July 2005 Archives
Breaking news from the Toledo Blade: Getting a Presidential appointment involves knowing the right people.
White touted Bush ties to help get federal postNow he investigates GOP, Noe
(THE BLADE/ALLAN DETRICH )COLUMBUS — U.S. Attorney Gregory White, a leader in a multiagency task force investigating powerful Republicans in Ohio, asked for help from Gov. Bob Taft’s office to get the federal post he now holds, records released by Mr. Taft’s office yesterday show.
No shit, guys! How the fuck do you think political appointees get their jobs? Sending a resume followed by a cold call?
How's this for your next headline and sub-head:
Sky Is BlueHas been for years
• Ozzfest will return to Germain Amphitheater on Tuesday.Between the opening of the gates at 10 a.m. and the end of headliner Black Sabbath’s set, many metal bands, including one with Will Smith’s wife on lead vocals, will perform. They include:
Iron Maiden, Shadows Fall, Gizmachi, It Dies Today, Arch Enemy, Black Label Society, Rob Zombie, Killswitch Engage, As I Lay Dying, Mastodon, A Dozen Furies, the Haunted, In Flames, Soilwork, the Black Dahlia Murder, Trivium, Bury Your Dead and Wicked Wisdom (featuring Jada Pinkett Smith).
Uh, come again?
Go see it.
Two hours of Scarlett Johansson. 'Nuff said?
Date: June 26, 2005
Temp: 95, Humidity - 1000%
7:00 - Enter Park
7:10 - Eat @ La Rosa's
7:20 - Walk to The Beast
7:22 - Wonder if they regret that giant Tomb Raider statue thingy.
7:23 - See The Italian Job in action for the first time. Cool.
7:30 - Ride The Beast.
7:32 - Wish with every fiber of my being that the restraint hadn't just ratched itself down one more notch.
7:33 - Remark to self that even if Z hits 48" this year, this is WAAAAAAAAAAY too intense for her.
7:35 - Walk to Viper.
7:37 - Lament the absence of the Flying Eagles.
7:38 - WTF? There's just a grassy area where the Flying Eagles used to be. It doesn't look like the Italian Job even encroaches on the space that the Flying Eagles used to occupy. WTF!
7:40 - Ride the Viper.
7:42 - Remark to self that that is one of my favorite - and in my opinion, one of the must underrated - coasters around.
7:43 - Notice that Flying Eagles would fit nicely where the stupid pay per use bungee thing is.
7:44 - Wonder if they regret putting Flight of Fear over in the middle of nowhere on the other side of the Racer, discreetly tucked away in the middle of the Midway.
7:45 - Think to self, evidently not, since it's the first ride today with a line.
7:50 - Remark to self that FoF is a better little coaster than I remember.
7:55 - Remark to self that Flying Eagles would fit nicely where the stupid and pointless water tower decoration is in the middle of the Action Zone.
7:57 - What? Another line? This is an outrage. Decide to speak to management about the crowds.
8:20 - Ride Face/Off. Remark to self that these xeroxed Verkoma boomerangs are pointless. Make note to complain to management that they only have one train running on this ride, which creates an outrageous line.
8:30 - Note to self while exiting park that there's room for about four Flying Eagles where the stupid fountains are just inside the entrance.
One hour, four coasters, much fun.
Now looking forward to trip South in September. Can't wait to stop at Carowinds to ride the Flying Eagles.
The guy who got himself gunned down by London police definitely deserves a Darwin Award.
Funny that Lileks would be ranting about prudery this week. I was just talking with my sister-in-law about what I do not remember, but the conversation turned to the evolving standards of decency. (For my younger readers -- yes; we used to have standards for such things.)
She laughed about how her grandfather was mortified and outraged by the Underalls commercials when they first appeared. And you remember how salacious they were don't you?
Remember how the butt would shake ever so slightly? Egads! Society, here's the handbasket; hell's thataway.
Aw, screw the handbasket. Just take the General Lee.
