:: Sic Transit Gloria ::

A sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament...
:: welcome to Sic Transit Gloria :: contact ::
:: NRO's The Corner [>]
:: Instapundit[>]
:: IAMO-FrankJ[>]
:: Kausfiles[>]
:: Hoosier Review[>]
:: DC Metro Blogmap[>]
:: USS Clueless[>]
:: Iraq the Model[>]
:: Moxie, Baby![>]
:: Michael Moore Watch [>]
:: James Lileks' "The Bleat" [>]
:: THAT Liberal Media [>]
:: ScrappleFace[>]
:: The Truth Laid Bear[>]
[::..My Favorite Links..::]
:: IMdB[>]
:: Television Without Pity[>]
:: Fametracker[>]
:: National Review Online[>]
:: The Onion[>]
:: FARK[>]
:: Something Awful[>]
:: Day by Day[>]
:: Slate[>]
Listed on Blogwise
[::..My Info..::]
:: Who Am I?[>]
:: My DVD Collection/Wish List

:: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 ::

States Rights Has Some Unlikely Supporters

James Taranton over at
OpinionJournal's Best of the Web Today points out that Sen. Kerry and the NY Times, while arguing States Rights in Marriage Amendment debate are a bit...selective... in their support for that particular concept. While I think Taranto supports the amendment and I do not(on the basis of States Rights), he has a point. Of course, any former States Rights Republican now backing the amendment(fewer than you'd think!) is just as guilty. It's just that the NY Times would be bashing them for it if they hadn't decided to be hypocrites, too. Plus, Taranto rounds up all sorts of reasons why John Kerry sucks that I'd never get around to, posts on the bankrupting of Canada's military(inavde now! While they can't afford to buy ammo!) and other fun stuff. I feel better today than I did yesterday about the gay marriage thing because a)Congress isn't rushing to pass it and b)Everyone looks equally bad in both parties.

That old-time Religion

Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ opens today, to glowing, confusing, angry and bizzare reviews all over the place, which leads me to believe that each person will honestly view the film's message and presentation differently. Some say it's really anti-semetic, some say a little bit, some say not at all. All agree it's violent, the disagreement is over whether or not it's justified. I know two things: It's going to make a lot of money, and I will not pass judgement until I seeit myself, which may not be for awhile, because I'm not sure how ready I am to see it, spiritually speaking. I'm not very religious or spiritual, but every lenten season, I get a little more religion. I'm giving up Coke(my favorite beverage, besides beer, which I don't drink enough of these days), and I'm fasting today and avoiding meat on fridays. I've pulled this off every year. So here's to self-restraint. I'm gonna go watch some good old fashioned TV violence now, not the uncomfortable, religious, not entertaining kind.
:: C.M. Burns 2/25/2004 06:10:00 PM [+] :: ::
Would You Want This Kid Voting?

Urban Outfitters has put up a perfectly hilarious new T-shirt for sale on their web site called "Voting is for Old People". Go to the link, see the picture of the kid wearing it, and tell me you want him voting, with his sullen look and stupid trucker hat. I'm not saying we keep him from voting, put I see no reason to encourage him. I think people are already getting upset because no one has a sense of humor about anything anymore. I want to send that kid to a Rock the Vote rally.
:: C.M. Burns 2/25/2004 04:46:00 PM [+] :: ::
John Kerry Screwed POW's/MIA's?

Thw Village Voice, of all places(I say that because they are incredibly liberal, not because they write bad stuff), has a potentially disasterous story out about John Kerry. Sydney H. Schanberg writes in "When John Kerry's Courage Went M.I.A." that Kerry covered up evidence of POW's left behind after the Vietnam War ended when he was chairman of the Senate Select Committee on P.O.W./ M.I.A. Affairs. He did so for political reeasons, the normalization of relations with Hanoi, which, as Schanberg writes, isn't a bad goal, but if what he writes about Kerry is true, I think he should be jailed.
Here's some of what Kerry did: Holding back
more than 1,600 firsthand sightings of live U.S. prisoners; nearly 14,000 secondhand reports; numerous intercepted Communist radio messages from within Vietnam and Laos about American prisoners being moved by their captors from one site to another; a series of satellite photos that continued into the 1990s showing clear prisoner rescue signals carved into the ground in Laos and Vietnam, all labeled inconclusive by the Pentagon; multiple reports about unacknowledged prisoners from North Vietnamese informants working for U.S. intelligence agencies, all ignored or declared unreliable; persistent complaints by senior U.S. intelligence officials (some of them made publicly) that live-prisoner evidence was being suppressed; and clear proof that the Pentagon and other keepers of the "secret" destroyed a variety of files over the years to keep the P.O.W./M.I.A. families and the public from finding out and possibly setting off a major public outcry.

Sorry for the long blockquote. I have no problem beliving the Pentagon would block information about POW's. That John Kerry would leave his "Band of Brothers" behind like that? Well, I have no problem believing it either. The whole story lists the cover up, what Kerry accused those of believing that POW's were still over of(being dupes), and his lame, sad, criminal response to his duty to account for all soldiers. What's even sadder is that Kerry, for all his faults, was never a tool of the Pentagon. He did this to advance his own political goals, not to avoid embarassing the Pentagon. If this is true, I want Kerry thrown into a pit of hungry lions, tied up in a sack of cats and tossed into the Potomac, I want him prosecuted. This could kill him, if true. Of course, it may not be true. But it'll be hard for Kerry's supporters to call this a "right-wing smear" as it comes from no less liberal a source than "The Village Voice"
:: C.M. Burns 2/25/2004 10:20:00 AM [+] :: ::
:: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 ::
Gay Marriage Amendment. Whoo-boy, this ain't good

About a week ago I posted here on the blog that I was against a marriage amendment vis a vis homosexuals. It simply shouldn't be a federal issue. And I feel the same way about it now, today, after the President announced his support for the FMA. I feel the FMA is a terrible idea of a Constitutional amendment. I think amendments are sometimes necessary, at least as it comes to the running of the Republic, but never for social causes. Some social conservatives say that the founders didn't mention marriage in the text of the document because they never fathomed the idea of gays having rights or getting married. I feel that is wrong. The founders didn't include marriage in the Constitution for 2 reasons: 1) that they never imagined a country where being married would give you special rights over thise who weren't (thank you IRS and insurance companies) and 2) they didn't want social/religious issues to be in the damn document. Its the Constitution, a blueprint for democracy, not for good domestic life. It's a bad idea.

