Tuesday, February 28, 2006
Kane Watch: Thanks, Gene**
You know, I was surfin around the net tonight looking for some inspiration, when I decided to check in on my old standby, Eugene Kane. As usual, he did not disappoint.
I don't know how I missed this one, but on Wednesday, he wrote, "I never said I didn't root for white American athletes. Actually, what I said was that most years, the Winter Olympics were too boring to watch."
Maybe he should have scrolled down and checked out what he actually did say, because an earlier post (the one right below the above, actually) states, "Some of the same people are mad at Bryant Gumbel - and me - for acknowledging that some blacks don't follow winter Olympics because there are not many black athletes to cheer for."
Call me crazy, but those don't seem to jive.
The reality is, there was nothing funny about what Bryant Gumbel said. At least one minority writer at JS seems to agree. And she also notices the double standard that is prevalent when blacks talk about whites in a disrespectful manner.
I think Eugene has a point when he says that people need to relax a little when talking about racial realities in America. However, I don't think that undermining the validity of the Olympic Games is a good way to start.
**Note to Xoff: While I do not personally know the man, I have taken the liberty of referring to him as "Gene." I would like to make it clear that I do so with no intention of offending anyone.
Monday, February 27, 2006
Did I Hear That Right?
I just overheard a local newscast that stated a 23 year old man and a 17 year old woman were found dead in a car. Apparently, they pulled into a garage and kept the car running to stay warm while they were engaging in sexual intercourse. While they were, um, occupied, they both suffocated.
That's gotta be a shoe-in for the Darwin Awards!
A response to Xoff
Apparently, Chistoferoyle didn't like my post critiquing his irritation about Paul Bucher referring to Kathleen Falk as Kate.
In his defense, he wrote, "You'll notice neither of those posts were made." I'm not sure what he means by that, but if those posts weren't good enough...
How about this one.
Or this one. Excellent commentary on their love life, really. Good work, Bill. Solid journalism, that is! And classy, too. Oh, wait, that was by someone to whom you entrusted your blog. Who's to blame for that?
Here's another one from a cronie. Indoctrinating the kids, are we?
Or hey, how about this one?
And for shits and giggles, here's one more.
Give it up, Bill. You got your hand caught in the cookie jar. It hurts less when you quit struggling.
A question for right-wing bloggers...
Missing the Point
Typically, I'm a big fan of Jenna's musings at Right off the Shore, but I think she missed the point in this recent post.
Her comments pertain to an article in the Portage Daily Register that reports the number of abortions in the state and, particularly, the county are down. Reasons cited for the decrease involve education, access to birth control and emergency contraception.
Jenna writes of the article, "I disagree with some of the reasons why given, but this is good news, regardless."
I'd like to know with which portion of the article she disagrees. In third world countries, for example, education, or rather lack thereof, is cited as the main reason for increased pregnancy rates. Combine that lack of education with religious beliefs that either prevent contraception or a literal lack of contraception, and you've got a recipe for skyrocketting pregnancy rates.
To be sure, the WHO conducted a survey on Unwanted Pregnancies that revealed,
"In every setting, sexual activity begins during adolescence among many young people. Much of this activity is risky, contraceptive use is often erratic, and unwanted pregnancy and unsafe abortions are observed in many settings. Sexual relations may be forced. There are wide gender-based differences in sexual conduct, and in the ability to negotiate sexual activity and contraceptive use. Despite this, relatively few young people think they are at risk of disease or unwanted pregnancy. Awareness of safe sex practices seems to be superficial, and misinformation regarding the risks and consequences of unsafe sex is widespread."
Their conclusion: A number of recommendations are offered on the basis of the summary review of these case studies. These include programmatic recommendations to build negotiation skills, dispel misconceptions, counter sexual violence, involve young people in programme design, tailor fertility regulation services to meet young people's needs, and communicate the message that every unprotected sexual act risks disease and unwanted pregnancy.
Sounds to me like this education/contraception thing just may be based in fact. I think those guys at WHO know what they're talking about.
Jenna also took issue with the following comment made by Sauk County Public Health Director Bev Muhlenbeck:
...educating people on birth control methods is the key to reducing numbers of abortions. Abortions are public health failures, she said.
Jenna writes, "Is she advocating more of a welfare state in order to encourage and convince women that they can "afford" to have a child? Or is she simply saying that education on the consequences of unprotected sexual activity is a "public" issue?"
You're damn straight it's a public issue! But seriously, what confuses me about Jenna's statement is the fact that with fewer unwanted pregnancies, there is less of a need for welfare. As such, how could it not be a public issue? I don't know about you, but I'd prefer that people are educated about contraceptive choices rather than have a baby that I end up paying for. Additionally, the cost of education pales in comparison to the cost of an uninsured/unwanted pregnancy.
Unwanted pregnancies start a vicious cycle. Young, unwed mothers have babies which they can't afford. Mom goes on welfare and Dad is nowhere to be found. Starting from poverty, that kid's life is that much harder. Not to mention growing up around the situations present in many low-income housing complexes (gangs, drugs, etc.) and I tell you what Jenna, I'd much rather pay for education than continue to pay the welfare, the higher insurance rates, the electric bills of the local jail and the list goes on and on.
The cycle ends with education. Period.
Legally Licensing Illegals
On this week's InterCHANGE, Joel McNally pointed out that some of the 9/11 terrorists had upwards of 30 drivers licenses. He doubted that all of those licenses were acquired via legal means and felt that was a good example of why AB69 (a bill requiring proof of US citizenship to attain a license) shouldn't be passed. Basically McNally is saying that there's no point in banning illegal immigrants from legally obtaining licenses since those that would use them for illegal purposes wouldn't go through legal channels to get them anyway.
This argument sounds familiar. It's kind of like what's often said in the debate over gun control.
Gun control proponents repeatedly claim that by banning gun ownership we will greatly reduce crime. Opponents to such measures are quick to remind them that guns used in the commission of crimes are acquired through illegal means, so laws to ban ownership won't stop the criminals for having them.
But while gun control advocates aspire to prevent law-biding citizens from practicing their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, advocates of AB69 hope to ban undocumented immigrants, people inherently non-law-biding by virtue of their entering the nation through illegal means, from having the privilege of driving a car.
(Yes, I said privilege. If you think driving is a right, you need to attend driver's education again, where it's beaten into students heads that driving is a privilege, not a right.)
I won't deny there are issues with our immigration policies. But there is definitely a problem when some seem to be working so hard to give privileges to those who've already broken the law while at the same time attempting to deny rights to those who follow it.