No. 1 on the list of "Reasons to willingly walk into the eye of a hurricane."
A shelter for tourists in Cancun Mexico. Not exactly the Four Seasons some of them had checked into.
Professional wrestling in Bolivia.
Cirque is due to roll into our humble burg next month, and as my friends who know me know, no one is looking forward to it more than I. My enchantment with Cirque is baffling, I admit, but I just can't get enough of it. This despite the fact that is profoundly weird, really.
Bryan Curtis has a great article in Slate about Cirque's unexplainable popularity, which he discusses in the context of the lastest touring show, Varekai:
I arrived a few minutes late and found the stage occupied by a small goat-man with forest leaves protruding from his trousers and his hair gelled into a three-point salute. "Pfffft!" he said, to much laughter. A few moments later, an angel dressed in white descended from the heavens. The goat-man regarded the angel with mock fury until the angel rose and began to perform trapeze stunts with the aid of a hammock. This seemed to satisfy the goat-man and he departed at stage right. Then there were some earthbound stunts from a troupe of flame-colored acrobats; children dressed in puffy suits as if they were about to train attack dogs, performing with bolas; then empty-eyed ogres dressed as samurai warriors and rhythmically stomping their feet. That brought the first act to a close.Varekai was so profoundly jarring, so uncertain in its narrative intentions, that when the lights came up nobody in the audience could think to move. At least at the end of similarly exotic occasions—like a Megadeth concert or a White House press conference—the crowd knows when to get up. A small boy sitting a few feet to my right and using a voice reserved for pre-adolescent terror turned to his mother and shrieked, "What's going on?" He spoke for all of us.
Curtis goes on to conclude that:
A great deal of Cirque du Soleil's magic comes from its unapologetic Frenchness. Or, if you prefer, its Quebecoisity. By this, I mean that Cirque du Soleil's shows make absolutely no sense at all. I studied the plot of Varekai for a solid hour before attending the performance, but by the end of the second act I was blubbering the same nonsense as the goat-man.
Well, I can't disagree with any of that. But still, I do love it so.
Here's but the smallest morsel to egg you on:
Here's another story you may have missed this week:''Iran will resume uranium enrichment if the European Union does not recognize its right to do so, two Iranian nuclear negotiators said in an interview published Tuesday.''
Got that? If you don't let us go nuclear, we'll go nuclear. Negotiate that, John Kerry.
Like I said. Go read it. NOW.
This article explains that a former player stole six autographed baseballs from his former K-State Coach, Bill Snyder. Here are the important details:
Riley County Police Lt. Tim Hegarty said the six baseballs stolen from Snyder’s home were signed by Mantle, DiMaggio, Whitey Ford, Paul O’Neill, Phil Rizzuto and Yogi Berra.
To which I have to ask: Paul O'Neill?
Gee. So it seems to be turning out that this whole Rove/Wilson/Plame thing is much ado (now THAT's an understatement) about nothing. In the end, it will turn out that no one in the government (much less Rove himself) came anywhere close to outing a covert CIA agent.
The most recent article demonstrating that this non-story, scandal-that-wasn't is slowly running out of steam contains a delightful quote that typifies the twisted, political sham this has become:
The person, who works in the legal profession and spoke only on condition of anonymity because of the secrecy of grand jury proceedings, told The Associated Press [about Rov's grand jury testimony]...
This can best be translated as: "The person, who asked not to be identified because by speaking to the AP he was breaking several laws and the professional rules and code of ethics, said...."
Seriously - why has this become acceptable? Would the same reporter write, "The murderer, who spoke only on condition of anonymity, told the AP that he sexually abused the girl before he strangled her and buried her body."
What? That's totally different you say? Perhaps, but only by a matter of degree. Why does the AP get to decide where to draw the line?
Well, of course the usual idiots are about gloating over the bombing in London, and using it as evidence that the war on terror is a failure because Islamic whack jobs can still blow up subways and busses.
