doesn't end there! Now he confesses to having "crossed the line" with other women as well (but not sexually, by golly, because apparently he's TWELVE and distinguishes between getting to second and third base, this guy.) And he STILL won't resign! No - because he says it is GOD'S WILL that he remain in office. God's Will??!?!?!? Are you fucking kidding me??? How many times does God have to totally SMITE you before you buy a clue and run as far away from the state house as you possibly can? And by smite you I mean, of course, cause you to have massive, over-share-y verbal diarrhea. Ran, man! RUN!!!!!
Which brings me to our next clueless lingerer at the party:
His wife. She told him in no uncertain terms that he could NOT go visit his mistress - despite his persistent begging. And when she kicked him out of the house so that he could think about their marriage he RAN IMMEDIATELY TO FUCK HIS MISTRESS!!! And yet she still wants to reconcile. Then, today, he TELLS THE ASSOCIATED PRESS that the other woman is is "soul mate" but that he's going to "try to fall back in love with his wife." WHAT?!?!?!? And you are sitting around WAITING for this asshole???? So much for your dignity lady! I think that walked out the door along with the "spiritual advisor" you allowed to accompany this douchebag on a trip to see his soul mate in New York.
Seriously lady, you give new meaning to the concept of being STOOPID.
Who else - who else refused to walk away after things got really, really ugly? Oh! In the spirit of bi-partisanship let's go with this douchebag!
Holy mother of God. It was bad enough when we found out he'd continued running for President after admitting to his cancer-stricken wife that he'd had an affair. Now we come to find out that he was running for President of the United States after having made a sex tape with his mistress. ON PURPOSE?!?!??! Let's not forget, the lady in question was a professional videographer here. And we're not even to the part where he's allegedly the father of this skank's baby, either.
I'm patting myself on the back for realizing, years ago, that John Edwards was just a leeeetle too slick, and a leeeetle too good-looking, and a leeeetle too much of a plaintiffs' attorney for me to buy into too much of his shit. But I wasn't expecting it to get this bad. Even some nasty, greasy wanna-be rockstar celebutard I know has better sense than to spill his seed all over the floor in front of a camera. And that's saying something, I tell ya!
And Elizabeth Edwards? CUT HIM THE FUCK LOOSE! I'm not featuring you out of respect for your health condition, even if you have been whoring your family's misfortunes around the Oprah/Larry King circuit to pimp your book.
Instead of Mrs. Edwards, my final clueless wallflower is, inevitably, her Royal Shallowness:
You betcha!
She hasn't even declared she's running for President in 2012 yet, and already the McCain staff is coming out of the woodwork to tell us what a loser she is.
Lady, my fondest wish would be to watch you try to take on Barack Obama in a few debates in 2012, what with all that winking and "Can I call you Barry?" and whatnot. But it ain't never gonna happen. You should have gone back to Alaska with your tail tucked between your legs and just hoped that the folks up there were too busy rubbing two sticks together to stay warm to notice what a jackass you just made of yourself and your state.
And now, we pay "homidge" [/inside joke] to a few who knew when to walk away - indeed, they knew when to run.
He got out early. Enough said.
Well, apparently by not putting up a stink she got out just in time.
Bitch saw that one coming, and dodged a bullet.
Hey, it looks like he's got nice favorability ratings these days. Not to mention, no one's talking about what a cultish, plural marriage-loving MORMON he is anymore.
And finally:
We'll just call him Al. As opposed to the Worst President Ever in the History of American History. Ever.
Kudos to those who saw the light and got the fuck out of dodge. There's something to be said about not getting what you wanted. Ask me - I just saw the photographic evidence of the dude I was in love with at my 20th high school reunion. Whew! Dodged the bullet there.
In honor of being lazy on Monday and a late-morning cup of coffee, I guess.
Let's hope we don't kill anyone.
Who knew that by making "Beat It" our 8o's Song of the Day we would actually KILL HIM????
LA Times Reports Michael Jackson is dead at age 50.