And interesting that they're usually the same people.
Darren McGavin makes 2 (and Dennis Weaver makes 3)
With all the news over Don Knotts passing, it seems that the loss of Darren McGavin was, well lost.
For those of you unfamiliar with that name, he was The Old Man in A Christmas Story.
They always say deaths like these come in threes. I'm thinking Dom DeLuise should see his doctor.
And as for McGavin, I'm sure that tapestry of obscenities is still hanging in space over Lake Michigan.
A toast to another great actor gone.
[h/t I Watch Stuff]
But I still think Dom DeLuise should see his doctor.
Saturday, February 25, 2006
My Sensitive Side
I watched Forrest Gump for the fifth time tonight.
It occurred to me that ever since the first time I saw it twelve years ago, I can't get through the last fifteen or so minutes without tearing up.
So now I have a question for the guys out there: All manliness aside, is there any movie that does the same thing to you?
RIP Mr. Furley
Don Knotts, star of The Andy Griffith Show and Three's Company, passed away today at the age of 81.
Even though I haven't seen much of him in recent years, hearing this actually made me go "awwww." I guess it's because, in part, I had always hoped to someday be the sheriff of a small southern town like Mayberry...or at least the deputy.
Laugh if you will, but I'm totally serious.
And when I retired, I was going to take a job as a California apartment manager and wear the most kick-ass leisure suits I could find.
Not so serious about that.
In all honesty, The Andy Griffith show has long been one of my favorite "old" shows. Every time we lose another one of that era's stars, I think we get further and further away from television's golden age.
So...a toast to Don Knotts and his half-century career.
Friday, February 24, 2006
He's a big bear!
No. I'm not talking about Aaron. But I am talking about something from the fifth installment of audio blogging/badcasting/Cheddar Chatting.
Check it out.
Belle's their guest this week, and it's revealed exactly what her job in the MSM is.
I also have it on good authority they're about to have a big time guest in the near future.
Spice Boys think college instructors should work for free
Spivak and Bice do a hell of a hatchet job on a Jessica McBride blog post defending the UW system overall against allegations made against the UW administration. In doing so, it seems they're implying that college instructors shouldn't be paid.
Big words from two guys that write one column. I've always wondered how they write their pieces. Does Cary pace back and forth around the room dictating while Dan pokes and prods at the keyboard? Do they take turns with each paragraph? Is it like some crazy Mad Lib?
McBride has every right to defend an organization she's a part of. And it would seem that at the same time she has no problem recognizing its shortcomings.
Could the Spiceblog do the same?
Thursday, February 23, 2006
I spotted The Commisioner of baseball, Bud Selig, and Steve "The Homer" True leaving the Hilton today. Looked like they had just gotten out of a meeting. I wonder what, exactly, they were discussing...
I didn't catch The Homer today. Anyone know if he was talking baseball?
Cantankerous, as usual.
I'm in a mood tonight. I think I'll pick on that teacher-pervert guy:
What a surprise. They found more porn on his computer!! *Gasp* I just can't believe it!
I've heard this subject brought up on talk radio a couple of times, and was appalled to hear callers actually defending the creep.
I have an idea: Why don't they wait until he rapes one of his students to fire him? How 'bout that?
If this guy doesn't have the constitution to discern when it is appropriate to look at pornography, what reason do I have to believe he knows the appropriate ways to touch and/or interact with his students?
Furthermore, you can't tell me that anyone with internet access at work doesn't know there are sites you can watch, and sites you can't, and when your job involves tax payer money and children, well you're either a complete pervert or a complete moron to risk it.
Either way, is that the type of guy you want teaching your children?
Kudos to the School Board for upholding its decision.
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
This is what it's all about
Elliot over at From Where I Sit opened up a can of worms by
Check out his post and read the comments. So far as I'm concernend, this is a perfect example of blogging's "town hall" aspect.
As an aside, there will be a demonstration against this ban outside Milwaukee City Hall on March 2nd. My buddy Jules and I will be taking pictures and names. Check out all the fabulousness that is Ask Me Later shortly thereafter for our take on it.
An acquaintance of mine asked me tonight what my signature dish is.
I said gumbo.
She said she would eat it, so long as she could add mayonnaise.
I had a blast attending Insight 2006 today. And yes, I was there. (We're pseudonymous, remember?) Kudos to Owen of Boots and Sabres who did a fantastic job on the panel.
I know a lot of people are blogging on the subject, so I'll just throw out my favorte part of the event: By far, it was it was Howard Fuller passionately taking on Peter Blewett. Fuller's comment about a level playing field was priceless. If you haven't heard it yet, you can do so here.
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
Terrorists from Ohio?!
You poor, fat bastard...
I've always been amazed by the fact that the United States is one of the only countries in the world where one could be defined as poor yet be grossly overweight.
Apparently, being "poor" offers more perks than I originally thought.
Kane Watch: Logic
Here is a standard, accepted definition of "racism":
"The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others."
Here are Bryant Gumbel's comments about the Winter Olympics:
"Try not to laugh when someone says these are the world's greatest athletes, despite a paucity of blacks that makes the games look like a GOP convention."
I think the logical equivalent of Gumbel's statement would be: The Winter Olympics cannot claim to have the world's greatest athletes because nearly all of them are white, and only sports that are dominated by blacks are valid sports, because blacks are the world's best athletes.
Therefore, Bryant's claim, is in fact racist by definition. What's more, it is a racist claim in two ways: He is claiming here that (1) black athletes are superior to white athletes and that as such, (2) white-dominated sports are inferrior.
I'd also like to point out that this is a claim that numerous white commentators and writers have lost jobs over.
Anyway, I just thought I'd point out that Logic 101 breakdown in response to Mr. Kane's post today.
He writes, "Some of the same people are mad at Bryant Gumbel - and me - for acknowledging that some blacks don't follow winter olympics because there are not many black athletes to cheer for."
Mr. Kane the issue is not with the fact that some blacks don't follow the winter olympics. The issue is that Mr. Gumbel's statement was inherentlty racist.
What are you supposed to do when your city starts to emit an oily black discharge?
For the love of all that is holy, see a doctor.
There are just too many jokes here. Aaron made it worse. My head is about to explode. I need to see something that is entirely un-funny.
Maybe Everybody Loves Raymond is on...
Kane Watch: Words to Live By
It's not racist to acknowledge something as clear as the nose on your face without getting offended.
