What you lookin' at?

Yeah yeah, I'm back. As with any blogcation, this blogcation was just too damned short. I feel like I need a blogcation from my blogation, you know what I mean?

(How many of you have heard co-workers say that? How many of you have said it?)

It's not like I had a real blogcation. First off, I just had to check Ask Me Later's mail at least once. Doing so made me put up this post. But it's a good thing I did, because, as I said, it's for a very worthy cause.

So while I was here, I figured I'd just check out a few other blogs, and what do I find but Elliot dissin' us while I'm gone! He said our template looked like a menu in a martini bar? I mean, what's wrong with that? I love martinis! But then he says we have "excellent commentary." Gee, thanks Elliot, that's like asking if a girl is hot and being told, "well, she has a great personality."

Which all meant that I had to check in on Ramon. Don't ask. He begged to do it and the next thing I know the place looks like Austen Powers' guest bathroom. As el Diablo called it, "Brokeback blogging." I guess Elliot was right. So I brushed up on my html and tried to clean things up a bit, and now Ramon's not talking to me. But he still has admin rights, so I'm not sure he'll ever really go away.

Meanwhile, Cantanekerous is going off. And apparently so were Hannity and Baldwin. Now that would be a show I would watch. So my apologies to her for disrupting her posts.

And I just realized I even stopped in to write some other post about a an article by Ben Stein, which has been around for a bit but I had just thought it worth putting up. Just consider it my "fix."

Now that I think about it, maybe it wasn't so much a blogcation as it was drying out. I did get the shakes.

Anyway, I'm back, I'm cranky, and I'm here to kick ass and chew bubblegum...and I'm all out of bubblegum.

Quick! Name the movie!

Good gosh, I just realized that this post is almost like a Carnival of Ask Me Later.

I'm so sorry.

Just think of it as having had to sit through my blogcation slide show.

It's a BUTTERFLY!

Hello this is Ramon!

The Casper, he has asked me to change the way the things around here look. It is like the butterfly! It will soon be so beautiful!

So don't be saucy you! Good things will come!

Ramon!

A worthy cause

It seems only appropriate that our first Have Your Say be for a worthy cause...

March 29, 2006An open letter to the Southeastern Wisconsin New Media

As so many of you have already reported, Quadrevion Henning, 12, and Purvis Virginia-Parker, 11, were last seen at 3:30 p.m. Sunday, March 19th, 2006. That is when they told Henning's grandfather that they were going out to play basketball in the area around North 53rd Street and West Hampton Avenue. Ten days later, the boys are still missing and believed to be in the Milwaukee area.

At 5:00 PM on March 25th, a family Web site (henningparker.com) was launched to assist in the search. The site displays the latest facts regarding what the boys were wearing as well as the most recent photographs and physical statistics. The site also provides a link to the latest “Missing Persons” poster in both PDF and JPG format. This is where the families really need your help.

As of 4:26 AM this morning, there were 183,360 hits at henningparker.com. While this is a respectable number, less encouraging is the number (4,168) of “Missing Posters” that were downloaded. The US postal carriers delivered 54,000 posters to homes and businesses surrounding the boy’s homes last weekend. We, as members of the New Media, can do much better. The Web site is capable of delivering over 6,000 posters per hour. In a few short hours, with your help, tens of thousands of these posters can be Downloaded, Printed and Distributed throughout Southeastern Wisconsin. If the download volume breaks the Web site, I will happily fix it and get it right back on line.

Download Print and Distribute

Gary Henning, Quadrevion’s grandfather said it best, “I would like the picture of these two boys burned into everyone’s mind.” So many people want to help, and the family and police think that this is the most effective way for the public to get involved. It’s definitely the easiest and fastest!

Download the poster

Print out at least one copy

Distribute it.

The missing poster is at http://www.henningparker.com/cm/missingposter.pdf for the PDF version and http://www.henningparker.com/cm/missingposter.jpg for the JPG version. If you would like banners or link graphics, please let me know the height and width parameters and I will get them to you immediately.

Ladies and gentlemen of the New Media, please flex your muscles for this cause.

Jim WendtWebmaster - henningparker.com

jwendt@henningparker.com

414.333.1632

Not Malkin

Xoff Tugs on York's Pigtail

An historic schoolyard battle took place today in the treacherous lot known as "Xoff's playground." Noted bully Bill Christofferson was seen calling Dennis York "Dennis Dork," and made fun of his pointy head. The incident appears to have been an ill-fated attempt to "tug" on York's short, piggy tail.


Here's the story:

Coincidental Doy-nations

Just when you think Xoff is finally going to admit that Doyle is all about Pay-to-play, he comes up with another post like this, in defense of Doy-nations made by out-of-state and highly commissioned real estate firm Equis Corp.:

Just when you think the Journal Sentinel has stretched things to the limit to try to link Jim Doyle's donations to state contracts -- like writing about donations that were given to someone else by another company -- the standard gets lower.

The latest: Employees of a firm with a state contract give money to Doyle's campaign a year later.

Yeah. Because it's such a stretch to doubt the legitimacy of Doyle's contracts. (Cough *WEAC*) (Cough *Potawatomi*) (Cough *Adelman*)

And here's a clue as to when things stop being coincidental: When they happen more than once:

Meanwhile Monday, the Democracy Campaign also criticized a $6.7 million state contract with Indianapolis-based consulting firm Crowe Chizek & Co. to consolidate state computer servers. Employees of that company gave $17,500 to Doyle in the second half of last year, more than a year after they signed a contract with the state.

As with Equis, Crowe Chizek employees had never given money to Doyle previously.

I mean, surely it's a matter of coincidence that one year after receiving a state contract and never before having donated to Doyle, the President of Equis Corp. finally decided it was time to show financial support. And surely it's a matter of coincidence that one year after receiving a state contract and having never previously donated to Doyle, Crowe Chizek employees finally decided to throw some cash his way.

Besides, Doyle has been a stand-up Governor. There's no reason at all to doubt coincidences in this administration.

(Wink, wink)

The real stretch here is Xoff trying to pull off the idea that, "...the Journal Sentinel has stretched things to the limit to try to link Jim Doyle's donations to state contracts...."

That's the real stretch.

Miller Park: Helping Charities One Beer at a Time

Local charity groups were unhappy to hear that Miller Park has, "...new rules this season that will make them fully liable if they serve alcohol to someone who already looks intoxicated."

Does anyone else find it ironic that such a rule should go into effect just days after it was announced that, "Meat prices raised at Miller Park; Brewers won't change the price of beer."

Seems to me that with the new rule, it would make more sense to raise the price of beer and lower the price of food.

Larry King Goes Old School

Larry King recently interviewed the First Lady. I think before the interview someone should have told him that old riddle.

You know, the one that goes: A man and his son were in a car accident. The man was killed and the son badly hurt. The boy was rushed to a hospital. The surgeon on duty, when examining the boy, said: "I can't operate on him! That's my son!" How is this possible if the father died in the accident?