If you're going to cheat on your wife and disappear with your lover to a foreign country for a few days - while being the Chief Executive of a state - maybe you should just own up to it instead of trying to weasel your way out of it by lying:
COLUMBIA, S.C. — Gov. Mark Sanford told a newspaper he was in Argentina, not hiking the Appalachian Trail as his staff had told the public to explain his sudden absence. He said he "wanted to do something exotic" to unwind after losing a fight over federal stimulus money.
The State newspaper reported that Sanford arrived Wednesday morning at Atlanta's international airport on a flight from Buenos Aires, where he drove along the coast of what he called a "beautiful" city.
Sanford apologized at a press conference to his family, and his staff at a press conference for "the way that I let them down." He said he had a conversation with his father-in-law a few weeks ago about where "my heart was ... laying my cards on the table."
"There are moral absolutes, God's law is indeed there to protect you from yourself. There are consequences if you breach that. This press conference is a consequence."
At first it was not clear what Sanford was referencing.
"I've been unfaithful to my wife and I've developed a relationship with what stared as a dear, dear friend from Argentina," he finally said. The affair has been going on for a year, he later explained.
Sanford announced that he is resigning as head of the Republican Governors Association.
"I spent the past five days of my life crying in Argentina," he said, "so I could come back and cry here."
GUESS who returns in August! 2 of our favorite dudes of all time.
*suppresses a squee!!!!*
Stealing a little from Unique Scoop today. From the Don't Hyphenate Your Name file...
Ah, there are many ways to know you've found your soul mate. But this one is surely the most certain.
I don't really enjoy Jane's show - she is even more shrieky and sensational than Nancy (I know it's hard to believe). She doesn't even do macabre, tacky montages of dead babies with creepy theme music by Michael Jackson. So why do I watch Jane's show? For one reason, of course...
THAT MULLET!!!!!
What the fuck is going on there? And who on god's green earth told her that was a good look? The only person with a worse mullet than Jane was:
But even Phil Spector has moved on to a more respectable coif, thanks to the fact that they don't allow rugs in prison:
Maybe Jane murdered one of the babies that Nancy features on her show, and then she too can be liberated from her tragic mullet.
God Bless Stephen Colbert
| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| Murder in the White House - Fly Widow Interview | ||||
| ||||
Looks like some whackadoodle in Oregon can't help herself when it comes to rabbits. Poor Miriam Sakewitz keeps getting caught with a bunch of live, and a bunch of dead, bunnies.
Problems for Sakewitz started in October 2006 when police in Hillsboro, about 15 miles west of Portland, found and confiscated nearly 250 rabbits in her home, including about 100 dead ones in freezers and refrigerators.
Police said she broke into the facility where the survivors were being cared for in January 2007 and stole most of them back. Authorities found her a few days later in Chehalis, Wash., with eight live rabbits and two dead ones in her car. Another 130 rabbits were recovered at a nearby horse farm.
Sakewitz was sentenced in April 2007 to five years probation and was banned from owning or controlling animals. She also was told not to go within 100 yards of a rabbit.
On Tuesday, Washington County animal control officers removed eight adult rabbits, five young ones and a dead one from Sakewitz's hotel room, Tigard police spokesman Jim Wolf said.
Why has she always gotta have at least one dead one on her?
So a handful of wingnut-ty Sarah Palin supporters (are there any other kind of Sarah Palin supporters?) showed up to PROTEST at the David Letterman show, after he made a joke about her teenage daughter getting knocked up by Alex Rodriguez and apologized - twice.
These beacons of feminist outrage ended up calling Letterman's son a "bastard" and his wife a "slut." When they weren't busy decrying SOCIALISM and screaching about how we should CLOSE THE BORDERS!
Wha? Oh what did you really expect from a bunch of fucking Palin supporters? I hope someone will show up at their homes and places up business to call their children and spouses ugly epithets as well. Keep the cycle going!!!