I can only hope that Eugene Kane read that line and digested exactly what he was saying before he hit the little "publish post" button on his blog, because I can almost guaranty that it's going to come back to haunt him again and again and again and again...
I would have liked this better
Saying Sorry Ain't Easy
Apologizing seems to be a trend these days. And now Bill Christofferson, in response to this post, is asking for one from me.
You know what? He's going to get one.
Bill, I'm sorry if I made it seem you did nothing to help the victims of Hurricane Katrina. That was not my intent. Whenever an individual aspires to help those in need I consider it a noble act.
Ultimately, though, that wasn't the point of what I wrote.
I wrote what I did in response to your accusations that Jim Sensenbrenner is heartless, uncaring and unfeeling for demanding accountability when increasing the amount of and distributing tax dollars for Hurricane relief. Your stance left me with the impression that you felt the alternative was a blank check for the victims, and that any opposing viewpoint was bereft of compassion. So while you were quick to call Sensenbrenner heartless for his position, I felt it only appropriate to point out that you could easily be considered an opportunist for using the tragedy as a chance to make a political statement.
For the record, I was in New Orleans, Biloxi and Gulfport only a month before Katrina. It is one of my favorite places to visit in the country and has been for twenty years. I was heartbroken to see the devastation that followed the storm and realize that much of what I had come to love was wiped away. So I offered what little help I could, writing checks to organizations I felt were able to use the money best. And I did so without asking why Ray Nagin never got those school buses loaded with evacuees, why Kathleen Blanco didn't reach out to the federal government when she needed to or what more the federal government could possibly have done.
Sure, I may ask all those questions now, but my first reaction was not to make light of the situtation and make a political statement in the process.
So again, I'm sorry. I'm sorry for implying you did nothing to help those in need. You certainly did and that's to be commended. But, as they say, no good deed goes unpunished.
Jim Sensenbrenner wants accountability when people need help? That's heartless. That's your view.
Bill Christofferson creates a board game when people need help? That's opportunistic.
Monday, February 20, 2006
Kane Watch: Empathy
Calling All Xoff's: Update
Is it possible that the biggest mouth in the blogosphere is at a loss for words? So much so that he is relying on someone else's to state his position? Apparently so.
After stating my amusement that Xoff had remained eerily silent about the school choice deal, he responded with this post, directing readers to the ironically named blog of Jay Bullock.
In his defense, Xoff claims that Bullock has been following school choice much closer than he has. *Chuckle* Okay, because apparently Xoff hasn't said a word about it.
At any rate, the article attempts to prove that the rightwing media entities and bloggers lied first about the Governor's stance on school choice and again when it was said that he "blinked" by giving in to the new deal. To be sure, he writes:
So how is it that the right Cheddarsphere can lie about Doyle's blinking like this? It's easy, actually: The right has spent the last couple of years creating a "crisis," and then, ever since the cap hit, they have been lying about Jim Doyle's role in that "crisis." By internalizing the previous lies--that Doyle wanted to "kill choice" and was "standing in the schoolhouse door"--they can now believe the lie that it was Doyle who "blinked."
These comments stand in stark contrast to comments in this, an article by notoriously rightwing newspaper The Journal Sentinel (yeah, that was sarcasm):
The cap for students - who attend private schools paid for with public money - is now at 14,751. DPI will allow enrollment in the voucher program through mid-September, but the cap will certainly have to be dealt with when MPS begins enrollment in February.The governor is the main obstacle.
Or, if that's not clear enough, perhaps this one better explains "the lies" told by rightwingers:
Republicans have pushed lifting or abolishing the cap. Doyle has thrice vetoed such bills. He must stop opposing the interest of needy kids in Milwaukee and work out a deal with Republicans on voucher caps.
So, out of curiosity, I wonder if someone will tell me which facts I've gotten wrong. I know that three times it was asked for the cap to be lifted. I also know that three times the Governor vetoed it.
Furthermore, Bullock's claim that,
For almost two solid years before last week, Doyle had been offering to raise the cap in exchange for things like more funding for MPS, or greater accountability in the choice schools. Though he personally opposes the program, he has always been willing to accommodate the needs of Milwaukee parents, students, and taxpayers,
is a complete joke. Doyle did nothing but prolong, avoid, and purport ridiculous demands along with his alleged "accommodation" of the voucher program. And last I checked, moratoriums don't lend themselves to accommodation of any sort.
Xoff hasn't said a word about Doyle's cave in because he knows it was just that: a cave in.
And Bullocks...well that's all I have to say about that.
Bill Christofferson is an opportunist
In response to this post shortly after Hurricane Katrina, an Xoff reader asked Bill Christofferson what he was doing to help relief efforts. Christofferson replied:
I am in Texas right now trying to do something more hands-on to help evacuees. I'm staying with friends who are taking in people from New Orleans, and doing what I can to help.
How did he help? By creating a board game.
Granted, any proceeds from sales of the game went to relief efforts, but even Christofferson admits that there wasn't much chance there would be many sales.
And even if there were, the definition of opportunist is "One who takes advantage of any opportunity to achieve an end, often with no regard for principles or consequences."
I'd be willing to bet that the "end" had more to do with bashing Bush than helping evacuees. And I won't even get into the "principles" aspect of the definition.
Either way, calling him an opportunist is nothing compared to repeatedly calling Jim Sensennbrenner heartless, uncaring and unfeeling because the Wisconsin representative demanded some accountability when it came to hurricane relief.
Debunking Katrina Myths
Popular Mechanics' March issue has a great story debunking Hurricane Katrina myths (not available online). If you get a chance to pick it up, or have the good fortune to be sitting in a waiting room that carries it, check it out.
Eugene Kane will be happy
Time and Newsweek are both planning huge cover stories on Cheney's hunting accident.
Meanwhile, much of the rest of the country has moved on.
Sunday, February 19, 2006
If you've never visited blogs like sexcapade or My Pleasure you should give them a try.
Years ago my mother kept telling me I should try living in Chicago.
As I get older, my appreciation for my mother's wisdom grows.
And I wonder, where are the Milwaukee versions of these blogs?
I'm so sorry, Cantankerous.
P.S. - This is our 200th post. Yay!
If it weren't for the fact that I'm giddy after celebrating Marquette's victory over number 9 ranked Pitt for the last several hours, I'd be more concerned about my having burned away that brain cell that knew what pseudonymous meant.
Saturday, February 18, 2006
If looks could kill, you wouldn't be the least bit threatening
Calling All Xoff's
Possible Answer to Casper's Question
I just read Casper's post about the circulation figures released by the Shepherd.