Now, who is to blame for all this? Bush, yeah, social conservatives, sure, but I think equally with the far right is Mayor Newsome of California and his supporters. I think he WANTED this to happen. He blatently disregarded the democratic process in his own state by handing out illegal marriage licenses. He stoked the controversey, pushed Bush's conservative base and forced the issue in the worst way possible. Also, Bush may be bluffing a bit to make Kerry and Edwards scramble. I don't know. Also, I don't think it will ever make it into the Constitution. 2/3 of the house, 2/3 of the Senate, 3/4 of the States. Thats a lot of hurdles, and the Defense of Marriage Act is easier to support than a poorly cobbled Constitutional amendment. So while many Gays are going crazy, I don't think this is over, and while Andrew Sullivan is ready to storm the White House, I think more rational debate will happen. In the end, much must be discussed, including full faith & credit clause issues, states rights (a valid issue here, more now than ever), and even civil rights and what, exactly, marriage means to us as Americans. It's ugly and it's a bad year for it, an election year that was already ugly as hell. Hoo-boy, this don't look too good. I still hate John Kerry though, even though he and I feel the same way about the amendment. Fuckers. God help us all.
:: C.M. Burns 2/24/2004 08:55:00 PM [+] :: ::
Attack of the Spongmonkeys

When I started this blog a year ago, one of my first posts was to ratergood.com and this flash file of spngmonkeys singing about the moon. Ever since I first happened across that bizzare but hyterically funny file I've shown it to everyone I can find. And then, wonder of wonders, the spongmonkeys showed up around the Super Bowl on TV singing about Quizno's subs. I looked in vain for information about how the campaign came about, but rathergood still has no mention of it. I got calls from friends about it, wondering if I knew the guy who did it. Well I don't. But over in Slate their Ad editor has written about "The Creatures From the Sandwich Shop - Behind the singing rodents in the Quiznos ad. SUffice to say, he loves them. Read it, and learn abotu how one goofy web cartoon is now going national. And then sing the moon song. Cheers.
:: C.M. Burns 2/24/2004 09:57:00 AM [+] :: ::
:: Monday, February 23, 2004 ::
John Kerry Is Scum

I really really really really really really really don't like John Kerry. Not just as a politican or a Democrat, but as a human being, if he can be accused of being one. Appraently, service in Vietnam now exempts you from being critiszied on National Security issues. At least, that's what John Kerry thinks, and his Democratic backers. Kerry sent a letter to the Bush campaign saying:
"As you well know, Vietnam was a very difficult and painful period in our nation's history, and the struggle for our veterans continues. So, it has been hard to believe that you would choose to reopen these wounds for your personal political gain. But, that is what you have chosen to do."

The letter was sent after Republiban Sen Saxby Chambliss of Georgia said that Kerry has a "32-year history of voting to cut defense programs and cut defense systems." Which is entirely true. Kerry, instead of answering this attack with speficic votes that he hasn't, in fact, been week on defense, decided to take the low road he accuses the Republicans of taking by claiming he had voted for all sorts of defense spending measure, which wasn't really what Chambliss was getting at, and then said the President was trashing him as a Veteran. Which is patently absurd. If no one who ever served in a war is above critique when it comes to national security issues, then I guess my mother's crazy Vietnam Vet cousin who believes in an international Jewish conspiracy and wants us to cut all funding to Isreal is above critique as well. Sorry Cousin John, didn't mean to call you an anti-semite, I forgot that since you served in Vietnam everything you've done since is unquestionably patriotic and good. This is so offensive, that Kerry would accuse the Presdient of "attacking him for being in Vietnam" when the President and his supporters really want to know why Kerry's voting record is so spotty. It is not a "slime tactic" to use someones voting history in the Senate against them. It's actually pretty clean. But don't tell Democrats, who have suddenly turned Vietnam into a good war, sort of, as long as you fought in it.

Just as bad is former Sen. Max Cleland of Ga, who Chambliss beat, and who is very bitter about the whole thing. You see, Cleland lost three limbs in Vietnam. He has medals. But no Purple Heart, apparently. Why? Because he lost his limbs by picking up a live grenade on an American base. It was an accident, pure and simple. You only get a Purple Heart for being wounded in combat. It wasn't Clelands fault, and he did serve with distinction. He was awarded the Silver Star for valor, I believe. And Joe Conason of Salon, in an otherwise awful and misleading column that doesn't answer the critiques of the Democrats use of Cleland as a Martyr to the evil Republicans when he clearly wasn't won, printed the citiation for it today. However, after Chambliss ran ads in 2002 accusinf Cleland of being weak on national security because of his voting record, Democrats turned Cleland into the above mentioned Martyr to the evil GOP. How dare they accuse this man of not being patriotic. Of course, that's not what happend at all. They said he was weak on terrorisim because he voted against the Dept. of Homeland Security Bill a number of times because incompetent federal workers might be fired(Democrats love to protect incompetent workers. I think they see it as making up for the fact that they got rich because they were smart. The feel guilty about it). No "Max Cleland Hates America", no real slime. It was after, when Chambliss' use of actual facts and not innuendo got Cleland out of the Senate that the myth of his losing his arms in combat got started, and that if you ever question a veteran's views on security, you are a) dredging up the Vietnam War and b) a horrible person. Cleland draped himself in the war to defend a poor record in the Senate on security and now Kerry wants to do the same thing. Chambliss' critique of Kerry, a quick soundbite whose 32-years goes back to 1972, when Kerry was out of the Navy and trashing his "brothers" in Senate testimony, didn't even mention Vietnam, or Kerry's service. What Kerry is doing is shameless and insulting to those who did serve.