The surgeon is the boy's mom, stupid!

KING: You've lived the life of a First Lady of a state and a federal government. Would you want it for one of your daughters?

MRS. BUSH: Sure, if they wanted it. I mean, the fact is I'm the First Lady because I happened to marry someone who ran for President and won. I didn't run for the office; I'm here because he ran and he wanted to run. As he said, don't feel sorry for him, he's a volunteer -- he volunteered for this job and he ran for the office. I think that I have an unbelievable opportunity to see our country at its very, very best. And do I get to see it at its worst? Sure. But overwhelmingly, every opportunity that I have strengthens and encourages me because of the way the American people are.

KING: So you wouldn't mind it if one of them had the same fate?

MRS. BUSH: Sure, no. I mean, why did you not suggest that one of them might run themselves?

Dishonorable Mention

So, Duke has made the headlines again. And this time, it's not for a noteworthy study or any astounding research or even an honorable mention. Nope. Turns out the lacrosse team may be in a bit of trouble. News of the alleged gang-rape by several lacrosse team members has made national news, and can be found at the top of almost every major websites news stories.

This has got me to wondering, why is it that this story has peaked the interest of so many? Consider the following statistics:

-One out of every four college women have experienced rape or attempted rape.

-One in seven college women will be raped before they graduate, and 90% will know their attacker.

-One out of twelve college men in a 1988 study admitted that they committed acts that meet the legal definition of rape or attempted rape, but only 1% of them consider the behavior criminal in nature.

So, what is it that makes this story at Duke so special? Don't get me wrong, I appreciate it whenever eyes are turned to the plight of women in this country who, without fear, just want to get an education, or walk around at night, or (gasp) get drunk at a party, or even though I don't agree with it, to earn their living selling out as dancers for private parties for rich boys or pathetic boys or any other boys who for whatever reason must rely on paying for sexual enjoyment in some form or another.

I just disagree with the way the story is being handled. The real story here is the obscene amount of rape that occurs in this country on a daily basis and that college campuses seem to be the ideal setting for them.

When that's what's being discussed, then maybe things can start to change.

Clooney? Clooney? Has anyone seen Mr. Clooney?

Just a quick break from my blogcation to share this article from Ben Stein (a little dated, but I just read it and that's all that matters).

The brave guy in Hollywood will be the one who says that this is a fabulously great country where we treat gays, blacks, and everyone else as equal. The courageous writer in Hollywood will be the one who says the oil companies do their best in a very hostile world to bring us energy cheaply and efficiently and with a minimum of corruption. The producer who really has guts will be the one who says that Wall Street, despite its flaws, has done the best job of democratizing wealth ever in the history of mankind.

So You Had A Bad Day

With Casper being gone, the pressure to write something daily has definitely increased. I don't have much time, so instead of looking for something to inspire me, I am going to use some space to vent. Hopefully by the time I'm done I can look back on today and laugh.

My bad day actually started last night. I don't know if I had the flu or food poisoning, but whatever it was, it was the first thing to inspire me to pray since my dad's cancer. Once again, the prayers didn't work. Thanks for nothing.

So, I got up at 6 after very little sleep and had to convince myself to go into work because of 3 rather important meetings. I was feeling pretty tough for making it there at all, but looking rather hellacious.

Luckily the day went fairly quickly, but not without protest from my stomach which seemed to be playing its own concerto. The stomach symphony prompted me to keep talking lest anyone hear the raucous, which in turn made my meetings longer. I'll have to rethink that strategy next time.

Yesterday, I tried to get to the DMV in time to get new plates on my car, but that was the one day it closes at 5:15, and I got there at 5:20. So, after an already challenging day I found myself back at the DMV this time trying to figure out the number system of the waiting line. Turns out they play a little game called "Switch it up." Yeah, I was D561 and D555 was on the board. I thought, "This shouldn't take long." Little did I know there are also numbers that start with A and B.

Two hours later I got my new license plates and was told that my license was about to expire. Given that I looked worse-than-hungover but still experiencing ass-numbness from the wait, I decided to go ahead with the new license. "No picture can be worse than my last one," I thought. I thought wrong.

I finally got home to find out that the hell-beast (otherwise known as my dog Sam) had broken out of the kitchen and decided to relieve himself on my bed and pillows.

Luckily no police were around to witness my response to that action. Ultimately, he was saved by my boyfriend who brought me dinner and helped to calm me down. What an angel. That's what Sam said, too.

Anyone else have a bad day? Feel free to vent in the comment section below. Strangely, I feel much better after writing this, and not too embarrassed to post it. Enjoy.

Hannity vs Baldwin: Round One

Alec Baldwin was quite surprised to find himself talking to Sean Hannity on WABC radio's Brian Whitman Show. Turns out Baldwin bailed on a scheduled appearance of Hannity's show, so Hannity called in to confront him when he was doing Whitman's show.

The exchange was priceless. See below:

HANNITY: Alec, I wanted to give you an official WABC welcome considering you were supposed to come on my program last week and you didn't show up. What happened?

BALDWIN: No, I wasn't supposed to come on your program, Sean Hannity.

HANNITY: No, actually you were supposed to come on the program because a deal was made with your agent that if you were going to come on with Brian, first you'd come on with me.

BALDWIN: I wouldn't dream of coming on your program, Sean Hannity. I'm here with Brian. I'm here with a really talented broadcaster.

HANNITY: [Crosstalk] that you are, you don't tell the truth.

BALDWIN: Why would I want to come on the show with a no-talent, former construction worker hack like you?

HANNITY: Are you the guy that said of our vice president, while we're at war, while we're leading troops in harm's way - are you the reckless, third-rate Hollywood actor who said that Dick Cheney is a terrorist? Are you the guy...

BALDWIN: Yes I am.

HANNITY: ... who said to stone Henry Hyde to death? Are you the guy who said our president is a CIA mass murderer? I wanted you to come on the program and defend that, you gutless coward.

BALDWIN: At first I thought this was a joke. But you can hear all the acid venom spewing hatred. It is Sean Hannity. [END EXCERPT]

Read the rest here.

Kane Responds

Apparently, Mr. Kane doesn't listen to much talk radio. Take Charlie's screener for example, he seems to enjoy letting dissenting callers on the air. And why not? When it provides for fodder like this, it's hard not to enjoy it.

Most bloggers that I've seen have email addresses, too. Every single time I've written McBride, for example, I've recieved a response.

And I don't think I need to go back to McBride's archives to pull the numerous posts that showcased her discourse with Kane via email. Which is to say, Kane is out of his element here. Of all the bloggers, I think, McBride is the most likely to respond, and the most likely to do so publicly by posting emails to her blog.