I may be going out on a limb here, but I think if someone checked the records, they would probably show that there is a direct correlation between the circulation numbers of the Shepherd Express and the rate of puppy births in the state.
Just a theory.
Who reads the Shepherd?
The 1000th issue of the Shepherd Express was published this past week, and to that I say congratulations to 20 years in print.
In the monumental issue they claim:
...the Shepherd Express has 261,400 readers, making it the third largest newspaper in the state of Wisconsin. But unlike the daily newspapers, the Shepherd’s readership continues to grow.
The Shepherd has a press run of around 75,000 issues. Having over 260,000 readers is based on an assumption that each freely distributed issue is read by nearly four people.
That readers-per-issue number seems small to me.
Nearly every Shepherd newsstand I see is still stacked with close to 20 unread papers on the day before the next issue is set to hit the stands. And this is in downtown Milwaukee and the East Side. I can only imagine how many go unread in Brookfield and Mequon.
Which leads me to wonder if maybe 20 people are reading every issue.
Or is the number just that far off?
Now the Shepherd wouldn't be in business were it not for its advertisers. Since the paper is free, advertising dollars, along with a small number of subscriptions, account for most of its income. And in the last ten years I've watched the amount of advertising in the paper grow enough to add nearly 30 pages to any given issue. Having once sold advertising for the paper, I can say with a fair level of confidence that it's the advertising that caused the growth, and not an increase in editorial content.
But even then I'm forced to ask if advertisers really believe they're reaching the audience the Shepherd claims to have? Or are they just willing to spend such a premium per-reader rate?
Either way, it's their money.
I still get the paper for free.
Kane Watch: Pithy
Here's a little advice for Eugene Kane. The next time he writes a blog post like this one, he might as well save himself some time and instead write:
Bryant Gumble can say what he wants because he's black and I agree with him.
Charles Barkley should just keep his mouth shut because he's black and I disagree
Now isn't that much easier?
A couple of years ago my uncle sold his mid-70s Corvette and bought himself a brand-new, top-of-the-line, Harley-Davidson.
It’s his new love.
During winter, he brings the bike into the house, parking it in his front foyer. And on warmer winter days, he opens all the doors and windows, backs the bike out the front door just far enough so the tailpipe hangs out, and starts her up. He revs the engine a few times, giving it a little exercise even though she can’t get out on the road.
I should mention here that he’s single…if that wasn’t obvious.
Around the time he told me this story I just bought my first motorcycle. It’s a ’72 Yamaha DS7 that runs about as well as a legless man on ice. So I was jealous that not only did my uncle have a great bike to ride, but one that actually ran! I could just picture him on one of those cold days, turning the bike off, pushing it back to its spot next to the coat rack, and looking longingly out the window as he waited for that first warm day when he and his love could be together again.
What an image.
And last night, I saw it from another perspective.
I pictured waking up on a cold February Saturday in my nice suburban home, pouring myself some coffee and wondering, with it being so cold outside, how I would spend my day in this quiet little town. As I look out the window I notice my neighbor across the street has his front door open. It looks like he’s trying to move something. Is that a wheel? Is that…it is…it’s a motorcycle!
And then I hear that distinctive roar that makes me think the Hell’s Angels are rolling into town.
Coming from my neighbor’s front door.
Who’s running a motorcycle. In his house.
I start to wonder what my house might be worth.
Oh yeah…that’s my family.
Rumsfeld: Al Qaeda Has Better PR
Not So Cool to Be Italian Today
Can someone please email the date? Is it 2006, or 1906? I cant seem to remember. It's not because it's late and I've been drinking. It's because I just read this.
Apparently, in Italy, rape isn't that bad if you've had sex before:
Italy's highest court ruled Friday that a man who raped the 14-year-old daughter of his girlfriend can seek to have his sentenced reduced because the girl was sexually active, news reports said.
What disturbs me the most about this is that it's coming from Italy. I wouldn't be shocked if it were coming from Afghanistan or Turkey, but Italy? A 14 year old girl gets raped and they are seriously thinking about reducing the perpetrator's sentence?
This line of reasoning is wrong on so many levels it probably doesn't even behoove me to go into much detail. Obviously there's the point that having sex with one (or 20, or 200) men in a woman's past does not take away her right to say, "No," to a man in the present. Furthermore, there's the fact that if rape is wrong it is wrong regardless of the circumstances. But I don't think it's a logical argument the high court is trying to make.
Rather, they are making a statement. Girls and women who are sexually active will be punished, one way or another. This is a clear case of, "let's make an example out of her." It is a statement and a warning to the women of Italy: If you engage in sexual activity, we will not protect you when you need it. It is yet another form of an allegedly free society attempting to dictate the behavior of women...and it is wrong.
In 27 years of being a female, I've sat through class lectures, freshman orientations, read articles, been warned by friends and family alike, and been sent numerous email forwards on all the dangers of being female and on how not to get raped: Don't walk to your car alone. Don't take a drink that you didn't see poured. Don't park next to a van. Don't pull over for an unmarked police car in an unpopulated area. Don't pass out at a party. Don't dress too provocatively. Don't...Don't, don't, don't, don't....
It always got me to wondering, how many classes and books and emails and lectures do boys get on how not to rape?
Is that such a crazy thing to wonder?
I guess it really doesn't matter. Especially not in Italy. It doesn't even matter, apparently, that rape is wrong. It just matters that the girl has been "virtuous".
I can't wait for the day when any society finally decides that it's going to punish the rapists and not the victims. And I mean really punish the rapists.
And if you want to know why I'm so damn pissed about all this it's because nine of my friends have been raped. And you want to know what else? It's not because I know all the 1-in-4's. It's because rape is the reality in the female world because if you haven't been raped, then one of your friends has. Do the math.
And since it's not the women that are doing the raping, it must also be a reality in the male world. Now everyone call me a psycho femi-nazi for pointing out what must be an obvious fact. I'm not a femi-nazi. I'm just painfully aware of the world around me, and sometimes it's not so pretty.
But on that note, I'll just say, these things also get me to wondering: if I know nine women that have been raped, don't the odds pretty much guarantee that I would know at least someone who has raped?
I guess if I do, my advice is to move to Italy. You'll have better luck there in the chance you get caught.
Someone Should Tell the Muslims...
Americans and most westerners have the attention span of an average 12 year old.
Are they really still pissed about that whole comic thing? What was that again? Something about some religious dude and a bomb or something?
Anyway, it seems they're still killing each other over it. That makes sense. Someone, let me know when they're finished.