In case you needed more evidence that racism is alive and well - despite the fact that our President is a BLACK MAN!!1!!1! - check out this lovely email sent by a Republican (natch) staffer in Tennessee:
(CNN) -- The chairman of Tennessee's Democratic Party wants a Republican legislative aide fired for sending out a "reprehensible" e-mail depicting President Obama as two cartoonish white eyes peering from a black background.
Obama's image is in the last square of a collage containing portraits of the previous 43 U.S. presidents. The e-mail, which was sent to other GOP staff members, was posted on the Internet Monday.
Sherri Goforth, an administrative assistant to state Sen. Diane Black, R-Gallatin, has admitted she sent the e-mail May 28 with the title "Historical Keepsake Photo." She said, without elaborating, that she mistakenly sent it "to the wrong list of people."
According to the Tennessean, a Nashville newspaper, a note on the e-mail said it was paid for by the Tennessee Republican Party, but GOP officials denied they produced it. Black leads the Tennessee Senate Republican Caucus.
There was no comment from the White House as of Tuesday afternoon.
Black rebuked Goforth but didn't dismiss her.
"I want to be sure that everyone understands that the communication was sent without my knowledge," Black said Tuesday afternoon. "It absolutely does not represent the beliefs or opinions of my office. I want to be very clear about that."
The senator said as soon as she found out about the e-mail, she consulted the Legislature's human resources office, then followed their advice.
"Ms. Goforth did get a verbal reprimand as well as a very strongly worded reprimand, written, that was put in her file that if this should ever occur again, that she would be terminated," Black said.
"This is an employee who has had a stellar record," Black said. She added that Goforth has worked in state government for more than 20 years, and has had a clean record.
"We followed policy. And that's what you do when someone breaks the rules, you follow policy," she said.
A phone message left for Goforth by CNN was not answered.
"Is this indicative of what Senate Republicans think about our commander-in-chief?" asked state Democratic Party Chairman Chip Forrester in a statement posted on the party's Web site.
"I am calling on Sen. Black to reject this racist smear and fire this staffer who, on state government time, on state government computers, using a state government e-mail account, launched this bigoted attack on our president," Forrester said. "Keeping her on the staff would send the message that this type of behavior is condoned by the Senate Republican Caucus."
"This e-mail is reprehensible, insults the office of the president, and is embarrassing to all Tennesseans regardless of political party," Forrester said.
Goforth told Christian Grantham of the Web site Nashville Is Talking that she had received a letter of reprimand from her superiors but will remain on the job.
Grantham said Goforth told him she felt "very bad about accidentally sending it to the wrong list" of people. "I inadvertently hit the wrong button," Grantham quoted Goforth as saying. "I'm very sick about it, and it's one of those things I can't change or take back."
Forrester, in his Web posting, said, "Ms. Goforth does not seem to understand what she did wrong. She has apologized for 'sending [the e-mail] to the wrong list of people.' I believe that any list of people would have recognized this e-mail as offensive and hateful."
State Rep. Johnny Shaw, D-Bolivar, a member of the black and Democratic caucuses, said Goforth should be dismissed.
"I don't think a reprimand is enough. I think this lady needs to go. I don't think she should be a part of the people who represent the state of Tennessee," Shaw said.
He said Goforth and Black, as well as Republican Lt. Gov. and Senate Speaker Ron Ramsey, should make public apologies for the incident.
"I am appalled. It's despicable. It's disgusting. It should not have happened, but it does happen," Shaw said. "It is the president of our country that we're talking about."
Several other black Democratic lawmakers agreed Goforth should quit.
"The last thing we need in the state of Tennessee is to send out the impression and the image that we are still stuck in some backwater mentality and culture that feels it's OK to depict the president of the United States in that fashion," state Rep. John Deberry Jr., D-Memphis, told CNN Radio.
Forrester added: "Unfortunately, Sherri Goforth's e-mail joins the list of shameful episodes by Tennessee Republicans, from the infamous 'Birds of a Feather' direct-mail piece that featured black crows with the heads of Barack Obama and [African-American] Rep. Nathan Vaughn, to the "Barack the Magic Negro" song that former Tennessee GOP Party Chairman Chip Saltsman sent to RNC members during his failed campaign for RNC chair."