What makes it even worse is that Kerry is clearly worried that the truth will show he IS weak on National Security. If he wasn't, he'd actually defend himself against a legitimate charge instead of playing the same brand of slimeball politics he accuses the Republicans of doing. If this man, whose pomposity and arrogance know no bonds, who served with destinction in Vietnam only to come back to trash his fellow soldiers, is allowed to use as his only defense against legitimate critiques that he served in Vietnam and we should shut up, then any rational debate is out, and Kerry will have been handing victory by a complacent media. Sen. Kerry and Sen. Cleland are using Vietnam as a political tool, not the Republicans, and they should be ashamed. Don't hold your breath, though.
:: C.M. Burns 2/23/2004 11:27:00 AM [+] :: ::
Tom Daschele on Failure to Find WMD's: No Big Deal

Republicans are seen as the party of the rich. Democrats, as the "champions of the poor". In reality, Republicans are the party of the tax cut and Democrats are the party of pandering. Really. They pander to everyone, and they do it condensendingly. They are for a nanny "we know what's best" state, after all. But unlike Republicans, who actually favor the ocasional hard truth and truly don't like sucking up for votes all that much, the Democrats excel at it. Why, lets look at Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschel, who is just as bad at his job as Trent Lott was, if not worse. Daschel is facing a very tough reelection campaign in South Dakota, a fact many Dems are conviently forgetting as they look at early polls in the Presidential Race. Daschel spoke to the Pierre, SD Chamber of Commerce, evil Rich folks, all of them, and said that "he has no serious concerns about the lack of weapons of mass destruction." None. No concerns. Of course, he said it to a group of Republican leaning community leaders in his hotly contested home state that went for Bob Dole comforatbly in 1996 and gave Bush 60% of the vote in 2000. But he said it. It's on te record. Someone read this into the Congressional Record, get it out there for time immemorial, and then ask him about it on the Senate floor the next time he talks about Iraq! It's would be fun! Frist, I'd like you more if you did it.
:: C.M. Burns 2/23/2004 10:30:00 AM [+] :: ::
:: Sunday, February 22, 2004 ::
Miracel on Ive was 24 years Ago Today

The greatest moment in sports history, period, the upset of the Soviet Olympic machine by Team USA at the 1980 Lake Placid Winter Olympics. See the NY Times front page here and read the original article. It requires registration(free), and is well worth it. It also shows that the writing stye of the NY Times hasn't change in a quarter century. Oh well. USA, USA, USA!
:: C.M. Burns 2/22/2004 12:31:00 PM [+] :: ::
Miracel on Ive was 24 years Ago Today

The greatest moment in sports history, period, the upset of the Soviet Olympic machine by Team USA at the 1980 Lake Placid Winter Olympics. See the NY Times front page here and read the original article. It requires registration(free), and is well worth it. It also shows that the writing stye of the NY Times hasn't change in a quarter century. Oh well. USA, USA, USA!
:: C.M. Burns 2/22/2004 12:31:00 PM [+] :: ::
:: Friday, February 20, 2004 ::
How long Til Nader Turns Up Dead?

Fox is reporting that Ralph "More Evil Than Bush to Dems" Nader is going to Jump into the Presidential Race. Nader is publically despised by partisan Dems and privately loved by GOPers for his roles in siphoning off votes from Al Gore in 2000. Whether he will run with Green Party backing this year is another story. On a sidenote, apparently Nader was basically in hiding during his decision-making process on this race. I'm only wondering how long it is until Salon readers and Eric Alterman storm his headquarters with torches to destroy the man. Should be fun, I'll bring beer.
:: C.M. Burns 2/20/2004 06:06:00 PM [+] :: ::
Are you a Son of the South or a Yankee?

Here;s a fun little game to kill the frustrtaion you might feel after reading about the Syracuse thing. It's the Yankee or Dixie quiz and it rates whether your're a damn yankee or a good ole' boy based on regional dialects. It's fun. I'm a yankee. Eat that, Jefferson Davis!
:: C.M. Burns 2/20/2004 10:39:00 AM [+] :: ::
Which is Worse? A Bad Racial Joke or Grand Theft?

There is a truly bizzare story coming out of Syracuse University about a student accused of wearing blackface makeup. For those of you who have never seen Al Jolsen, it's what Ted Danson wore to Whoopie Goldberg's friars club roast that almost cost him his career. Almost. Anyway, the article says that the Orwellian sounding "Department of Public Safety"(not the name, what they do sounds Orwellian) got a call about a student running around with his face painted black in a suspicious manner, and went looking for him. Now, I admit that if I saw someone with their face painted lurking around a dorm, I would suspect either a Frat Joke, or a criminal. However the SU Dept. of Public Safety actually assumed the student was running around in blackface like an old, racist minstrel show and was intending to...well, I guess offend people with his presence. Really. That was their first thought. Not that he was a criminal. Well, actually on campuses nowadays anything that is racially offensive to anyone is ALMOST criminal in the eyes of the University. They went to stop him and basically send him up the river for being racist.