I'm gonna go read another article about Cheney and that whole shotgun thing.
Friday, February 17, 2006
Now there's a surprise!! Check out today's top news stories from Yahoo.
Another Talk Radio/Blogger Victory?
First a repeal of the gas tax, and now this:
An Increase in the Choice Cap. The cap on the Milwaukee Parental School Choice Program will be increased by 7,500 students.
Strong Accountability. All schools participating in the choice program will be required to obtain independent accreditation by an outside group such as (but not limited to) the Wisconsin North Central Association, the Wisconsin Religious and Independent Schools Accreditation, the Institute for the Transformation of Learning at Marquette University, or the Archdiocese of Milwaukee.
I suppose all that really matters is that it's a victory for Milwaukee's youth.
Thursday, February 16, 2006
Why is This Guy so Familar?
Ronald McDonald without the makeup? No...
The host of The Grand Ole Opry? No...
Bobby Brady all grown up? No...
I'd like to know, is there going to be a designated hour on the show that's "Killin Time"?
Good Cop/Bad Cop
Ragnar Mentaire (good gosh that's a cool name) from I Am The Force shows there's no love lost between him and police officers with his post COPS ARE PIGS, OINK, OINK, OINK.
Meanwhile, that Milwaukee-ID10T Clint shares his experience of being racially profiled for Driving While White and says he really doesn't have a problem with it.
I get the impression that Ragnar's disdain for police stems from his experiences with suburban cops, while Clint's appreciation is for those in the City of Milwaukee. So now I'm curious...
When comparing City of Milwaukee police to suburban cops, what are your feelings?
A gift for that special lady in your life
Inspired by one of Charlie Sykes' readers.
Kane Watch: If McNally's not a token...
Today Eugene Kane asserts that because Joel McNally has a long history of making "it a point to prove how comfortable he felt around black folks" and that his liberal positions are aligned with many Milwaukee blacks that he shouldn't be considered a token because he was hired at WMCS.
But when blacks support conservative thought or serve in high-ranking positions in a Republican administration, they are tokens?
I'm just so confused.
UPDATE: Bill Christofferson seems to disagree with Eugene Kane over whether or not McNally will be hosting a "black radio program."
Now I'm really confused. I don't know who to believe!
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
I hate to break it to ya...
But Regime Change Iran was all over the Saddam Tapes back in the beginning of January. I wonder what's taken everyone so long to finally pick up on them...
Alright. I'll admit it. I occassionally read Miss Manners. And today I was reminded why:
MISS MANNERS: I have been dating my boyfriend for four months and it came up this week that he still does not know my name. I do not know what to do about this because he has heard my name so many times, both my English name and my Italian name. I also write it on everything I have given to him, yet he still calls me by the wrong name.
He will blame it on his disabilities, yet he knows all of his co-workers first and last names, even the most recent workers. He tells me he has all of these feelings for me and really cares about me but I feel, "You can give the world to someone, but if you don't know who you are giving it to, it's just not worth it."
GENTLE READER: As much sympathy as Miss Manners has for bad memories and disabilities, she has to break it to you that a gentleman's inability to learn the name of a lady he has been courting for four months is not a good sign. You might consider impressing it upon him with a letter of farewell.
And I thought I was bad with names.
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
Kane Watch: It's a non-story
When Eugene Kane posts not one, not two, but three items to his blog in less than five hours trying to assert just how big the Cheney hunting accident is, it's a sure sign that he's trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.
UPDATE: Let's add number four to this list. Kane doesn't seem to get that while "most serious journalists understand this is a huge story," most Americans don't.
Not that the media should give a gosh darn about what's important to the public, though.
Gregory Unveils Vest, Wiretapping Plan
Washington, D.C. - NBC Chief White House Correspondent David Greogory unveiled the latest addition to the veteran reporter's arsenal: a bulletproof vest.
During an early morning press conference, Gregory wore a prototype of an MSNBC-branded vest over his traditional suit and tie.
"Unlike our soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq, I believe America's reporters need all the protection they can get when climbing into the trenches of White House reporting," said Gregory.
Gregory, who has reported for NBC since 1995, was inspired to don the vest after the recent hunting accident where Vice President Dick Cheney peppered hunting companion Harry Whittington with bird shot.
"I'm in the same building with this man on a near daily basis," claimed Gregory, "and it would be silly for me to pretend I'm safe without wearing a vest."
When asked by a fellow reporter if this was an over-reaction considering the amount of security already in the White House, Gregory responded, "I'll calm down when I feel like calming down."
During the conference, Gregory also revealed NBC's plans to begin wiretapping White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan. Also a direct result of the hunting accident and the perceived delay in releasing the information, Gregory asserted that it was the only way the public is able to find out about every single piece of information flowing through this administration.
"We need to hear the chatter. We need track their movements. If the President missed the toilet when peeing, Americans have a right to know. It's the only way to protect ourselves as citizens. Let's say Vice President Cheney puts metal in the microwave that causes a small breakroom fire. Do we want to wait for them to tell us about it? I, for one, am not comfortable with that."
In related news, the National Press Corps today announced their support for a nationwide conceal-carry law. "With armed men like Dick Cheney running around, it's important that every man, woman and child be able to defend themselves when necessary," they said in their statement.
Monday, February 13, 2006
Kane Watch: Barkley*
[Charles] Barkley often talks about race in a provocative way, but other times he sounds like a black conservative.
C'mon Gene...why not just say he deserves an asterisk?
My jaw literally dropped when I read that Raising Kane post.
Here we see Jack Abramoff in the background of a National Socialist meeting. He really had a hard time convincing old Adolf to take tribal money.
This photo was taken moments before the Kennedy assassination. Boy he loved parades! Hey...wait a minute. This was in Texas! Aren't the Bush's from Texas?
And finally, here he is...um...orbiting the moon.
With all those pictures of Abramoff standing alongside any number of politicians floating around, don't you think there'd be a better picture than this one to implicate Bush in the Abramoff scandal?
Sunday, February 12, 2006
Kane (Big Media) Watch: The Missing Link
I love it when other people do my work for me.
From Where I Sit takes a look at Eugene Kane's most recent column and "compliments" the columnist's fine fence-sitting abilities.
Nice work, Elliot.
And it frees me up to comment on something I've been pondering lately.
After quoting Kane's assertion that conservatives are comparing the recent partisian speeches made at Coretta Scott King's funeral to treason, Elliot writes:
I guess that’s one of the advantages of writing on paper instead of
In a blog, we’d expect the author to link to the posts comparing the
liberal’s funeral tackiness to treason.