I discovered on my way home tonight that today is apparently National Man Day.
CELESTINE, Ind. — Two Indiana men have declared Monday "National Man Day" only to find there's already a romantic holiday that falls on that date.
Ninteen-year-old Joel Longanecker of Celestine and his 26-year-old brother Aaron, of Indianapolis, have for months been rallying thousands to their masculine cause on Facebook. More than 260,000 people have pledged to "stand up and do manly things" on Man Day.
But it turns out June 15 is also "Sneak a Kiss Day," a day for sweethearts to steal smooches from their sweeties.
The Man Day organizers urge participants to take part in "manly" activities such as football, hunting or watching Rocky movies. They claim real men don't "sneak" kisses.
Ah, the frustration that there's a Democrat in the White House - and that HE'S BLACK! bubbles over.
This guy used to be the chairman of the South Carolina Elections Commission too. And we still have to wonder whether there's voter discrimination going on???
I gotta admit, I'm a Top Chef junkie. And I was set to be swept away by the new Top Chef Masters, which started this week. Unfortunately, this concept SUCKS.
First of all, there's no Tom Colicchio. There's not Padma. This is pretty much vacation time for anyone associated with the regular show. Instead, there's a bunch of judges and hosts I've never heard of before, and 24 "celebrity" chefs competing for charity. Oh, but wait - they really aren't competing. Instead of all competing together and getting picked off, one at a time, this season has the chefs "competing" in groups of 4. Each week, a new group of 4 goes up and only one of the 4 goes on to compete in the final group. Which might be ok, if it didn't look like each group of 4 is going to consist of 3 up-and-coming chefs nobody's ever heard of and one ringer.
On the first episode, the ringer was legendary chef Hubert Keller. The other three were nice, young guys who've won some awards but, let's face it, are no Hubert Keller. No, these three are some saps who have offered themselves up as Top Chef chum in order to get a little free publicity for the one episode when they'll appear. The judges are very kind to them, everyone's a great chef, no one gets harsh criticism, and the ringer proceeds to the finals.
The real master chefs know they're in for the finals. Chefs like Rick Bayless, John Besh, Wylie Dufresne, and the afore-mentioned Keller aren't seriously going to compete with no-names. And in the end, I predict, those will be the finalists. Which may very well make the last 4 or 5 episodes worth watching. But the first half of the season is rigged. And that sucks.
Nor should you "friend" an attorney appearing before you and discuss the case you are presiding over on each others Facebook walls:
Judge Reprimanded for Friending Lawyer and Googling Litigant
A North Carolina judge has been reprimanded for “friending” a lawyer in a pending case, posting and reading messages about the litigation, and accessing the website of the opposing party.
Judge B. Carlton Terry Jr. and lawyer Charles Shieck both posted messages about the child custody and support case heard last September, the Lexington Dispatch reports. Terry also accessed the website of the opposing litigant and cited a poem she had posted there, according to the April 1 public reprimand (PDF) by the North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission.
The opinion says Terry and Shieck first discussed Facebook in chambers in the presence of the opposing lawyer in the case, Jessie Conley, who said she didn’t know what Facebook was and didn’t have time for it. After the discussion, Terry and Shieck friended each other. Shieck later posted a Facebook reference to the issue of whether his client had had an affair, saying “How do I prove a negative?” according to the opinion. Shieck also wrote, “I have a wise judge.”
Terry told Conley about Shieck’s posts the day after he read them. The same day during court proceedings he referenced the poem he found and posted a Facebook message that the case was in its last day of trial. After the hearing concluded, Terry disclosed to both parties that he had visited the website of Conley’s client, where he found the poem, and then disqualified himself at the request of Conley.
Terry told investigators the poem had suggested that Conley’s client was not as bitter as he first thought and had given him hope for the litigants’ children. He also cooperated in the investigation, the opinion says.
The opinion says the ex parte communications and the independent gathering of information indicated a disregard of the principles of judicial conduct.