Furthermore this idea of a call screener not letting people on-air because they disagree with with the host is completely out of line with the notion of a call screener. It's actually easier for the host to continue the discourse and to get the lines lit up when the host is debating. To my knowledge the screener ensures that the person is audible, not on a cell phone with a weak signal and able to get their point across quickly and coherently.

And finally, I find it even more ironic that Kane keeps referring to the screeners as the problem seeing as Kane has the biggest screener of all: himself. When Kane actually responds to an email or a phone call, he gets to "screen" which ones he makes public, unlike the comment section of blogs, where most anyone can immediately make public their words. And if Letters to the editor is his response, well it's no surprise that those letters are "screened" as well.

Once again Kane lets his mouth get the best of him. Instead of owning up, he just keeps digging deeper.

If he disagrees with my opinion, of course, he is free to comment about it below.

Blogcation

I'm taking a blogcation. Or a blogattical. Whatever you call it, I'm taking a break from blogging. I've found myself spending a little too much time surfing news and blogs lately, and since the Ask Me Later benefits package includes two weeks unpaid vacation, I figured I'd take advantage of that to "freshen up."

I hope you'll all stop by for the slide show when I return.

Meanwhile, Cantankerous, I'm sure, will be a gracious host. If not, I can always get Harris Kane to fill in for me while I'm gone.

Sykes and Wagner Virgin Podcast

I guess even though all this Walker business started too late for their shows, Charlie and Jeff didn't want to miss out on the fun...so they took it to the web, posting their first ever joint podcast.

Listen to it here.

Looks like I wasn't too wacky with my theory on Tommy running for something. Charlie reports that Walker is talking Tommy for US Senate. Jeff's opinion is that Tommy is making too much money.

It's an interesting podcast. Kinda fun to hear Jeff and Charlie together.

The Ironical Mr. Kane

While making my rounds this morning, I noticed this quip from Mr. Kane:

STOP whining. I think these folks need to start posting feedback to their blogs and maybe do a web chat now and then where they answer questions. The way they do it now is similar to right-wing radio talk shows that screen callers to prevent any dissenting voice from being heard.

I went to post a comment about it, but alas, there is no comment section on his blog.

How ironic.

Wacky Theory

So, what are the odds that Scott Walker bowing out of the race means that Tommy is going to step in?

Thoughts?

Just a Thought

If thousands of of illegal aliens didn't show up to their jobs yesterday, but instead attended a rally against the "evil empire" that is trying to throw them out of this country, shouldn't that, in theory, have left tens of thousands of job openings for the thousands of unemployed black males in this country?

Whose right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are the liberals protecting, anyway? Certainly not Americans'.

Kane Takes a "Small" Dig at McBride

From his chat today:

Q: Freda of Milwaukee - I see your name mentioned on lots of blogs. What do you think about blogging? Do you mind if they talk about your column on their blogs?

A: Eugene Kane - Freda Blogging is an exciting new development that give some people a voice who never had one before. BUT some bloggers are little more than political hacks who play juvenile "gotcha" games. I don't mind being mentioned in blogs as long as they link their readers to my column so they can read what I wrote themselves. I don't like so-called media experts acting like they can tell me how to write my column because in most cases they are second-rate writers who can't carry my jock when it comes to real journalism.

What is This World Coming To?

How does something like this happen at 2 o'clock in the afternoon? Is it reasonable to believe that not a single soul was around the intersection of 1st and Center St. when this crime occurred? Is it reasonable to think that nobody, anywhere could have done something to help this kid?

These, I think, are not the right questions.


I think, rather, I should be asking whether or not McGee is going to be out peddling any stop snitching t-shirts. Because it is that kind of mentality that allows things like this to happen.

I think I should be asking when the Eugene Kane's of the world will resort to cries of responsibility instead of excuses. Because I'm sure you can bet that in the next few days we'll hear his answer to this crime. Yes, because in poor neighborhoods, apparently, nobody has a conscious. You only get those if you're rich and white. (Although I hope he does write something on this, and that he proves my prediction wrong)

The fact that yet another crime like this can happen, and in the middle of broad daylight should turn a glaring eye back on the community in which it happened. When will the people who live in these communities decide that they've had enough?

Maybe after the stop snitchin' t-shirts go out of style.

Ultimately, there's only so much government programs and police can do. At some point in time, someone (and by that I mean a lot of someone's) in these communities has got to stand up and decide whether or not their children are going to be able to see tomorrow. Whether or not thugs can roam the streets freely and without fear of repercussion. Someone has got to decide whether or not the world they wake up to can be bettered, and they've got to do something about it. It's my belief that these changes can happen, but they've got to start with caring about your neighbor.

UPDATE: Apparently, an unconcerned citizen did notice a "commotion":

Lillie Thomas lives nearby and noticed the commotion as she walked to the store Thursday. "A brown truck stopped right there and they got out."

Thomas tells TODAY'S TMJ4 it's not unusual to see people fighting at the school. "You can't really tell when they playin' or when they fightin' because there is so much of this going on over at that school."

You wouldn't like me when I'm angry

For a while now I've been considering pulling XOff off the blogroll. It's not that I don't think he has something valuable to say, it's just that sometimes the way he says it makes me angry. Like, pulling hair out angry. C'mon...Tom Tomorrow? You're better than that, Bill. And when Rowan and Kane substitute, well, I might as well enter a Homer Simpson look-alike contest.

Now I'm not a petty person. That, and I'm too lazy to to mess with my template. But if things keep going on and on like this, I'm going to start ruining a lot of shirts. Why? Because sometimes some things just make me angry, and I start to Hulk out.

So here's my solution. From now on, I will gauge my reactions to certain things on the following scale:

*****

PRE-HULK

Yeah, just me. By no means do I intend to use this every single time I post. Instead, expect to see it when I share something I consider thought provoking, like this post from dear old Elliot that kept me awake for three days straight. Or maybe I'll use it when I think the Cheddarsphere needs a good Casper fix. Y'know, I wasn't wearing pants when this picture was taken. Ladies? Ladies?

*****

OLD HULK
By '70s standards, this was about as tough as you could get while wearing cut-offs and being green. And it's about the way I feel when I read things from Folkbum's Rambles and Rants or that Melinda who's in favor of the smoking ban. Put sitting in front of Mandy Jenkins (who, by the way, did herself a huge career favor by speaking her mind) at the Blogger Summit in that category as well. I may disagree, but my anger pretty much amounts to me becoming muscle-bound and coating myself with body paint. I guess I'm saying it can be kinda fun.

*****

NEW HULK

Thousands of man-hours and countless gigabytes of computer processing are dedicated to just how angry I am now. Something like this will leave me raging and unable to form complete sentences. I stop using doors and simply walk through walls. Blogger being down will also probably get me here, so I hope their offices are in a deep, underground bunker. Not that that would save them or anything.