The thing is that these days most news outlets traditionally "on paper" are also online, including the Journal Sentinel. In theory, when the maintstream media brings us the news it should be the facts and just the facts, so readers would consider it to be the source. But when it comes to overtly opinionated columnists like Eugene Kane, why don't the papers (or the authors themselves) dedicate a little time in their online versions to providing links supporting the assertions they make?
Part of what makes blogs so appealing is that they allow their authors to easily cite those materials they write about. In fact, some blogs go so far as to define every word written. It could be argued that the power of the hyperlink is a major contributor to the credibility of many blogs. Likewise, not linking to your source material is the electronic equivalent to forgetting to staple that bibliography to your college research paper.
As one professor once commented on a paper I wrote, "Where did these facts come from?"
Of course, journalists like Kane are bound to argue their years of experience and reputation are all the credibility we should need.
I bet Dan Rather wishes that were true.
So in the tradition of blogging, I'd like to link you to this column on blogging by Eugene Kane where he writes:
New studies show that Internet sites run by newspapers are growing rapidly. JSOnline, in fact, attracts more than 2 million unique visitors per month, and 50 million page views per month.
If the battle for new consumers of information and commentary is to be fully engaged, much of it will happen on the Internet.
The day when newspapers are no longer on paper is inevitable. Maybe a little lesson in HTML is in order.
There are probably 2 million readers who'd really appreciate it.
Saturday, February 11, 2006
Why is it that members of Congress are on the federal payroll?
For that matter, why does the federal government get to say how states choose their representatives?
I know, I know...it's all in the Constitution.
But while I'm willing to accept a federal mandate that each state gets two senators and X amount of representatives, why shouldn't the states get to determine how those people are chosen? What business is it of the federal government how long they serve? Or how often we vote for them?
Or how they're compensated?
I'm certainly not questioning the role they play in our government. All I'm questioning is how they get to play that role.
And who signs the paycheck.
A little change like that might go a long way.
Wowsah! You go, Iran Press News.
The headline reads (and you'll have to trust my translation): Ahmadinejad again states the Holocaust is a "myth".
However, the best part about this article is how they saved the photo: Admadinazi.JPG.
That's a nice play on words.
Sykes' Biggest Fans: Spivak & Bice
After checking out the Spice Boys today, it occurred to me that in eight days of February blogging, they wrote not one, not two, not three, but four posts that directly pertain to Charlie Sykes. And if you want to get technical, you could say they wrote five and six if you count the ones about webstats that link to a post at Marquette Warrior involving Charlie's blog statistics. Looks like the Spice Boys may be Charlie's biggest blogosphere fans.
And they call us Charlie's Angels.
Please excuse our mess as we make enhancements to our blog in hopes of bringing you a new and improved Ask Me Later.
As always, customer satisfaction is our priority. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause. Feel free to contact your service representative if you have any questions or concerns.
Please note that no refunds will be offered.
I'm supposed to be cleaning the house but I decided to clean up around here instead.
UPDATE: Changes are complete...at least for now.
One thing you should take note of is that we'll periodically change the language of our date headers. That way, at least you'll come here and maybe learn something useful.
I hope you like Italian.
Friday, February 10, 2006
Khatami Positioning for Iran's Uncertain Future
It seems the immediate past president of Iran is seizing the opportunity to position himself as a moderate Muslim leader in the eyes of the west. His goal? Clearly, gaining favor at this point in time is a strategic move if, in fact, the western powers are serious about the idea of supporting regime change in Iran.
As I said yesterday, the question is less about if there should be regime change, but rather which group will step up to take the throne.
Khatami seems, at first glance, to be the most probable and best suited candidate, both in retrospect of his past leadership of the country and especially given the sound bytes he's tossing to the press these days. For example:
He said a transformation in the Muslim world could pave the way for setting up "democratic governments that pursue national interests and create the grounds for achieving greater science and technology."
Khatami has always publicly been an opponent of nuclear weapons development, and big proponent of nuclear power. However, the biggest issue I have with Khatami is the mere fact that Iran didn't get to where it's at in nuclear development in the few months that Ahmadinejad's been in power. Which is to say, a lot of what we're dealing with today started on Khatami's watch.
Second, while it is true that when Khatami first won the presidency in '97 and did so with an overwhelming 70% of the vote, he nevertheless was only allowed to run because he was approved by the Ayatollah. Iran has never seen a free election, and so to assume that any president actually had the support of the people is to ignore the fact that the people didn't have a free pool of candidates from which to chose.
That said, what I like about Khatami is that he seems to be the most progressive minded of any Irani politician that's been produced in the last twenty five years. It also seems possible to me that many of the changes he would have liked to put in place could be made if Iran were a true democracy.
I haven't fully made my mind up on this one. It will be interesting to observe the developments of the coming weeks.
Anyone see my other sock?
Check out this post for a screen grab of Tim Cuprisin's blog.
Now go to his blog and try to find the post I grabbed.
Am I blind? Or is it just gone?
Or is the Journal-Sentinel using Blogger?
Note: This isn't a big mistake, I've just been checking back to see if any clarification was offered on some confusing writing. But instead, it's just not there!
Wisconsin Citizen Action and Me
Last night I had just sat down to dinner when the doorbell rang. The dogs started going crazy. After trying to shut them up and slipping through the front door and onto my porch without letting them out, napkin in hand and still chewing my food, I was greeted by a shaggy haired young man holding...oh no...a clipboard.
Shaggy: Evening. How are you?
Me: [Still chewing, wiping face] Fine.
Shaggy: I'm with Wisconsin Citizen Action. We're asking people to sign our petition [hands me clipboard]. I'm sure you realize how important health care is.
Me: [Swallowing] Sure I do.
Shaggy: That's why we want to enact legislation insuring all people receive adequate health care with businesses providing their fair share.
I was reading the petition at this point and not catching everything Shaggy had to say.
Shaggy: ...if you could just sign the petition, that would be great.
Me: So is this up to the business to participate in the program or would it be mandated by law?
Shaggy: It would be the law that all businesses have to pay their share.
Me: [Handing back the clipboard] Thanks, but I'm not interested in signing this.
Shaggy: Oh. Can I ask why not?
Me: I'm just not crazy about the government telling businesses they have to participate. If it's such a good idea, I'd think they'd want to do it on their own. Thanks. [Start walking back inside].
Shaggy: [Now aggravated] You could be the one without health care!
Me: [Smiling...being polite] Okay, thank you.