My mom had to put her dog down this morning. Niles was a great love, if a little neurotic. Ok, a lot neurotic. He made everybody smile. I'll miss him.
Sleep peacefully, sweet boy.
The fake controversy created by the Republicans over Judge Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the Supreme Court mostly just has me rolling my eyes - she's not a racist, she's not a radical, and she will be confirmed. End of story. But what has bothered me more than the pretend outrage that an "activist judge" (read: liberal) is going to be our next Supreme Court Justice is the passive-aggressive suggestions by some that Judge Sotomayor somehow isn't qualified - or, in the words of Karl Rove and Jeffrey Rosen (quoting an anonymous former law clerk), she's just "not that smart."
What? I'm sorry, WHAT??? This is a woman who graduated summa cum laude from Princeton University and Yale Law School. She has served as a federal district court judge and a federal appellate judge for 17 years. I think it's fair to criticize her, and any judge, on their record - as in, you can believe that a judge is wrong, or misguided, or has an agenda. I believe all of those things about, for example, Justice Antonin Scalia. But would I EVER deign to call him "not that smart"? Would anyone? No, they wouldn't. And you know why no one will ever call Justice Scalia's intelligence into question, or for that matter, the intelligence of Clarence Thomas (who, by the way, never utters a peep on the bench)? Because they are men, and they are presumptively "smart enough" to be Supreme Court Justices. But a woman? Not so much.
A lot has been made about Judge Sotomayor's ethnicity as the first Latino Supreme Court Justice, and rightly so. It's an important milestone for both the Latino community and the country as a whole, and given the fact that 8 out of 9 people on the Supreme Court are currently White (and the other one is Clarence Thomas, so the Court is for all intents and purposes 100% White), I welcome the diversity she will bring to the bench based on her life experience as a Latina. But I think the disparaging comments about her intellect - the insinuation that somehow, this very accomplished woman doesn't deserve this high honor - is as much about gender as it is race. Remember, she will be only the THIRD woman in the history of the Court if she is confirmed. This sense that Judge Sotomayor can't play with the big boys - that her intellect is no match for the great (male) minds already on the Court - has a serious overtone of misogyny that is disturbing to me. Judge Sotomayor's resume is just as impressive, if not more so, than those of the men who currently sit on the Court. But there is this underlying insinuation that her accomplishments don't matter; that still, she's somehow not good enough.
I find this to be incredibly depressing. As a (relatively) young woman, and a lawyer, I have always assumed that someday, I will reach some objective level of "success" or accomplishment that will insulate me from the accusation that I'm "not that smart," or that I don't belong playing with the big boys. Because regardless of the fact that more than half of the people in law school nowadays are women, I assure you - the law is still very much an old boys' club. I do not look forward to getting older, but I have been looking forward to the respect I assumed age and experience would confer upon me. Of course, I will never be a federal judge with 17 years of distinguished service on the bench - and I certainly don't have the Princeton/Yale Law pedigree - but nonetheless, I felt that I would eventually pay my dues and have enough experience that no one could seriously question my competency, or suggest that whatever accolades I receive or the good work I've done isn't actually that good. In short, I've always assumed that my work would speak for itself, regardless of my gender.
Unfortunately, the attacks on Judge Sotomayor have convinced me otherwise. Her substantial accomplishments have been attacked and undermined, with the implication being that she has been given a pass in life because of her race and her gender. Will we ever realize Dr. King's dream - to be judged on the content of our character, rather than the color of our skin? Will our humanity ever trump our sexuality? And most importantly - will we ever question the accomplishments of White men the way we do women and people of color as somehow "undeserved" because they are the beneficiaries of centuries of race and gender privilege? Sadly, something tells me no.
Awwww, Dumbass Liar Sarah Palin's got her wittle feewings hurt by big, bad meanie David Letterman. Because he apparently took some pot shots at her, saying that she sports a "slutty flight attendant look." Well, sir! Now the Shrew is going to milk this for all that it's worth, playing her beloved victim card and whining that her femininity is under attack again.
