Friday, August 01, 2003
Great Gift Idea for Someone You Adore
OK. How awesome is this?
The celebrities listed leave a little to be desired, but how fun!
Thursday, July 31, 2003
Losing the upper hand
Now that Mark has informed me that the President can't be impeached for autographing that flag, I'm moving on to other topics. Of course, I'm having to squint at the screen due to my eye log.
On Tuesday evening, I was walking my dog in the park on her extendable leash. Some people call it a retractable leash. The point to the leash is that your dog can move further away from you than with a normal leash, but you can also prevent that by snapping on a lock to keep the leash short. Goal: flexibility in dog walking. Anyway, there I was contentedly extending and retracting when I realized that two large, fratty-looking men and their similarly large and fratty-looking dogs (with choke collars) were approaching. So, I began retracting to keep my dog closer to me. As the fratty foursome drew even with me, one fratty man commented loudly to the other fratty man, "Man, I f***ing hate those f***ing leashes. They're so f***ing annoying." The fratsters then tugged on their testosterone-jacked canines to keep them moving past my lovable little pooch.
I was taken aback by all that swaggering and swearing. And so I commented to their backs, "Well gosh, that was a polite conversation we just had. Thank you."
As I continued walking home, I felt really good. I had put those men in their places for violating the dog walking etiquette. Moreover, I felt fully justified in criticizing two strangers for swearing in my general direction for no good reason.
But I TOTALLY lost that nice, smug, upper hand last night. I encountered one of the fratsters again. Dumb freakin' luck. [Aside: Why is that in this city of so many millions, you see the same strangers time and again ONLY when you have had a bad encounter with them?] This time, though, he had his menace of a pet firmly chained and my frisky (but totally sweet) mutt kind of lunged toward the fratster's dog, catching me unaware. The neanderthal snorted, sneered and then got the satisfaction of saying to me, "Well, I would have started a polite conversation, but I guess I won't since your dog can't be polite."
DAMN. I had to drink several beers last night to recover from my loss of the upper hand.
Here's what I have to say about Bushy and his gay speak - toleration, hateration, crunk funk, fag blag, tail wag: "Frippppppsssssssssspppppllllliiiipppppppccccrrrreeeeessshhhhhplip."
EVERYONE raise a stink and email it to your representatives!
This is time for civil disobedience; to let our insides be heard!
Wednesday, July 30, 2003
Here's what President Bush said today about the gays:
Q Thank you, sir. Mr. President, many of your supporters believe that homosexuality is immoral. They believe that it's been given too much acceptance in policy terms and culturally. As someone who's spoken out in strongly moral terms, what's your view on homosexuality?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I am mindful that we're all sinners, and I caution those who may try to take the speck out of their neighbor's eye when they got a log in their own. I think it's very important for our society to respect each individual, to welcome those with good hearts, to be a welcoming country. On the other hand, that does not mean that somebody like me needs to compromise on an issue such as marriage. And that's really where the issue is heading here in Washington, and that is the definition of marriage. I believe in the sanctity of marriage. I believe a marriage is between a man and a woman. And I think we ought to codify that one way or the other. And we've got lawyers looking at the best way to do that.
OK, I have one comment and one question.
Comment: OW!!! I've got a log in my eye!!!!!
Question: What does he mean by "somebody like me"? Does he mean "President"? Does he mean "Christian"? Does he mean, as I suspect he does, "non-freak"? Help. I must know your thoughts. Just now, though, I'm off to the emergency room to get this log removed from my eye.
Is this as dumb as I think it is?
I mean, don't we all agree that the Framers had themselves some slaves and so originalists around the Dred Scott era had themselves a bit of a hard time getting around that were it not for the 13th and 14th amendments and stuff?
That is not to say that hysterical law professors don't squeal "DRED SCOTT" whenever the court does something they personally feel is dumb. They do. High-pitched hysterical squeals of "DRED SCOTT" or "PLESSY V. FERGUSON" were heard a lot around Bush v. Gore's announcement -- for no good reason, of course, except that the squealers were trying to get people as excited and outraged as they were. So that's bad.
This commentary is really no better than those knee-jerk hysterics that it targets. Its just saying "Dred Scott = BAD originalism, Scalia dissent in Lawrence = GOOD originalism."
Thanks, Dude. Damn illuminating.
And HUZZAH to IA's return.
Without fanfare -
IA is back. This makes me happy.
And I was ready to call the authorities!
Then, I saw this in that Federal Flag Code:
"SEC. 8 Any rule or custom pertaining to the display of the flag of the United States of America, set forth herein, may be altered, modified, or repealed, or additional rules with respect thereto may be prescribed, by the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States, whenever he deems it to be appropriate or desirable; and any such alteration or additional rule shall be set forth in proclamation."
Monday, July 28, 2003
According to the Federal Flag Code, "[t]he flag should never have placed upon it, nor on any part of it, nor attached to it any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature."
Matt Drudge is reporting today that President Bush may have violated this federal law. The President acted in flagrant disgregard of the Federal Flag Code when he autographed a small flag handed to him by a citizen.
Query: Does a violation of the Federal Flag Code qualify as a high crime or misdemeanor?