Shaggy: People will suffer without this! People like you will see to it!
Me: [Closing door] Thank you. Good night.
Shaggy: It must be good, businesses like Johnson Controls support it!
This legislation is similar to the Maryland/Wal-Mart law recently passed forcing the super chain to dedicate at least 8% of their payroll to employee health benefits or put the money directly into the state's health fund for the poor. In fact, if you visit the WCA website you'll see they repeatedly use Wal-Mart as an example of why this law needs to be passed. I honestly don't know how we, as a society, can assure that everyone has access to affordable health care (not to say it can't be done, just that I don't know how to do it). But I doubt the answer is in forcing businesses to pay for it because they're too successful, too profitable, too big or out of some ill-conceived notion that they got there by being big bad businesses "cheating" their employees and customers. While it's great that in Maryland Wal-Mart has decided to be above this and continue its "commitment to [their] customers, [their] associates and the communities [they] serve," there's simply no reason they should be forced to take the stance in the first place.
On a more personal note, while I live in a very liberal area I'm certainly right-of-center. I've had a lot of experience turning down requests to sign things I don't agree with. Almost always I'm thanked for my time and the person moves on to the next house. This was the first time I had someone start arguing with me. While I was eating dinner. While dogs were going crazy behind me.
At that point, I'm not signing a thing.
Thursday, February 09, 2006
Finally: US - Brits Talk About Regime Change in Iran
Two reasons this development is promising:
The discussions in Washington involved Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns, who is coordinating U.S. policy on Iran, and British diplomats who are serving or have served in Tehran, the officials and diplomats told Reuters.
The United States cut diplomatic ties with Iran after the 1979 revolution, but Britain has an embassy in Tehran and encourages development of a civil society through activities like technical assistance and seminars.
The big question as of late has not been if regime change is the best possible solution in Iran, but rather what Irani group needs the support to actually do it. It is my feeling the British can best provide an answer to this question. The decades-long lack of a U.S. presence in, and a U.S. concern for Iran precludes us from coming up with the answer to this one on our own. The Brits' experience will be instrumental here.
Bush's administration has been divided over just how strongly it should encourage political change in Iran. But in recent weeks it has increased the number of appearances by senior U.S. officials on media, like the BBC Persian service, which broadcast to Iranians.
"There's been a conscious effort to try to speak directly to the Iranian people and explain what is happening" within the international community on Iran, a senior U.S. official told Reuters. Iran's government often blocks foreign broadcasts.
Communicating directly to the Irani people will only help to convey the message that the goal this time around is to give the country back to them. For better or worse, when the fighting starts, it is my belief that if Irani citizens are at all unsure of this fact, they will support their current government by way of not supporting the revolution.
All in all, it's a good sign that these talks have begun. The only better scenario in my book is if it's just the first time we're hearing about these talks.
TMJ's New Talent
It was announced today that Jessica McBride will be joining the staff of 620 WTMJ on a part-time basis. We at Ask Me Later send our congratulations. Filling the spot that was left by the cancellation of the Mark Reardon show, McBride will air weeknights from 8-11 pm, when she’s not interrupted by sports, that is. The first show is said to be February 13.
My response: I’m happy to see that a female host will now have a place on 620. Way to go, sistah! Aside from that, I think it’s obvious that McBride is a perfect fit for the station.
Just out of curiosity, I wonder: What’s the over/under on how long it will take for the leftist conspiracy theories to start flying? Never mind that McBride holds a Master’s Degree, is an accomplished columnist, teacher, blogger and talk show host, having spent some time at WISN. I’m sure that in spite of these facts the lefties are going to go berserk. And you know what? Let ‘em. At the end of the day, it’s still going to be McBride on the airwaves.
Is anyone else confused by what this says?
That Skinny White Chick
Muslims are the only people who make feminists seem laid-back.
I don't regularly read Ann Coulter, but I thought that line was great. Second only to:
[...]Muslims think they can issue decrees about what images
can appear in newspaper cartoons. Who do they think they are, liberals?
I'm not sure who should be more offended here: liberals, feminists or Muslims?
Wednesday, February 08, 2006
Audio Blogging with Aaron and Jenna
If you're just too darned lazy to read, go check out the second installment of Blogger Audio.
I found it interesting that they have a hard time getting guests due to a lack of people having microphones. C'mon people, it's the 21st century!
Me, I use my Mr. Microphone to host my own daily talk show. The only problem is I have to sneak into people's homes and set their radios to some obscure frequency just so they can pick it up.
But it means they get to hear my uber-sexy voice.
Brian Fraley hates suffragists!
Or at least he thinks they're dirty hippies.
The bigger point of his post is calling out lefties concerned about Scott Walker's proposal to open up Milwaukee parks to some commercial businesses. One such person is some guy named Seth who likens it to the commercialization of New York's parks:
The effect is that the number of places in New York City to meet publicly for
political purposes or to challenge social norms has severely decreased since
Central Park was privatized.
(note to Brian: provide links to the quote you're citing...or at least indicate where you got it.)
The park I frequent most often is Lake Park. Arguably one of the county's most beautiful parks, it was also designed by Frederick Olmstead, the same landscape architect who designed Central Park. It also happens to be one of the parks currently housing a commercial venture with Bartolotta's Lake Park Bistro. Areas of the park aren't restricted because of the commercialization. Green spaces are wide open. In fact, it seems the need for permits to have a picnic and drink beer and ordinances requiring that dogs be on leashes are far more restrictive than anything the presence of a restaurant may cause.
The truth is that parks, at least in Milwaukee, don't seem to be the demonstration grounds Seth believes they may be. I would guess that Seth, and those like him, are more anti-business than they are pro-park.
Ultimately I like Walker's proposal to explore any possibilities to keep the parks open that don't involve raising taxes. He certainly isn't insinuating that we pave over the green spaces or entirely privatize the grounds. Rather it's a realistic approach to insuring the parks' survival.
And if I can get my triple venti mocha topped off while I'm there, so be it.
WWCD, part II
So the results are in from the very first Ask Me Later poll. If you'll recall (and if you don't, just check out the original post), I wondered if I should have identified someone by the color of their skin, and the overwhelming response was that I should have.
Yeah...I know. 25 responses isn't necessarily "overwhelming," but you know what I mean.
One interesting thing I noted in the comments was that one person (Elliot of From Where I Sit) said:
Hell, I would have said "the black one" in a heartbeat.
The only thing is that I never identified which cashier I was talking about. Although, I can guess that by indicating my discomfort in revealing the cashier's skin color readers would most likely assume it was the black one I was talking about.