Am I supposed to be outraged, as a woman, because David Letterman referred to someone's look as "slutty"? Maybe I could muster a little more smpathy for Sarah if she hadn't posed for the cover of Vogue looking pretty much, well, slutty.
You can't use it as both a shield and a weapon, Sarah. Like all the rest of us gals - you have to choose.
Oh for the love of god.
Joe Scarborough calls Jon Stewart angry? Joe "can you see the steam coming out of my ears? shall I make more" Scarborough calls someone angry?
Nice try to get some publicity for your stupid book, Joe. Don't take the bait, Jon.
Oh Heavens to Betsy! Today is some kind of very big day in the book debut for morning talk show host and Republican hack Joe Scarborough. He's got some new piece of Republican propaganda out now, titled The Last Great Hope.
Seriously? Joe the Morning Meltdown Scarborough is our last great hope? Somebody hold me. Now.
Let's take just a moment to deconstruct this, shall we?
I have not read Mr. Scarborough's book. Nor do I intend to invest the money and energy necessary to do so. Let's just say that I've absorbed all the relevant info I need to from the ubiquitously vapid Mika Brezezinksi, Joe's own perpetually flapping mouth, and the always helpful interwebs.
It all boils down to this: Joe *brewed by Starbucks!* has decided to resurrect his political career by regurgitating the myths of the great Republican demagogue: Ronald Reagan. Oooohhhhh, according to old Joe (as many of his bretheren) Ronnie was the Great Uniter. His policies were favorable to everyman, across the board. He cut taxes. He fostered smaller government. He the champion of small business and individual freedoms. All hail!!!
Point in fact, Ronald Reagan did none of those things. Tax cuts? Reagan instituted imposing federal taxes on unemployment benefits. Genius! Let's tax money that's coming from the government in the first place. The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away. Smaller government? Reagan oversaw the largest national defense spending ever, while purporting to need less taxpayer money to support his little fetish. Uniter? Reagan united one group: WHITE MEN. And he united them on the backs of women and minorities. He created the myth of the black "welfare queen," taking your taxpayer dollars to subsidize her lifestyle of wearing fur coats and eating bonbons in the housing projects. Oh yeah, whatever. IT WAS A LIE! Reagan capitalized on the hostility of white men towards minorities - the fear that if YOU get ahead, I have to take a step back. Reagan had absolutely no personal moral dog in the abortion fight, but he fostered the pro-life rhetoric just because it helped his party platform to do so.
Ronald Reagan had one lasting legacy: he smoked out the Soviets and continued outspending them on defense so as to bring the Cold War to its inevitable close. But understand - the Soviets were never going to be able to win the Cold War so long as the US maintained a ridiculous level of defense spending. In order to try to match us on that front, the Soviets had to basically rob their own citizens and cut off all social programs. The result was a persistent situation where the citizens were being slowly starved to death, which ultimately made it impossible for the government to continue spending on weapons systems. America was able to do both (at the time): maintain some level of social support AND pay exhorbitant amounts of money towards national defense.
How did Reagan fund defense spending while at the same time cutting taxes on the wealthy and on businesses? HE RAIDED THE SOCIAL SECURITY FUND!!!! Which leads us to the precipace on which we sit today, tomorrow, and for years into the future.
Back to Joe. Today on the Daily Beast, Christopher Buckley proclaims Joe and his new book "the new face of the Republican party." As a die-hard Democrat, my response to Buckley's assertion is: bwahahahahahahahaha! Bring.It.On.Dude! You want to parade Joe "Morning Meltdown" Scarborough around as the savior as your daddy's party? Have at it! As Buckley's blog claims, Scarborough "comes across as a profoundly likeable and reasonable man." Right, as long as you don't yank his hair-trigger chain. At which point "likeable" and "reasonable" give way to TOTALLY OUT OF CONTROL LUNACY. Seriously, Joe's got less self-control than - dare I say it - Nancy Grace when confronted by somone conversant in the Fifth Amendment. Friend.