Anyway, they find this guy and he says no, I'm planning on robbing a dorm room. See, the guy's a fraternity pledge and, upstanding shapers of youth that they are, the frat decided that part of his pledgship should include breaking and entering. Anyway, the story gets a little convoluted from there, as the Dept. of Public Safety people were INCLINED to believe him but are "investigating both scenarios". Wait a minute. He cops to planning on robbing a house, according to the article an anonymous tip said the house was going to be robbed(frat brothers also like to get the pledges arrested, apparently), and the DPS thinks that this isn't a sufficient explination and decides to look into what they apparently consider the more serious crime of...painting your face. This is all very strange, but since free speech is not a right on campuses, and every campus has the PC sensitivity meter turned up to 11, it seems like this is the normal response.

Now, what's really interesting is what if the kid really was only wearing blackface, and was told by his frat to go embarrass himself by pissing people off. Think Bruce Willis wearing the offensive sandwhich board sign in "Die Hard With A Vengence". Now, I'm not denying it's offensive, it is, but why is it that Universities do not encourage people to confront those who are racist, but instead try to involve a sort of legal system that seems to think in Orwellian terms of "thoughtcrime"? What are they teaching kids? Certainly not to stand up for themselves. And if the kid WAS wearing blackface and not camoflauge for a robbery, is it so much worse a crime to wear MAKEUP than to commit a felony? The DPS is treating it as such. And since they are, it's not unreasonable to think that in their eyes wearing blackface is worse that stealing from people, from phyisically violating their homes. Which is fucking bizzare. They called the incident a "possible misunderstanding", with the implication being that if he was just a robber it was OK. Were the police not called? Was this guy not arrested for at least planning a robbery? And shouldn't the campus paper be more upset that a frat is using pledges to rob places than to say, just offend people and embarrass themselves? What the fuck is wrong with college campuses? It's all so bizzare and strange that I think college, which used to be the place where you got ready for the real world, is now in it's own little universe where up is down, left is right, and the sun is green. God help anyone at Syracuse University. They care more about someones feelings than defending your personal property.
:: C.M. Burns 2/20/2004 10:36:00 AM [+] :: ::
Arab Feminisim Exists? Or Existed? Read on...

Slate has a really, really interesting article called "Veil of Tears - Whatever happened to Arab feminism?" By Lee Smith. He's writing a book on Arab culture, and while I knew that Iraq was much more progressive when it came to woman's rights, I had no idea that back in 1899 a male Egyptian author wrote that denying women rights was detrimental to Islam and Egypt. I happen to agree, and the whole article is facinating on a day with lots of good stuff I want to rant to myself about.
:: C.M. Burns 2/20/2004 09:45:00 AM [+] :: ::
:: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 ::
Dean Quits Race to Focus on Zany Schemes

Howard Dean actually dropped out today, saying he would support the eventual nominee (Is it Kerry, is it Edwards? No one knows! Except Tim Russert. It's Kerry you morons!). He disapointed me and others like me who wanted him to stay in the race because he said crazy things and made it interesting. Dean left room for more loopyness, though, commanding his army of slavish followers to make sure the Democrats adhere to "progressive" Dean ideas. So I guess Dean thinks he can be the shadow Dem nominee, pulling the strings and calling the shots. Maybe he's training his followers to become ninjas. Still, go ahead and check out his blog, linked in many places, for his mind-controlled slaves, I mean "suppoprters" depressed reactions. Good for a laugh. How will history remember Dean? One word: nutty.
:: C.M. Burns 2/18/2004 04:25:00 PM [+] :: ::
Bush Campaign Ads I Can Support

Check out IMAO: for Suggestions for Campaign Ads. I personally think full Hollywood special effects should be used for the debate ad.
:: C.M. Burns 2/18/2004 03:12:00 PM [+] :: ::
Gay Marriage: Please God Make the Coverage Stop!

I'm oh so tired of this debate. No one wants it right now, it's an election year disaster for everybody, and the free-for-all that's going on with either condemning or lauding the mayor of San Fransisco is just tiresome. And I'm tired of thinking about it and talking about it here in DC. So here's Jonah Goldberg's column on Gay Marriage on National Review Online. He says: let federalisim work. I agree. Can we stop talking about Amendments and Courts now? Oh, look, John Kerry didn't sweep Wisconsin! I'm gonna think about that. That and booze.
:: C.M. Burns 2/18/2004 09:55:00 AM [+] :: ::
:: Tuesday, February 17, 2004 ::
Learn the Rumsfeld Way, Grasshopper

Judging by the pictures posted here, Donald Rumsfeld is some sort of martial arts master. Maybe he and Jackie Chan can team up for a buddy comedy in which they fight terrorists. I'd buy THAT for a dollar!
:: C.M. Burns 2/17/2004 11:42:00 AM [+] :: ::
The End of Howard Dean? Or Just the Beginning?

Today is the Wisconsin Primary, and since John Edwards and even Howard Dean refuse to attack him, he'll win big. I know why Edwards isn't attacking, at least I can guess, because he might want that Veep slot and maybe since the media is only focusing on the "unstopable" and "most electable"(snort) Kerry, he just wants to be the nice guy with the goofy grin and the same populisim Kerry for some reason uses.(come on, Kerry and populisim? I mean, thats like Ralph Nader becoming a spokesman for Ford).