*****

HULK HOGAN

This is for when something upsets me, but I'm not sure why. The bans on gay marriage and abortion come to mind. I'm bothered by it, but I need someone to help me work through it. Or I'm just confused because something simply doesn't make sense. Mr. Christofferson, I'm looking in your direction. Basing your argument on the other person's poor grammar or misspellings will result in a handlebar mustached pensioner visiting your dreams. And maybe I'll just use it because what this world needs more of is Hulk Hogan.

Study Determines that Milwaukee Columnists Want to be Bloggers

A recent post by Spivak and Bice quoted a blogger who stated that any blogger's true desire is to find his or her words in print. Naturally, the Spice Boys used this to try to prove their usual point in the invisible pissing contest in which they seem to be engaged: journalists are better than bloggers.

I found that quite ironic seeing as in Milwaukee, the trend seems to be the other way around: Columnists want to be bloggers. It's true. I did a study. Here are my findings:

Spivak & Bice Blog
Eugene Kane's Blog
Tim Cuprisin Blog
Mandy Jenkins Blog
Patrick McIlheran Blog

Conclusion: This study has determined that most Milwaukee columnists want to be bloggers.

Elliot is a bad a**

Having read From Where I Sit for a while now, I've long had this impression that Elliot is a soft-spoken, gentle person. After meeting him and seeing his tricked-out wheelchair, with blades on the tires, a skull-and-crossbone gracing the back and chrome exhaust, I realized he's anything but. I actually wondered why a wheelchair would need an exhaust system, but frankly, I was too afraid to ask.

Thunderdome-inspired wheelchair and all, it would seem that Elliot's true power is found in his ability to respond to militant rhetoric in a manner that makes it look, well, militant.

Check it out.

Did I miss something?

It would appear that Tony "Paulie Walnuts" Sirico of The Sopranos is getting some press lately for his decades-old criminal history.

I just happened to catch Tim Cuprisin's blog post on the topic, and from what it looks like, it's been a hot topic elsewhere. Tim points out this Smoking Gun page outlining Sirico's shady past.

But here's the thing: I've known about this for years. Being the IMDB junkie I am, I've known about Tony's indescretions since The Soprano's second season. And even the Smoking Gun feature is at least a couple of years old, based on a reference made to the show.

So I just gotta ask, did I miss something? Anyone out there know why this has suddenly become news? I've seen it referenced in places other than Cuprisin's blog, but now I can't recall where.

Or are the show's producers highlighting this now for publicity?

I mean, seriously, authentic mobsters on the show? How much better can it get?

Kittens!

Hey, did you know Ask Me Later is up for MKEOnline's Blog of the Week? Y'know, if you wanna vote for us, that would be nice.

Kane Watch: Cruisin for a Bruisin

Since Eugene decided to weigh in on the recent cruising debacle, in a boldly titled "Cruising is getting harder to defend," I decided to take a look into Kane's past to see exactly how his feelings on cruising have changed.

In an article from 2000, Kane compared cruisers to the Harley crowd that had just visited Milwaukee for the reunion.

Of the Harley enthusiasts, Kane had this to say, "Sure, they were loud and in some cases, pretty boisterous....but they won over most residents with their overall friendliness and easy-going ways."

Not surprisingly, Kane attributed the dislike for cruisers to a matter of race.

"The crackdown on cruising...is another reaction to the stereotypical perception of young black men looking for trouble..."

He concluded by pondering, "Makes you wonder how those bikers managed to break out of their own stereotype, because they certainly didn't don suits and ties just to make the rest of us feel comfortable...What they did do - they forced people to see past the stereotype and accept them on their own terms."

Here we are, 6 years later, and what have the cruisers done to "force people to see past the stereotype"? In case you missed it you can watch the news footage here. Or if that wasn't enough, here's another.

A stereotype is a perception that is often an exaggeration of an original and sometimes no longer relevant fact. And the fact of the matter is, as the video shows, these cruisers are far from good kids portrayed in a bad light.

There is nothing false in saying that these cruisers are obnoxious, rude, loud, vulgar, destructive, inconsiderate and dangerous. Just the kind of image we want in Milwaukee.

Makes me wonder why Kane says it's getting harder to defend. Seems to me that any rational person would have trouble defending it in the first place. But then, there's the catch.

Even in his alleged condemnation of cruising the best he can do is to say that,

"The single best argument against cruising, which is the potential for tragedy by blocking life-saving emergency vehicles, seems to have fallen on deaf ears. That's understandable when you consider how loud these folks play their music. It's also hard to defend many cruisers who fall into the category of being show-offs with fancy cars or the kind of mindless followers who feel compelled to do what everybody else does, despite the consequences."

To be sure, it's not the gunfire or the driving on lawns. It's not even the dancing in the street or on the cars, or the hanging out of windows and fights. It's the "showing off" that we've really gotta worry about.

Yeah, he's really changed his tune on this one.

For another blogger's take, you can read Elliot's opinion on the matter here.

It's Bambi, right?

IMDB has a Quote of the Day, in which you're provided with a quote and asked to guess what movie it's from. Today's:

CLEMENZA: It's a Sicilian message. It means Luca Brasi sleeps with the fishes.
-From which TV show/Movie?

Seriously?

I'm Anti-War

During my regularly scheduled Sunday visit to the local Wal-Mart, I was surprised to find the 1970 film Catch-22 in the discount bin and quickly threw it in my basket. Despite an all-star cast, it's far from a great movie. However, it is based on one of my favorite novels. Having read one-hit-wonder Joseph Heller's book three times now, I figured I could get a little enjoyment from the film rather than investing time into reading the book yet again.

I've long considered MASH to be one of my top three favorite films. Directed by Robert Altman and starring the likes of Donald Sutherland, Robert Duvall and that guy who played Odo in Deep Space Nine, the movie has some of the greatest scenes and subtle humor of any film made.

[a gun goes off at the football game]
Hotlips O'Houlihan: Oh my God! They've shot him.
Colonel Blake: Hot Lips, you incredible nincompoop. It's the end of the quarter.

Classic.

But after thinking about Catch-22 and MASH, it suddenly occurred to me that one of my favorite films and one of my favorite books are both "anti-war." So I started to think about some of the other war movies I've enjoyed over the years: The Bridge on the River Kwai, The Longest Day, Pork Chop Hill, Platoon, Full Metal Jacket, The Big Red One, Three Kings, The Dirty Dozen, Saving Private Ryan, The Boys in Company C. And what I realized was that to some extent, all of these were anti-war films. In some way, no matter how subtle, and in spite of any sensationalism, glorification or heroism displayed, each of these films carried one simple message.

War sucks.

And in that sense, I'm "anti-war" as well.

But just because the idea of war is so unpleasant, don't think for a moment I think it unnecessary.

I'm not naive.

(I also picked up the 1979 Sean Connery flick Meteor. For the record, I am also anti-meteor)

More Milwaukee News

Just returned from the Coldplay show. It was excellent. Now, I'm going to bed.

I'll report you!