No doubt, Joe Scarborough has spent the last several years trying to position himself as a moderate friend to everyman. Supposedly, he left Congress unexpectedly in the middle of his third term because his son was spiraling out of control and needed him. Or, perhaps it was because of the Congressional intern who was found dead in his office! In any event, shortly after he was summoned "home" to Florida, Joe began commuting right back to Washington in order to do his first show, Scarborough Country, on MSNBC. Make of that what you will.
I watch Morning Joe occasionally. Because despite being a ginormous douchebag, Joe's got good producers who get damn good guests who have smart conversations - when they can get a word in edgewise. But mostly I just tear my hair out over what a smarmy, out of control, manipulative douchebag this dude is. Don't buy his book. Don't read his book. But for the love of all that is good and holy, don't vote for him in any Republican primaries coming up anytime soon - he just might be diabolical enough to win.
President Obama made an appearance on the first Colbert Report from Iraq yesterday, along with General Odierno, the Commanding General there. I think it's hilarious. Of course, some yahoo on cable yesterday was whining about "don't some people have more important things to do?" Y'know what? Shut the FUCK up. It's called TROOP MORALE - and this guy gets it.
| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| Obama Orders Stephen's Haircut - Ray Odierno | ||||
| ||||
I mean, really people - this is news? I know I have excellent gaydar and all, but a blind and deaf Mormon from Planet Jesus would take one look at Adam and know that he really, really, really likes cock. Duh.
I love Adam because, in addition to having an amazing voice, and the fact that he sang a song from "Donnie Darko" on AI, he is a drag queen. Even when he's not completely dressed up like a woman, he's still in some form of drag. And even though he toned it down considerably on American Idol, he still barely kept the lid on the flamboyance. I was at the AI finale and when he came out in those Bob Mackie wings and false eyelashes, it took everything in my being not to rush onto the little stage he was on and tackle him. I luv me a man who looks like an unholy fusion of Cher and Liza Minelli - and on AMERICAN IDOL??? It was the best thing ever.
I only wish Adam had sang "A Change is Gonna Come" on the AI finale like this:
Most people can only dream of being so fabulous. I love it!
Oh, and in the Rolling Stone article, Adam apparently confesses his attraction to the winner of AI and his buddy in bromance, Kris Allen. He says Kris is "pretty" and totally his type. I'm getting migraines just thinking about the slash fic that is going to result from that comment (not that I read that shit...).
Well, the funniest part after Bret Michaels almost got his head chopped off - Neil Patrick Harris singing!
Here it comes.
Tonight, Nancy interviewed Jennifer Buchanan, the mother of the little girl found murdered last week in Michigan. And, as anyone who is familiar with Nancy Grace's douchebaggery should have expected, it was totally a set-up. Much like the way she tore into Melinda Duckett after the disappearance of her child a couple of years ago, Nancy set out to hone her rotting-out, formerly prosecutorial teeth on the fragile psyche of a woman whose child is not yet even in the grave.
Listen, Jennifer Buchanan has got more than her fair share of issues. Apparently she befriended more than a couple of sex offenders with questionable pasts, and continued to allow her kid to be around them even after she knew about all that. And trust me, as someone who has never walked a mile in Jennifer Buchanan's shoes I've got plenty I'd like to rake her over the coals about. Starting with the naming of a child "heaven" backwards. *eyeballs roll out of head* But let's be clear: the time for that is not now. Unless I have one single iota of evidence suggesting that this woman had anything intentional to do with her daughter's death, right now is the time for those who would question her (other than, y'know, the police) to BACK THE FUCK OFF.
Yeah, Nancy? When you try to make yourself all superior and shit by taking down the emotionally and mentally fragile? You don't end up looking like a big shit. You end up looking like an evil, narcissistic, insecure, second-rate hack. You look like a fucking douchebag. Which is what you are, Madam.
Oh - and all those people who call into your show and coo over your nasty spawn, Lucy Elizabeth and John David? They all live up the side of a hill. Their dentures are slipping out. And they all resemble - well, they all look like KC!