Wisconsin was originally going to be Dean's last hurrah, as he himself stated, but nowhe is planning on staying in, even though his National Chairman just quit. Dean said that he's moving forward despite running out of cash and support. For a glimpse into the minds of the Deniacs who are still urging him to stay in, head on over to Dean's own Blog for America and shudder at the possibility of Dean running as a third party candidate to spite the DNC. His supporters run through conspiracy theories about why Dean fell apart, they grab onto flase hopes and treat every reporter as in on the plan to bring down Dean. (What killed Dean in my view? Two words: Al Gore). Just click on the comments section of the blog posts, and wonder. The Democrats keep waiting to put any issues on the table other than "electability". Once Kerry is nominated, perhaps they might still stand for something. But with a Dean taking away Kerry votes, things might get ugly, again, on the left. But you say Dean pledged to support the Dem nominee? Well, he also pledged to get out after Wisconsin, and is now ignoring his top advisors. To get back to the light tone of teh debate, the reason I think Dean didn't go negative is because he is waiting until Kerry is officially anoited and he runs off on his own to attack him. Why waste the big guns early(like the Dems did with Bush's Nat'l Guard record). The election might get more interesting with Dean running on his own, but it would be bad for the country. And I say this as someone who hates Dean AND Kerry and wants a Bush victory. Is there anyone with any control over Dean left in his camp? Maybe his wife? She seemed sane. Maybe she could prescribe him something...
:: C.M. Burns 2/17/2004 11:16:00 AM [+] :: ::
Trillions and Trillions...

John "Derb" Derbyshire, who's social commentary can be a little grating(he takes a little TOO much joy in being un-PC, like it's his schtick), is an excellent mathematician and a staunch fiscal Conservative. He has a dry, British sense of humor, unsurprising since he is, in fact, dry and British, though now an American citizen. Today, he empty's both barrels of his considerable writing talents on the President, Congress, Corporations, Special Interests, and his fellow voters as he has seen the aditional ONE TRILLION DOLLAR "readjusted" budget deficit estimate for the next 7 years and had enough. On this he and I agree, and he is funny, most of the time. His sayings are funny, too. Plus he was in "Return of the Dragon" with Bruce Lee. So he's got that going for him, which is nice.
:: C.M. Burns 2/17/2004 10:58:00 AM [+] :: ::
Down With President's Day!

Yesterday was Presdient's Day, a National Holiday that I had off that used to be two National Holiday's, Washington's Birthday and Lincoln's. Back in either the early 90's or late 80's the government decided to combine them into one all-encompasing holiday that diminishes those two great men and enhances the reputation, however slightly, or losers like Hoover, Hayes, and Andrew Johnson. Last year
in National Review, Matt Spalding of The Heritage Foundation pointed out that legally, Washington's Birthday is still a Holiday, and suggested that by Executive Order, President Bush abolish the absurd "President's Day" holiday, and reinstitute at least Washington's Birthday as a full holiday so that the father of our country would get the recognition he deserves. Hey, it's how Thanksgiving got started. Plus, every February I wouldn't have to think that we were subtly honoring Nixon or Clinton. Give The original George W. his due. Give him back his birthday.
:: C.M. Burns 2/17/2004 09:13:00 AM [+] :: ::
:: Thursday, February 12, 2004 ::
It's not a rational for war, but...

Yes, we didn't attack Saddam to make good news for people to make fun of. But if we HADN'T attacked, we would have beeb deprived of classic stuff like this from The Onion: "Saddam Hussein Rules Over Cell With Iron Fist". I wouldn't want to be a mouse under his rule...
:: C.M. Burns 2/12/2004 09:23:00 AM [+] :: ::
:: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 ::
Is Kerry A Bob Dole Redux

John Hood writes in National Review Online today that the Democrats have made a huge mistake by front-loading the primary process to get an early nominess to rally around. He compares this to the GOP strategy in '96 and '00 when the party produced two nominees that sailed through the primaries and got hammered into near submission in Bush's case and total dismemberment in Dole's case. He contrasts it with Bill Clinton's EXTREMELY difficult race for the nomination in 1992 in which all of Clintons considerable dirty laundry got aired before the Republicans even spent a dime on attacking him. He fended off the hard looks and swept up in November. He's applying the lesson to the Dems, but the GOP should learn as well. A long primary season might just put the best candidates out there, as I believe that since G.H.W. Bush won a tough nomination in 1988, the GOP hasn't had a really good, hardfought primary(McCain only had a week of good press after New Hampshire). If Bush loses in November, or if in 2008 the party is looking at a tough battle to succeed Dubya, they should reconsider their early primary strategy, and if Kerry gets whipped in November, which is actually more likely now than it would have been 12 years ago, the Dems should go for the long season as well.

If Kerry does lose, Democrats will have one consolation: the end of Terry McCaulife as Dem. Party Chairman. He's been awful for his party and if this strategy backfires, the Democrats will kick him to the curb, where he belongs. A Kerry loss will be more McCaulife's fault than anyone else's, not voter fraud, evil GOP smear tactics, or Kerry's. Bush is vulnerable. The Dems are already fumbling their chance with a Dole "electibility" strategy. Learn from the GOP, Dems, or you've got 4 more years of Bush detesting, and I don't think even an Eric Alterman or Joe Conason could keep it up that much longer.
:: C.M. Burns 2/11/2004 11:47:00 AM [+] :: ::
Democrats Against Kerry

Well, I suppose "Democrats Desperately Hoping Edwards Beats Kerry" would be a better header, but I think that this article in Slate "Kerried Away - The myth and math of Kerry's electability" by William Saletan shows that some Democrats have the same problems with Kerry that I do-namely, that he sucks big time. Of course, they're concerend he'll get clobbered in November and kill the party, while I'm hoping he does. But Saletan is as intellectually honest a partisan pundit as there ever was, and is an excellent writer. He takes a cold, hard look at the exit polling and concludes what every other pundit concluded last night: that Kerry's voters in the primaries are focusing only on "electability" as an issue with Kerry. However, while people as smart as Tim Russert and Chris Matthews are glossing over Kerry's big issue deficits, Saletan is tackling them head on. Head on over to the article to read about how exit polls show that people who actually CARE about the issues in the campaign DON'T overwhelmingly support Kerry and how this is dangerous for the Democrats. For more fun Kerry-bashing on the moderate Democrat side, see kausfiles over at Slate as well, as Mickey Kaus has made it his mission to blast Kerry daily, in the hope that his party will take notice. It's all very interesting, especially as the media is focusing on Bush's GOP problems(and he has them). But Kerry is polling pretty low on "has same position on issues as I do" amongst moderate Dems, and this could be bad news for the whole party. In the interest of a good campaign, I'd also like to see the Dems dump Kerry, maybe for Edwards, who is at least human, unlike the awful, awful, offensively bad John F. Kerry. God I don't like him!
:: C.M. Burns 2/11/2004 10:07:00 AM [+] :: ::
:: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 ::
Why I'm Still a Bush Man