In light of Mandy Jenkins' claim that bloggers don't report, I'd just like to share this exclusive photo of French protestors straight from Ask Me Later's Paris bureau.

Take that MSM!

Wisconsin DNR Calls for Gray Wolf Hunting

Faced with losing the gray wolf as the symbol of endangered species in Wisconsin, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources today issued a statement encouraging open hunting on the state's population.

"For over ten years the gray wolf in profile has served as a strong symbol to encourage support for preserving our state's wildlife," said the statement. But with the U.S. Interior Department's plans to remove the wolf from the list of endangered and threatened species, the symbol is seeming less and less appropriate.

After considering other species facing extinction, such as the gravel chub or Butler's garter snake, and realizing that neither image could generate the nearly half million dollars annually used to protect endangered plants and animals, the DNR opted to instead advocate for controlling the gray wolf population with two to three seasons of bow and shotgun hunting.

"I doubt anyone wants bait on their license plate," said an unnamed DNR source, referring to the gravel chub. "We only need to knock the [wolf] population down by a couple hundred to assure the plate retains its legitimacy. Even one good hunting season along with a couple dozen roadkills could get things back to normal."

Population growth is also threatening the bald eagle's coveted spot on the endangered animals list. Word has it the DNR already has a "tastes like chicken" campaign in the works.

Chuck Norris

Chuck Norris is 1/8th Cherokee. This has nothing to do with ancestry, the
man ate a f***ing Indian.

See The Superficial for video of Chuck Norris on Chuck Norris.

Live fast, die young, leave a pink, fuzzy corpse

In the tradition of Ma Cass, Janis Joplin, Jim Belushi and Chris Farley, Dennis Pork goes and throws it all away.

Is it any wonder this man won Blogger of the Year?

Bad Investment?

I just learned that Kyle from Panther Talk Live owns stock in Ask Me Later.

He's going to be really disappointed when he show's up at the annual shareholders' meeting.

That tremendous "wooshing" sound you hear

...is the vacuum created when so many of the bloggers on my roll were sitting in one room.

Not blogging.

For those of you I met, well, it was nice to meet you. Considering I met around seven people, I figure I've now personally spoken with every single person who's ever visited Ask Me Later. I bet Daily Kos can't say that!

For those of you I didn't meet, I just didn't bother because I didn't want to go up to you, tell you who I was and get a blank stare. I get way too much of that when I go home for Christmas.

And now I'm off to buy Blogger's Insurance.

Puppies!

Just a reminder to vote for us as MKE's Blog of the Week.

More things said on St. Pat's

The following conversation took place at approximately 2:27 a.m.:

Cantankerous: Dude this house is, like, 150 years old.

Buck: What in the hell was going on in Milwaukee 150 years ago??

Cantankerous: Like, industry and sh*t.

__________________________

The following conversation took place at approximately 2:17 a.m.:

Buck: Give me a bite of your sandwich.

Cantankerous: I told you people to get some Erbert's and Gerbert's because you wouldn't be getting any of my Erbert's and Gerbert's! Who's the genius now? That's right! I got the Erbert's and Gerbert's, fool!

__________________________

The following conversation took place at approximately 11:58 p.m.:

Cantankerous: GUYS! There's an Erbert's & Gerbert's! Let's all get a sammy so later when we're super hammered, we'll have eats!

guys: I don't want any.

Cantankerous: Fine. But don't be asking me for any later because you missed your opportunity!

Things said on St. Pats

Jules: Are we going to stay at the bar once we get there?
Casper: No, we're just going to touch it and head home.

*****

Kurt: Those guys are Canadians.
Jules: So are they professional or just really funny?

*****
Q: Are you Irish?
A: No. Just drunk.

*****

I love St. Patrick's Day. It's that one day of the year where not only is it acceptable to be stumbling drunk down the street at three in the afternoon, it's mandated.

*****

I lost that damned leprechaun. So now I'm going to the bathroom and making my own pot of gold.

People must have had a LOT of green beer

...because somehow we were nominated for Blog of the Week.

Which I found out about from Elliot.

So, y'know, if you'd like to vote for us that would be really nice. If not, that's cool. We know who our friends are. All I know is that my mom thinks I'm cool. And good looking. That's why she was my prom date.

Cantankerous is Old!

Happy Birthday Cantankerous!

May you celebrate your birthday with the same gusto as all the years past!

COB XXXI: Dear Casper

Dear Casper,
I'm having a problem with my husband. Lately it seems as if he's always depressed. Once he told me that it just seems like there isn't any point anymore. When I asked him to be more specific, he just said nevermind. I'm really worried about him, but if he won't tell me what the problem is, I can't help him. And I must ask him to open up to me at least twenty times a day. I suggested he see a doctor, but he refuses. Please help me!

Dearest Reader,
First off, doctors are good for a lot of things, especially if you have a nail in your head or a pack of dogs just attacked you. Frankly, though, I think your husband's problem can best be summed up with one word: You! For crying out loud, lady, cut the guy some slack. If you're nagging him from sun up to sun down, chances are the poor guy can't get a word in edgewise! I'm willing to bet he's already told you dozens of times what the problem is, but in my quasi-professional opinion, I'm guessing that you're just not paying attention. If you ask me, and you did, I suggest you have a nice thick steak and a bottle of expensive scotch waiting for him the next time he comes home. And then, if he finally makes up his mind to tell you what's bugging him, don't be surprised if he spends a lot of time looking in your direction.

*************

Dear Casper,
I'm a drill sergeant in the United State Marines. With as disciplined a life as I've lead, for the life of me I can't figure out my good-for-nothing son. He's extremely overweight, spends his days reading comics, and procrastinates with just about everything. He did quite well in school, but shows no interest in furthering his education. What can I do to get him motivated and off my couch?

Dearest Reader,
Let me get this straight. You're a military lifer, have probably busted enough heads to make Mike Tyson jealous, and you don't know how to handle your fat, lazy son? My first word of advice to you is retire! If you can't handle that slug making a permanent impression of his ass on your sofa, you're probably doing far worse for the security of our nation than anything any politician could ever dream of doing! Take your pension and go on a nice vacation far, far away from your troubles at home. And as for your son, maybe if you would have spent a little more time impressing your values on him when he was a child, he wouldn't be the sorry excuse for a human being he is now. He's a lost cause, and no amount of ranting and raving is going to change a thing. Or you could just bring a gun home from work and threaten him or something. Your choice.

*************

Dear Casper,
I'm twelve years old and I'm fighting with my friend. I told her I want to be a politician when I grow up, but she said that is a stupid idea. Now we haven't talked for a week. She's my best friend, and I really miss her.