But Cliff May offers a salient counterpoint:
The attacks of 9/11/01 were highly sophisticated and killed thousands. The attacks of 3/11/04 in Madrid were somewhat less sophisticated and killed hundreds. The attacks of 7/705 appear to have been the work of amateurs and killed dozens.Anyone see a pattern here?
I think Mr. May makes quick work of those pessimists who think that every bombing is evidence that Bush's approach to terrorism isn't working.
Here's an interesting story about the Cleveland Plain Dealer holding back from publication two investigative reports concerning local and state government because they are afraid that they might be forced some day to reveal the source of the "leaked documents" that the stories would be based upon.
Apparently the PD's editor wrote a piece in the June 30 PD explaining "why it's important to protect sources, and how the public would suffer if reporters' ability to gather news is compromised. He mentioned the potential consequences if the newspaper published the two investigative stories."
The courageous PD editor also says: "Things that are important for the public stand in jeopardy of not getting reported because of the state of the law."
Huh? Isn't part of the journalist's creed to get the truth out, and damn the consequences? Here, they are afraid to put their own necks on the line by publishing what they think is an important story. But the PD won't report it because they might be dragged into court some day to reveal their sources. That, they reason, would chill others in the future from being sources for stories.
So the PD won't publish an important story because their source might suffer some consequence, which would in the future give pause to other potential sources, which in turn would prevent the PD from getting information they need to publish an important future story, which consequently wouldn't get published. Can anyone else spot the Catch-22 here?
Of course, let's not forget that this is all based upon, in the editor's words, "documentation that would have been illegal to share...." Got that? The PD got documents that someone gave to them illegally. And the PD won't base a story on the documents unless they can find some other source for the information in the documents so that they can obfuscate the identity of the person who committed the initial crime of illicitly turning over the documents to the PD.
We in the legal profession have a term for that: aiding and abetting.
Not even the title and subhead can prepare you for the article:
This is a HI-larious article about a topless protest in San Fransisco.
So many great things in the article, like the cop (whose last name is "T") explaining why it wasn't illegal:
And it doesn't fall into the category of public nuisance, because it lacks an annoying quality, like the guy who was doing naked yoga at Fisherman's Wharf near a children's school bus stop, he said.
And the part about the nearby panhandler:
The nipple display certainly surprised Chuck Pollock, who has been panhandling around Union Square for the last decade. But he got into the spirit, lifting his T-shirt for passers-by to make them laugh and drop a few coins in his cup.
So many vignettes on modern America to be had here - read the whole thing.
Perhaps my favorite part is the explanation from the protester on why exactly they chose a topless protest:
Breasts Not Bombs said they are trying to make people uncomfortable to get their anti-war message across and to also desensitize people to nudity.
Now just stop me if I'm overthinking this. But what if they succeed with the latter before the former? What will they do then?
Yea!! It's London!
Or just the ones in the UA Fourth of July parade?
My girls are afraid of clowns. Why? I have no idea. It must be something you are either born with or not -- I had a friend in high school who was deathly afraid of clowns; I just don't get it. Anyway.
So my wife and I were on clown patrol. Sitting on the curb with the girls watching the parade, we had to be on guard for approaching clowns so that we could evacuate the girls to a safe distance if need be.
Well, sure enough, along comes a clown with one of those monkey puppets. We saw the clown way ahead of time, and pointed it out to the girls, and I took them back about 20 or thirty feet from the curb, where they stood clutching my legs.
And the clown, seeing the girls had retreated some distance away, seeing the girls clear up in the yard clutching my leg, LEAVES THE PARADE ROUTE to come see the girls!! So now the girls are hysterical, because there is a clown hunting them down. Luckily, my wife had stayed at the curb, and was able to stop the clown before she got too far. And the clown says, "but I thought they'd like the monkey."
Yea, maybe they would. Except for the clown with her hand up its ass!!
A little commonsense. That's all I'm asking for. Is that asking too much?