Unless something monumental happens in the next 9 months, such as Bush being impeached due to incontrovertible proof of high crimes and whatnot or the emergence of a Democrat other than Kerry who is SERIOUS about National Security, I will vote to re-elect George W. Bush. It might be the hardest vote I ever cast. I am a Republican, but I am also a fiscal conservative, and Bush is spending too much AND blaming CONGRESS? I don't like that. I wish Bush had a primary challange, just so he'd come around to seeng the folly of his spending policy(on taxes, he's fine for me. After all, we GOPers hate the poor, right?). But Bush is serious about ending terrorists threats to this Nation. John Kerry seems to be arguing for doing nothing. He has no platform, no ideas, and Democratic talk about Universal Health Care is just as fiscally irresponsible as Bush is being. If you think the deficit is bad now, wait until a President Kerry decides to inact a Health Plan. Sure, even if Bush loses the GOP will keep the Congress, at least, current polling indicates that, but Kerry would certainly push the debate about spending in the wrong direction. As would any Democrat. And Bush at least has the courage to say "reform" and "Social Security" in the same sentence, something Democrats can never do, as evidenced by Gore's irresponsible, damaging "lockbox" crap being popular on the Left. These are the issues that will make or break America in the coming decade, and Kerry is just plain wrong on all of it. Bush is not my perfect choice, I cringe when he talks, and his administration is way too secretive, Clinton-esque secrecy, really, and that's not what he said he'd do when he came to town. So do I have problems with Dubya? Hell yes. But is he a safer bet than Kerry, a man with no new ideas who's incredibly cynical "reformer" campaign would make Bill Clinton blush? Hell yes he is. I think Kerry would be a far worse President than Al Gore would have been. Gore's campaign was poorly run and he refused to be himself, but there was a certain class that he had at the time(apparently gone now), that Kerry simply lacks. Perhaps it's because I like the idea of a leader who LEADS rather than panders is the reason I like Bush. Dems say Bush is the greater of two evils. Bullshit. Kerry is a manipulative, ideologicaly bankrupt hack who knows nothing about how to deal with the world we live in. He actually makes me angry in a way Clinton or Gore never did. I don't know why, but when Bill Clinton seems more honest than Kerry, it's no surprise that I'll stick with a wobbly Bush over a stiff, empty Kerry.
:: C.M. Burns 2/10/2004 09:28:00 PM [+] :: ::
Replace Cheney Now

I can't think of a really GOOD reason for the President to keep Cheney on as his VP. I can think of plenty of good reasons to dump him, however, including the fact that he's just plain creepy. Also, it would shut off a lot of the "Cheney's the power behind the throne" talk that, while baseless, persists amongsts the now SCREECHINGLY angry left. Plus, he's not viable as a '08 candidate. I think Condi Rice would be the perfect choice, as I don't think Powell wants the job. If the Dems want to play the race card once this National Guard thing dies down(and it will, as the Dems have shot their load on it too soon), they'll think twice about it.

:: C.M. Burns 2/10/2004 09:11:00 PM [+] :: ::
Maybe It'll End Like "Easy Rider"...

Not content with simply humiliating themselves in front of a single town, Paris "Butt Clevege" Hilton and Nicole "Trackmark" Ritchie have signed on for a second season of "The Simple Life". According to the article, they will this time be travelling via RV across America. A FOX spokesman said "It'll be interesting to see the country through their eyes. Maybe Paris will visit a Wal-Mart. I'm kind of hoping they stop at a Hilton." Well, I'm pretty sure Hilton's have dress codes, so they might not get in. And I've always wanted to see the US through the eyes of two doped up, brain dead rich morons who wouldn't know "America" if it drove up beside them in a pickup and blew them away with a shotgun, symbolizing the end of an era. Of course, I'm not suggesting this happen, I'm just hoping FOX publishes their route in advance so those who wish to "welcome" them can properly prepare and find a place by the road with enough cover that the cameras can't find them. Whoops. Watch Paris and Nicole create class resentment in America this May on FOX! Maybe they're working for Kerry...
:: C.M. Burns 2/10/2004 10:06:00 AM [+] :: ::
:: Monday, February 09, 2004 ::
American Men Are All Impotent!

At least, that's the impression I've been getting from TV commercials these days, what with all the Viagra knock-offs for "Erectile dysfunction". I don't even WANT to think about the Mike Ditka ad for whatever Penis pill he's selling, and Cialis is way too comfortable with the phrase "erectile dysfunction". Is that a serious problem? Did anyone even notice until Viagra came out in '97-'98? If it is a problem, shouldn't we be looking into the WHY and not just how to give men 24 hour erections? And finally, can we end the damn saturation commercials? When I'm eating my breakfast and watching Dubya on Meet the Press, the LAST thing I want to see is a commercial for penis pills. And to think we got so worked up over a breast. God, we need to fix our priorities. Stupid Viagra.
:: C.M. Burns 2/09/2004 10:19:00 AM [+] :: ::
:: Friday, February 06, 2004 ::
The End of Politics As We Know It?