I can only hope that one day, one of those freaks of nature crawls out from his or her hovel and murders one of your children, upon which some shrewish harpie can cross-examine you as to why you coddled and cajoled such human waste into your life, in effect endangering your own offspring.
Yeah, I said it. Fuck you Nancy. I spit on you. Friend. Ptooooey!
Today in North Korea, two American journalists
were sentenced to 12 years of hard labor in a North Korean prison camp.
Yeah, doesn't look like much fun, does it?
Look, this sentence is clearly an outrage and something has to be done to get these young women out. That being said, once they're back on American soil someone needs to slap these bitches silly. There are conflicting accounts of the circumstances of their arrest. They were, at the very least, tempting fate by being right on the North Korean border - and they may very well have entered North Korea and defied orders to stop filming. It doesn't matter which account is true. American journalists - particularly young American female journalists - should know better than to play with fire like that. These women should never have been so close to the border without their own security escorts. And if they did purposely cross the border and defy orders to stop filming? Then we're inching closer to being in the territory of you get what you ask for.
Our government has better things to be negotiating with North Korea about right now - and much more important demands need to be made of them - than to have to give up some bargaining chips in order to get two female journalists out of a prison camp. And lest anyone believe we're going to get any international backup on this (aside from Nicolas Sarkozy's willingess to sit on Barack Obama's lap and lick his face while the negotiations go on) we'd better think again. The only two countries who can issue and kind of sanctions that would make a dent in North Korea are Russia and China, and neither of those nations views the individual rights of two young journalists the same way we Americans do.
Yeah, the sentence was too harsh. And if North Korea kidnapped two journalists who weren't even on its territory and then put them on trial, something has to be done to stop that practice. But, whatever happened, these women are not blameless. And they've caused us a headache we didn't need.
I know no better way to introduce myself than to defer to the mighty, well, you know.....
Greetings, People of Earth [/inside joke]:
Yes, we're here! It's actually us! Just when you thought there was no more smart, scathing discussion to be found on ... blogspot.com. Up pops your two favorite stinkee pinkees. Here with smart, scathing commentary on politics, current events, pop culture and Nancy Grace (ah yes, *rubs hands together*). Not just us, but hopefully some lovely and talented guest bloggers as well. Together we are - in the immortal words of one well-documented internets psycho - the meanest and cruelest girls on the internets. FEAR US!!!
What you need to know: We're hoping to keep an open community here, meaning an open comments policy. We'll see how it works, although we are leaning towards requiring a blogger account login as a commenting prerequisite. Just because it let us know who our community consists of and fosters a sense of community. If, however, we suddenly go under lockdown and you find that we're requiring comment approval, just know that it's probably not anything personal - more than likely we're under attack from a known quantity of trolls and we've had to take preventative measures. This will obviously impede the flow of conversation, but if we've got a good pace of comments going someone will check in regularly to keep the reparte going without a lot of downtime (except for sleep).
Also, just like our other little slice of heaven on the interwebs, we get to decide what the topic of conversation is here. Of course, we want the rest of you to chime in with your opinions, but since this blog is mainly for our own diversion and entertainment, we're going to talk about topics both silly and serious that we find interesting. This runs the gamut from dogs and cooking (babyfishmouth) to reality television and drag queens (kc). We are both really interested in politics and current events, but we don't always agree - so watch out! The fur is going to fly, and that's good, right? Few things in life are more fun than watching the two of us argue - respectfully, of course. And feel free to jump in if you want to get your head bitten off, too (especially if you disagree with kc).
WORD OF WARNING: There is going to be adult language and adult content on this blog (as reflected in the settings when you access the blog). This is not a place for children. Keep yer damn kids off our blog or we will run them the fuck off for you. Thanks. Friend.
Ok. I think that about covers it. Let's get this show on the road.
About me? Who are you and why are you asking? 
I'm a misanthrope, y'all. Babyfishmouth has me hoodwinked. I'm the "nice" one. mwahahahahahah!! 