Dearest Reader,
The first thing to keep in mind is that no relationship is perfect all the time, unless you're having one with yourself, in which case you'll eventually go blind. You're probably far too young to understand that, so ask your mother to explain it to you. Anyway, while I commend you for having such high aspirations at such a young age, I have to agree with your friend. Being a politician is a thankless job. And even though you most likely hope to get into politics to serve your country, you'll eventually find yourself ignoring your constituency and completely losing sight of why you chose to be an elected official in the first place. Now I know I'm using a lot of big words here, so let me just say that if you become a politician, you'll keep losing friends for the rest of your life. I recommend you consider something a little more rewarding, such as trash collection.

_________________________________

Casper is a completely unqualified advice columnist. His opinions in no way reflect those of Ask Me Later, or even himself for that matter. Should you ever find yourself facing a true dilemma, don't bother asking him because his advice probably stinks. In fact, don't ever write to a newspaper advice columnist unless it's really the only way you'll see your writing in print, you're desperate for attention or really have no friends. Nevertheless, Casper would like to thank his tireless staff of research assistants: Elliot, Grumps, Brent, Dad29, Nick, Peter, Clint, Belle, Fred, Jay, Sean, Patrick, Mike and Jenna.

My Attempt at Prescience

Xoff fill-in Jim Rowen floated this gem in a post a today:

The voters will censure Bush in 2008 by voting in an administration far different than what passed for leadership the previous eight years, and Feingold's effort to have started the censuring in 2006 will look prescient.

One question: How is Feingold going to look in 2006 when this proposal to censure the President blows up in his face?

Let me take a stab at predicting this outcome:

Feingold will look like an ass and the Dems will hang him out to dry.

How's that for prescient?

Spin It and Bite: The Importance of Blogging in Earnest

SpinIt and Bite, otherwise known as Spivak and Bice, had an interesting post today that featured some of Elliot's thoughts about the Cheddarsphere.

I found their comments to be written in the usual Spin It and Bite style: condescending in nature. Take this, for example, "We expect this may offend a few bloggers, particularly those who think the world is breathlessly awaiting their thoughts about everything from the Iraq War to their favorite breakfast cereal."

I hate to break it to them, but I think that last statement is, perhaps, more telling of their own egos than of any blogger's that I know.

I also found it interesting that they neglected to quote what may have been the most important point in Elliot's post:

Does all this mean i hate blogging or think it has no value?

Nope.

I like it quite a bit.

Just having the opportunity to publicly dispute Eugene Kane and Dave Berkman is worth my monthly hosting fee.

And isn't that the heart of the matter? Whether 100 people or 100,000 people read a particular blog, what blogging gives to everyone is the opportunity to have a say. I don't know about the rest of you bloggers, but it's the opportunity that keeps me coming back for more.

So, Spivak and Bice can laugh at me all they want. Except now they have to do so knowing that I can laugh right back.

And if Charlie, or Jessica, or Elliot links to my laughter, then that's a tribute to the power that is word of mouth marketing. Because, Elliot, blogging is exponential.

And yes, there really is a Santa Clause: He's a mathematician. The fact that 100 people read my blog does not mean that the same 100 people read your blog. And across the 50 or so active blogs that are mentioned in Elliot's post, there are probably 1000's of readers that access them on a daily basis.

For what it's worth, though, I don't blog because I expect someone will read it. I blog because I've got something to say. Now, I've got somewhere to say it.

Please God, Let it be True

This may be a little on the vain side, but I don't think many Americans would want this guy as the Commander in Chief. He could, though, give the Menard's guy a run for his money.

Advice

I'm stupid. Or ignorant.

One of the two. Maybe both.

I guess I wasn't aware that hosting the Carnival of the Badger meant I should be giving people a theme to work with.

Well, now I know.

But I'm still not giving you one.

I'll make it work...trust me.

Sweet

You Are 76% Evil

You are very evil. And you're too evil to care. Those who love you probably also fear you. A lot.

How Evil Are You?

Thanks to Belle for the link.

And another thanks to Belle for so courteously hosting the colorful variety of We Take Comments banners designed by yours truly.

Get yours today!

(The banners are not evil)

You've got to be kidding me

I honestly cannot believe I saw this from one of Bill (McSykes/McBucher) Christofferson's substitutes:
Man...XOff is gonna be pissed!

Things That Make Me Giggle

• Thanks for coming.
• Genuflect
• Moist
• Canadian
• Officer
• Sample
• Twig
• Mister
• Golden
• Tea Bag

I'm twelve.

Where Do You Stand on the Proposed Amendment Banning Gay Marriage?

Where do you stand on the proposed amendment to ban gay marriage?
	For
	Leaning For
	Undecided
	Leaning Against
	Against
Free polls from Pollhost.com

Completely Unresearched Commentary

I am going to take a moment to sit back and, using my everyday mind, think about the conceptions of marriage I've come across in all my 27 (almost 28!) years.

I've heard of:

Ceremonious marriages that took place out of obligation (See Seth marrying his brother's wife on Deadwood")

Two heterosexuals embarking on a life together marriage (like my brother and his wife)

Arranged marriages (like my Irianian friend's parents)

Re-marriages (like the one my mom had after my dad passed away)

Un-marriages (this refers to most of my friend's parents)

Marriages over the internet (Russian bride, anyone??)

Marriages to more than one person at the same time (Muslims, Mormons, etc.)

Vegas marriages (Oops I did it again! Thanks, Britney!)

Green Card marriages (see the movie Green Card)

The kind of marriage you get when you don't actually get married, but live together so long the government considers you married (or is that just in Illinois?)

Come to think of it, I've heard of just about any kind of marriage. And that's without conferring Yahoo. So, can someone inform me what this big to-do is about the "institute" of marriage everyone seems so hell-bent over?

I can't seem to figure out what that is to begin with.

Here's a Thought For You Anti-Gay-Marriage-Types

What's a bigger threat to the "institution of marriage"? Acknowledging gay marriages or welfare?

If part of the argument is:

If you extend marriage to relationships that are not fundamentally procreative, you will reduce the importance of procreation. Having children will no longer be the key purpose of marriage and the idea that mothers and fathers are the norm for children can no longer be advanced by the state, but, in fact, must be dismissed as discriminatory.

Seems to me that in welfare, having children is the key purpose but having a marriage is often not, or at least having a man around in some capacity.

So, which is the bigger threat?

Just a thought.

Kane Watch II: The Harris Kane Debacle

Since it's tradition here at Ask Me Later to keep an eye on the Kane's of the world, I think you'll find it no surprise that Harris Kane has recently entered our radar.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I can't wait 'till Xoff comes back. Who exactly, this Harris Kane guy is, I have no idea. What I do know is he likes to fly off the handle with often vile, uninvestigated claims and general nonsense.

To be sure, tonight Harris writes:

Looks like Feingold has done more than just get under Rick Graber's skin. Over at Daily Kos, which gets over a half million hits a day, our "Junior Senator," as Cheney called him today, has really stired up the netroots with his call for accountabilty of W's illegal domestic spying on innocent American's.

Feingold's post has recieved over 400 comments and an open thread has gone over 400 as well.