There's a facinating article by a Humanities Professor from the University of Texas named Frederick Turner at Tech Central Station called "A New Politics". Turner argues that the political lines in the United States, and perhaps much of the world, are shifting, and not in a normal way. The upheavel he describes and predicts may happen is a total reorganization of the scheme, which would lead to the end of the Democratic and Republican parties, at least as we know them. He points to the fact that since the traditional left is now ideologically bankrupt and with the GOP fighting out exactly what conservatisim means anymore, new labels and alliances may spring up. It's all very interesting and in my mind entirely possible, maybe even inevtiable given the current state of affairs and the technologically advanced world. A facinating think piece.
:: C.M. Burns 2/06/2004 10:49:00 AM [+] :: ::
:: Thursday, February 05, 2004 ::
Fuck the NFL, ESPN, Janet Jackson, Justin Timberlake, CBS and the FCC

The AP is reporting that ESPN is canceling 'Playmakers' after one season. The well-written, entertaining, and controversial show was about the inside workings of a fictional pro football team. It dealt with corrupt management, womanizing players, drug abuse, and everything else that goes on in the NFL that the NFL doesn't want you to know about. ESPN apparently bowed to pressure from the League since a highly rated, critically acclaimed show usually lasts more than one season. ESPN, of course, broadcasts NFL games and is owned by Disney, which also owns ABC which is the home of Monday Night Football. ESPN went down faster than a Hooker on speed. The NFL pulled the strings, and the network said "no mas!". Fuck both of them. The NFL, while being the most well-run professional league in the world, is also a craven, money-grubbing, critiscism-smashing machine. If a player dares to say a ref made a bad call, he gets fined. Say the Commissioner screwed up, you get fined AND suspended. Kill someone, well, sit out a game, maybe. Rape? Suit up, buddy. Plus, the NFL probably knew ALL about the Janet Jackson thing, they've hyped the Super Bowl to the point of irrelevence, and they let way too many people into the Hall of Fame. Fuck Them.

ESPN used to be gutsy as hell. They had cool reporters, they had the best anchors, the sportscenter ads were great. But in the late 90's, they stagnated. The Sportscenter Commericals went belly-up. They bought up Classic Sports Network and promptly turned it into ESPN's greatest hits. They sold out to Disney, and they let Kieth Olbernmann go, a crime compounded by the fact that Olbermann now is a "real" journalist on MSNBC and really, really sucks at it. You ruined agreat SPORTS anchor ESPN! Plus, they have an obsession with Boston sports, like it's the only place in the world with great fans, and while NFL Countdown is still the best pregame show on TV, they were stupid enough to think we'd believe them when they said they were "shocked" Rush Limbaugh acted innapropriately. They suck. Fuck Them.

Janet Jackson has a great voice. She really does. That seems to run in the Jackson family. That, and an inapropriate image of sexuality. With brother Michael, it's little boys. With Janet, it seems to be getting naked FOR little boys and S & M style clothing. Janet hasn't had a hit song in ages and her acting career is DEAD. Two movies she starred in both sucked, "Poetic Justic" being entirely her fault for sucking since Tupac was a good actor, and "Nutty Professor 2" sucked because the producers actually thought we MIGHT believe a fat Eddie Murphy could MARRY Janet Jackson. Her complicty in the plan makes it partly her fault. Plus, she just can't seem to keep her clothes on. There was the Rolling Stone cover, the HBO special, and of course the truly terrible Halftime show. Thankfully, the whole thing seems to be blowing up in her face, with her being banned from the Grammy's(yeah she "chose" not to attend, right before an album release. And I'm Osama bin Laden)and she's put another nail in the coffin of the Jackson Family "Dynasty". But she deserves a big "Fuck You" for what's happening because of her stunt. An overreactive FCC is going after people like crazy. CBS is denying like crazy and looking stupid doing it, and now they are censoring the Grammy's. A FIVE MINUTE delay. How stupid and what overkill! And the worst part is, it's all because of a stupid stunt that was obvious and unoriginal and lame. Remember the "Soy Bomb" guy back in '97? The guy who ran onto the stage and danced while Dylan played? That was awesome and funny. Now, that will never happen again at any big live event thanks to Janet Jackson and her stupid pierced nipple. The goofy, unplanned, random stuff will be edited out. Meanwhile, MTV will have planned "accidents" at all it's awards and claim it is still "edgy" because of it. Damn. I hate her. Fuck Her.

Justin Timberlake. Well, his lame backtracking after the incident is enough to prove he has no brain, and he has no credibility anymore, and maybe it will destroy his career too, to something good can come of this. He also may have shown society that maybe we SHOULDN'T encourage sexuality in young children. But still, he's a tool, and if his lame act leads to censorship, I say: Fuck Him.

CBS, the "Family Network" probably knew all about this thing. How could they not. It's the Super Bowl. MTV certainly knew about it. It wasn't a "sudden" thing. And now CBS is bleeping the Grammy's and cutting out originality because they miscalculated. Tools. Fuck Them.

The FCC is going to fine CBS $27,000? Why bother. Do something useful for a change, like beating up on cellphone companies some more, or attacking Comcast for lying about it's internet service. Until then, lay off and let society condemn these idiots. Fuck You.

I would say "Fuck MTV", but since they traffic in cheap stunts like this it's really no surprise. That they tried to deny knowing it was going down is extra lame in their case since if they WERE edgy instead of saying they were, they should have proudly said: yeah we did it, what are you gonna do? I would say kill them, but still they would at least be honest, and a bit rebellious. But they're corproate shills with no class, so what do you expect. I always say Fuck MTV just on genweral principal anyway. So they get a pass for being predictable.

As you can tell, this whole thing has gotten me upset. Well, the whole thing reeked. I was just annoyed it was getting so much press to begin with, and when it looked like it would backlash on Jackson and Timberlake I was glad, but this censorship shit is annoying. Especially since it was staged. So that got my haunches up. Thankfully, the Oscars are resisting ANY delay, so they still have integrity on free speech, if nothing else. And maybe something good will come of it. There are two columns in two different newspapers today. One is by Peggy Noonan, former Reagan speechwriter, and it's on Opinion Journal here. She suggests that maybe, just maybe, our culture isn't out of control and pathetic yet. I've never thought we were that messed up culturally, not being a cultural conservative, but Peggy makes some excellent points about the general decline of Western Culture. The second column is by Marjorie Williams in today's Washington Post. Williams writes that this is just a blip on our said cultural state of affairs. She writes about how sexuality is being sold to kids at younger ages, and that a random boob is nothing compared to how kids are exposed to a lot worse all over the place, Hollywood, video games, whatever. These women differ politically and neither is calling for censorship, but simply a general reassesing of where we are in society when one random breast invokes outrage, and, to steal from Williams, clothes that are designed to make 8 year olds look like hookers doesn't even raise an eyebrow. So maybe this whole pathetic affair will have some kind of happy ending afterall, and maybe, just maybe, lame no-talent acts like Timberlake and Britnety and Xtina and the rest will be exposed for the frauds they are. Fuck 'em all.
:: C.M. Burns 2/05/2004 10:57:00 AM [+] :: ::
:: Monday, February 02, 2004 ::
If You're Gonna Have Some Fun, You're Gonna Break Some Eggs

Fun game here called The Amazing Dare Dozen. Break some eggs.
:: C.M. Burns 2/02/2004 03:28:00 PM [+] :: ::
The Super Bowl Really Sucked, People

I've been reading way too much crap about how great the Super Bowl was this year. That's BS. The game was dull and lifeless until about midway through the third quarter. Before that there was an excellent chance that a punter could have been named the games MVP, and a safety could have decided the score. It was SLOW, and not in a great "defensive struggle" sort of way. Just bad football was what I saw for 2 and a half quarters, until the offense for both sides exploded(The over/under on the Game was 35. Vegas not so Happy, also since the Pats failed to cover the meager spread). Yes, the last quarter was a classic example of how NOT to play defense by two of the most powerful defensive teams in the league, not a great showdown by two fun n gun QB's. It was sort of sad. The game is no classic, even by the pathetic standards of the Super Bowl.

Of course, the game is only half the story. The other half is the commericals, which were the worst since 1999, and with this year's halftime show also providing content that sucked, Super Bowl XXXVIII was an all-around failure. The commericals were uniformly crass and crude, which makes you giggle when you see it, but makes you feel stupid for doing so in the end. The farting horse, the bikini wax for Cedric the Entertainer, the Horny monkey, all one-joke lame-o's that really didn't take any imagination. The best commercial of the night did have to be Budweiser, though, with the Donkey who wanted to be a Clydesdale. It was clever, didn't have an obvious payoff joke, and turned expectations on it's head. Also, the car commerical where the kids had soap in their mouths was good because it was a CAR commercial that dared to be different, ie, funny. The rest were nothing special, although Homer Simpson's MasterCard spot gets a special place in my heart. One final good one was the Willie Nelson advice doll, because A)It's Willie Nelson and B)Don Zimmer was involved. Very funny, proving H&R Block can run with the same concept two straight years and be original about it. The rest were intellectually insulting or so full of gross out humor that I thought the Farraley Brothers might have directed them all, only if they had been lobotomized. Bad, bad year for commercials.

And the halftime show. If it were not for the "accidental" baring of Janet Jackson's wierd, sparkly nipple by Justin Timberlake, the talk would be how MTV could produce such an awful spectacle. I know they really don't DO music anymore, but couldn't they have gotten the artists to perform songs written this CENTURY! I mean, Kid Rock does Cowboy, which is at least 5 years old, Janet Jackson sings "Rythem Nation", and those pathetic old geezers, Aerosmith, sand a song older than most of the players on the field. It was really bad. As for Janet's toatlly scripted nipple "shocker". There wasn't much shocking too it, other than they decided to "piss off the squares" by showing a boob on CBS. And not Phil Simms, I mean a breast, a teet, a funbag. It wasn't all that shocking, nor was it even risque. It was a sad, old fashioned "shock" move that simple didn't work in the context of the show or in being "shocking". Shocking would have been her holding up a picture of brother Michael with the words "Guilty" written on them. Shocking would have been her showing some new material. Shocking would have been a halftime show that didn't suck. This was just a sad attention grabber. Kinda pathetic, though my crowd all wanted to see what really happened, whether it was an accident or not. Verdict: no accident. Check outDRUDGE REPORT for an animated GIF of the whole thing that shows just how planned it was.

All in all, a sad Super Bowl. With one exception. Beyonce Knowles, proving that she has classic beauty and an outstanding voice, sang a wonderfully vibrant National Anthem that was just pitch perfect. I thought it was very nice, especially how the vice-chairman of the Joint Chiefs escorted her to the stage. Entertainment and Patriotisim, two common Super Bowl threads coming together in a classy way. How nice, and yet how rare. I'm forgetting the Super Bowl as I type this. Who played again?
:: C.M. Burns 2/02/2004 12:47:00 PM [+] :: ::
Happy Birthday to Me

Today is Feb 2, and it is my 27th birthday. Yes, my birthday is on Groundhog Day, and that SOB Punxsutawney Phil saw his damn shadow which means 6 more weeks of shitty. Terrific. Anyway, in honor of my birthday, only positive, non-political funny stuff will be posted, and I will star of by saying that if Bill Murray, star of too many great movies to list, does not win a Best Actor Oscar for "Lost in Translation" than the terrorists have already won. Go Bill. (He's also from my hometown)
:: C.M. Burns 2/02/2004 10:50:00 AM [+] :: ::

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?