What do you think matters more, what the self-proclaimed "champion of the blogosphere" Sykes says on his blog or what real people are saying on Kos.

Charlie, how many hits do you get a day? Do tell.

Before attempting a slam on the undisclosed number of readers at Mr. Sykes' blog, Mr. Kane may have first enlighted himself a little by reading the article Charlie cites. Yes, friends, this article, from the Associated Press, which details Sen. Feingold's embarassing display.

Check out Sykes' take on the AP article here.

I may be taking a wild guess here, but I would bet that AP articles get way, way more "hits" (sic) than the Daily Kos. Like, totally, dude.

(Hits is an internet metric that refers to the number requests made to a server for a file, like any image that is loaded on to a screen, and in no way reveals the number of readers or page views a particular site may have. It is a term most often used by the ignorant.)

Good call, Harris. Still think Charlie was off when he wrote that the Dems are not supporting Feingold?

Harris Kane Makes a Grand Re-Entry

Upon seeing that Xoff is gracing us without his presence for a few days in the Cheddarsphere, I decided to welcome back the infamous Harris Kane.

I did so by posting in the comment section of one of his posts:

Hey Harris,

Welcome back! So, what should we hope for this time? More tasteful musings about the bedrooms of conservatives? More name calling and baseless, accusatory attacks?

I can't wait!

You'd think Xoff would have learned his lesson the first time.

Looking forward to the mess you make while Bill's gone!

1:04 PM

Harris had this to say in response:

Funny, it seems to me it is the right that has taken to firmly implanting itself into people's bedrooms.

1. attacking a women's freedom to make her own health care decisions.

2. big governemnt deciding who can marry who.

3. spying on Americans.

Do tell me is this the sort of "baseless and accusatory attacks" your speaking of?

It's ironic that you stand up for the McBucher bedroom but turn a blind eye to sticking your nose in everyone else's.

2:58 PM

How incredibly perfect! Those of you who read my blog know that I have spent the last two weeks writing about the recent ruling in South Dakota, and that I am against it.

You also may have seen my recent post in which I state that I am in favor of gay marriage.

This is just too funny. What an ass. His best defense against the vile comments he made about Jessica McBride are to bring up gay marriage? How about an apology???

My most recent comment to Mr. Kane:

Hey Harris,

Obviously you're not a frequent reader of my blog. That's alright I won't fault you for that.

What I will fault you for is your ignorance. If you took the time to investigate the person you are attacking (me, in this case) you'd see that my blog currently has a debate going on in which I am against the recent ruling in South Dakota and in favor of gay marriage.

Get a clue.

So, actually, you just proved my point. A baseless and accusatory attack on me! Fantastic! I knew you wouldn't disappoint!

I'll keep you all posted on any more developments. Too easy, drill sergeant!

HEY!

Just a reminder to all you fine folks out there that Ask Me Later is hosting Carnival of the Badger XXXI.

And we don't take kindly to slackers.

So head on over to Nick's place to find out how to submit.

Seriously.

Do it.

Now.

Suggestion Box

Elliot at From Where I Sit makes a nice, pithy point about how comments are an integral part of blogs.

Personally, I think it's a blogger's right to do with his or her (or their) blog as they please. If they choose to not allow comments, so be it. But like Elliot, I believe that in doing so they eliminate the discourse blogs create. Face it folks, we're all throwing our own ideas and opinions out there for the world to see, and none of us is right 100% of the time. All the facts in the world, all the logic there is, all the quoting of philosophy, is nothing unless you understand how other people react to it. And unless you want to spend your days browsing millions of other blogs to see how someone reacts to what you write, comments allow your readers to provide the most immediate feedback.

So in the spirit of discourse, I invite all those bloggers who allow comments to stand tall and display your open-door policy to your readers. Encourage their feedback. Welcome their voice. Show that you're ready to be challenged, validated or just plain screamed at by the crazies with nothing better to do!

And for those of you not allowing comments, like I said, it's totally your right.

I just think you're missing out.

Damn You, Texas Pete!

I think I lost a good hour of my life at Blog Things.

Could you pass the US Citizenship Test?

h/t Peter DiGaudio

See It

I remember once imagining what my life would be like, what
I'd be like. I pictured having all these qualities, strong positive qualities
that people could pick up on from across the room. But as time passed, few ever
became any qualities that I actually had. And all the possibilities I faced and
the sorts of people I could be, all of them got reduced every year to fewer and
fewer. Until finally they got reduced to one, to who I am. And that's who I
am...

...The Weather Man

Alternate History

• After a giant meteor strikes the Earth and fills the air with unbreathable iridium, the dinosaurs realize that their only hope to stay alive is to fast and hold their breaths for the next 10 years. Their plan works flawlessly. During the celebration that follows, they all jump into the pool mere minutes after eating barbeque. None survive.
• Due to a communication breakdown, the Great Wall of China is constructed 4,000 miles tall and 35 feet long instead of 35 feet tall and 4,000 miles long. Mongols completely overrun China within the year, but many perish in their treacherous trek up the wall.
• Inspired by a large upswing in his approval rating after the famous incident in which he was shot but completed the speech he was giving, cunning president Teddy Roosevelt convinces members of the secret service to open fire upon him at the beginning of every speech from that day forward. He is subsequently shot 374 times over his sixteen year term in office, and dies with only one month left to serve due to a baffling case of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome.
• While working on the theory of relativity, Albert Einstein stumbles upon concrete mathematical proof that it's okay to pork your cousin.

See the rest of the timeline at Something Awful.

Nichols Right on Target

Mike Nichols has an excellent piece today confronting the claim that perhaps Steven Avery became a "monster" as a result of serving time for a crime he did not commit.

Apparently, the national attention this heinous crime is garnering is producing some ignorant folks who take a breif look at the details and think there is a bigger "story" behind it all. I hate Hollywood.

It all started because, according to Nichols: A woman from the East Coast called me a couple weeks ago saying she was planning to make a movie about Steven Avery.

I think that anyone who wants to make a movie about Steven Avery should have their head examined. Nichols, on the other hand, says he can see how some may see that there's a story there, but goes on to lay any ideas about an innocent-man-turned-villain-in-prison to rest.

I found this to be a compelling piece of information: Avery, quite famously, did serve some 18 years after that. Rarely noted is that, during the first six or so years, he was serving concurrent sentences for what he did to his cousin.

And I found Nichols' conclusion to be right on target: If Steven Avery did what they say he did, it's shocking. But it isn't ironic. Or, looking back 25 years, completely out of the blue.

You can check out the entire article here.

One More Thing About Gay Marriage

In the middle of the gay marriage debate, I've noticed that most people have focused on the economic benefits afforded to married couples. What I think is missing is a debate about a basic right that is protected by immigration laws that all Americans have the opportunity to pursue. Unless, of course, they happen to be gay.

Ragnar Mentaire, in his recent post, stated: If they're not quite human, what else would Glenn Grothman and Ralph Ovadal like to deny them. The pursuit of happiness? Liberty? Life?

Now that you mention it...

Consider: Two people meet. They fall in love. They get married. One is an American citizen; one is not. If the situation I'm describing involves a man and a woman, there is process in place that would, upon completion, grant permanent residency to the non-citizen and allow that couple to begin the pursuit of happiness together.

The US Government has this to say about it: Every year thousands of American citizens marry foreign-born persons and petition for them to obtain a permanent residency (Green Card) in the United States. Spouses of U.S. citizens are considered "immediate relatives" under immigration laws, therefore they are excluded from all numerical quota limitations. This means that there is an unlimited number of Green Cards available to foreign nationals who marry U.S. citizens.

I think many Americans take for granted that we have the right to love, marry and be with anyone we chose. It is, in my opinion, a cornerstone of our basic freedom. In the case of two gay people, however, it is not the case. This right is denied them.

Because no gay marriages are currently recognized, no gay couple in which one of the two people is not a citizen can begin the process of permanent residency. This is only because spouses of gay people are not considered "immediate relatives" since gay marriages are not recognized.

Why is it that as a heterosexual I have the right to petition for a green card for the person I love, but a gay American does not?

And what's more, how can we pretend that this is not a violation of a basic civil liberty, given our current laws that protect heterosexual couples?

I'm interested to hear what you all think about this. I happen to know two people, deeply in love and committed, that are currently separated because neither of their countries recognize gay unions. I had never thought about it before, but it just doesn't seem right to me.

A Response to Casper

I was going to post the following comments to Casper's piece about Abortion Rights for Men in the comment section of Casper's post. But then I got to thinking, I have the password to this blog and can post to it freely (Something Casper may be rethinking in the near future). So, here you go, a post in response to comments from Casper's post about my dialogue with Dad29 and Elliot from a previous post written by me.

Wow. That's a lot of background.

Alright, here are my somewhat thought out feelings on this.

This is a challenging explanation since so many people can not step outside of a world where women's actions and bodies aren't governed by someone else, (yes I'm being sarcastic) but I'll give it my best shot.

I understand that what I'm about to say is an opinion that Jenna does not like very much. I'm okay with that. See below:

I look at it like this: A man has a right to his DNA (by way of his sperm in this case). Once he agrees to let that sperm leave his body, his rights to it are somewhat willingly sacrificed. This is only because he enters into this situation with the full knowledge that if the girl gets pregnant, the decision to keep the child is, for all intents and purposes, out of his hands. This does not come as a surpise to him later.

He knows, in this country, the "contract" that is in place: He does not have the right to tell the woman what to do with her uterus or anything inside of it. So, in choosing to have sex in the first place, he is entering into this agreement.

Given that he has this knowledge, and the knowledge that if the girl should get pregnant, then in my opinion, he has agreed to the outcome of child support, should the girl decide to keep the baby.

To me it's a type of social contract. On a daily basis we all "agree" to hundreds of things by chosing to be citizens of this city, this state, even this country. Which is to say, while I may not want certain results, I know that by doing certain things I will get those results. Hence, if I do those certain things, I and only I am culpable for the results. If I do not like the possible outcome enough, then it is worth it to me to refrain from the action in question.

And what's more, I think the man gets off pretty easy ONLY having to pay child support. It is the woman who is left with the bigger issues: the raising of the child, the legal consequences of that child's actions, day care, schooling etc. and you can slap me silly if you're going to argue that the man has to pay MORE money via child support than the woman ultimately will over the course of that child's life. The men who leave get off easy.

Now on to the bigger point, and I touched on this before.

It is because of the unique situation present in a pregnancy, where one of the two parties involved faces the real physical consquence, that one of the two parties involved has the bigger claim on what to do.

The reality is this, for a child to be produced, the only physical requirment involved from a man is an orgasm. Obviously, it is not so in the case of the woman. The entire process takes place inside a woman's body, and as such, the bigger responsibility lies with the woman on whether or not her body will continue the process.

Is it fair? No. Is it the way it is? Yes. If you're that distraught about it, take it up with God.

Denying these basic physical entitlements to the process of pregnancy is what produces ridiculous pleas for economic and abortion rights for men. Which is to say, the day a man has to take a pregnancy test is the day I'll feel sorry for his "lack of rights" on the abortion front.

I'd like to state that most of the above comments were just my answer to the question that Casper put before me. The reality is, I do not support abortion unless it is for one of three situations I will outline below.

I think that when two people decide to engage in intercourse they are agreeing to the possible outcome of having a child. However, it is only when two people agree to have sex that any type of social contract is in place. In the case of rape and incest, two people did not agree and so on the one end, the woman can not be held responsible for upholding a social contract she never agreed to enter. This is why I believe she should have the right to abort the fetus.

To be sure, let's take a look at the flip side: The day the government forces a man to provide his sperm to impregnate a woman.

I think any man would have issues with that. I think they'd say: Only I can decide who gets to use my DNA to create a child! The government can't take my sperm and impregnate someone without my consent! You'd be right and I'd agree with you. That would be a major violation by the government.

This is why I am in favor of three kinds of abortions: 1) When the woman's life is in jeapordy due to the pregnancy 2) When the woman was impregnated through rape 3) When the woman was impregnated through incest.

Because, if a woman is raped and impregnated, but can't get an abortion, it is the day the government forces her to provide her DNA to reproduce. Just like I think it would be wrong to force a man to give his sperm to reproduce, I think it is wrong to force a woman to use her body to reproduce.

I cannot stress this fact enough:

That'd be the government telling her she had to accept someone else's DNA into her BODY, allow it to combine with her DNA, and then create a child in HER WOMB. In addition, I may be going out on a limb here, but I think that would also affect 9 months of her life, her ability to work and oh I'm just taking a guess here, but her family life may be disrupted, too. I mean beyond being raped and dealing with the emotional side affects and whatever diseases she may have picked up from it.

But wow. Isn't that freaky? Government ordered pregnancy. Kinda frightening when you really think about it.

Oh wait a minute. You guys support that. My bad. I'm just a conservative and against big government.

America Loses to Canada

I've said before that I am a huge fan of baseball. And so, it is with great respect that I can say, by far, the best commentary I've heard on the recent US loss to Canada in the World Baseball Classic was on the Colbert Report. I admit it: I'm addicted to Colbert.

He had this to say about the game : "Congratulations to our neighbors up north. But I want to remind everyone, it's just an exhibition game, doesn't count for anything. And it's spring training -- the players aren't even in shape yet. Plus, a bunch of our best players are sitting out, so if we really cared, we would have won that game." Probably by about a billion runs!

And this: People only hit inside-the-park homeruns because the outfielders fell down and they're children!

And lastly: It doesn't matter though. We'll win the World Series. We always do.

Watch the full report here.