But that's just an observation.
And now for the rest of the story...
The incident I had related to my co-worker was one not entirely flattering to the cashier. Already running late for a meeting, the cashier spent over five minutes trying to figure out how to ring up my purchase. She hit every button on the register until she found a price that seemed right for a box of Tic-Tacs. While it was by no means the worst incident of customer service I've ever experienced, it was a bit frustrating.
Now, considering that the story I told my co-worker was less than complimentary and the color of the cashier's skin was really the only way I could identify her, I'll ask you all again:
Tuesday, February 07, 2006
Iran Newspaper to Hold Holocaust Cartoon Contest
If I were joking, it'd be a pretty sick joke. Unfortunately, I'm as serious as Mohammed in a cartoon.
Get the facts here.
You know, if this is an attempt to "show" the world how the west or the Jews will react, it's probably just going to backfire. I don't imagine that scores of Jews or westerners will be seen rioting, bombing or murdering anyone over this. Nah. Probably not. That really just seems to be the preferred method of expression for Muslim populated countries.
What's more, if this is going to show anything, hopefully it will just illustrate how civilized countries deal with distasteful instances of freedom of the press.
Does this count as a booster seat?
I'm wondering if this is what state lawmakers had in mind when they mandated that children 8 and under would have to be in booster seats.
Before Britney Spears became the most expensive piece of white trash on the planet and she was running around in that schoolgirl outfit I would have volunteered to have to sit in a booster seat if this is what it would have been like!
But alas, those days are long gone.
This photo gratuitously stolen from The Superficial, who claim that Britney is a "great mom" and that "if brains were french fries, Britney couldn't fill a Happy Meal."
So I go out and get myself all liquored up for some good old fashioned Bourbon Blogging and Blogger is down.
So I tried blogging in a notebook but the linking was just too tough. All that string, all that glue...what a mess.
Monday, February 06, 2006
Back in the Saddle
Cantankerous would just like to state that she's back from vacation. And now, after this hell of a Monday, I'm caught up with work and should resume posting in the next couple of days.
So now, dear readers, you may quit holding your breath. All 2 of you, that is.
So it's Monday. The football season is over. I think I'm going to be bored tonight.
That means only one thing.
Maybe the NEA can help me out
I'd like to commission a drawing.
In it, Jesus and Moses are engaging in an act of sodomy with one another. Meanwhile, Martin Luther King, Jr. is dressed as a 'gangsta' and pickpocketing them. In the background, Caesar Chavez is spray-painting "fags" on a wall.
And as offensive as it may be, I doubt anyone would blow anything up.
Sunday, February 05, 2006
Help a brother out...
If you have a minute, check out this post and answer my poll question. There's another part to this story, but I want to get as many responses as possible before going forward.
And thanks to those of you who've already participated!
Friday, February 03, 2006
Now here's something funny that happened to me recently. Not really funny "ha-ha", but funny "hmmmmmm."
I was relating to a co-worker something that happened in a convenience store we both frequent. My co-worker asked which cashier was working. Most of the time it's one of two women. Unfortunately, I know neither of their names. I would guess they're around the same age, or at least close enough to not be able to say the "younger" one or the "older" one." Each are of around the same height and build, so no "short" one or "skinny" one. Both have the same color hair. I don't know either well enough to describe them by personality traits, like the "nice" one. Eventually, I resorted to describing the cashier's hairstyle, for what seemed like an eternity, and my co-worker finally knew who I was talking about.
Of course, there was one way I could have easily described the cashier that could have avoided all the confusion.
One cashier is white, the other black.
And I got the feeling that as uncomfortable as I would have been just pointing that out to my co-worker, she would have been just as uncomfortable to hear it.
So here's Ask Me Later's very first poll:
And feel free to comment on your answer as well.
Must do this
I don't usually speak to why I add anything to the blogroll, I just do it.
But for some reason I felt compelled to add Party Girl's sexcapade blog today.
I had to. I really did. I just had to.
Thursday, February 02, 2006
The list is too long
Some people, like Robert Miranda, went so far as to accuse Charlie Sykes of being a racist for daring to compare Jim Doyle to George Wallace for the governor's stance on school choice.
What will people call Julian Bonds for comparing the GOP to Nazis?
Let's do another comparison.
George Wallace vs. Nazis
1. Who are they?
George Wallace: Elected governor of Alabama as a Democrat four times.
Nazis: National Socialist German Workers Party led by Adolf Hitler.
2. Rise to power
George Wallace: Adopted a segregationist stance after previously losing the gubernatorial primary to a KKK supported candidate. Wallace, meanwhile, had the support of the NAACP.
Nazis: Believed Aryans to be superior to all other races and promoted Germanic racial supremacy. Took control of Germany and, eventually, much of Europe.
3. Infamous for
George Wallace: stood in a schoolhouse door at the University of Alabama in an attempt to stop desegregation.
Nazis: Killed between 9 and 26 million in the name of racial purity.
Is Our Children Learning?
If you're a whack-job moonbat who just happens to subscribe to the beliefs of the radical left-wing, chances are, yes!
The boy's homework assignment for English class was to write
what he would do on a perfect day. In addition to the president and Winfrey, the
boy wrote that violence should be directed at executives of Coca- Cola and
Wal-Mart, police and school officials said.
You just gotta wonder what this kid is hearing at home. Read the rest here.
Wednesday, February 01, 2006
Internet 101: Definitions
It seems our friends over at Spice Blog have quite a nasty sense of humor. If you're going to be smart asses about the whole thing, then I suggest you learn a little about internet metrics, as Jessica inclines. That just so happens to be my profession, so let me help you out.
Visit - Any session on a website over a given period of time. This number takes into account repeat visitors.
Unique visitors - The number of individuals that create a session. This number excludes repeat visitors and is a more accurate metric of the total number of individuals who access a given site or web page.
Page view - The number of times a page is loaded. Period. So, if one person loads a page 30 times, then the recorded number would be 30 page views.
Page visit - This is a term with which I am unfamiliar, at least in the manner that it is used in the Spice Blog. Is that an account of page views or total page visitors or unique visitors or some combination of the three? Please, Spice Blog, do tell!
What's quite amazingly missing from the stats you do list are YOUR OWN page views and unique visitors. However, if the entire family of JSOnline blogs is bringing in a whopping 7553 "page visits" (whatever that means) per day, then that works out to an average of 472 "page visits" per blog, given that there are 16 blogs by my count (This, of course does not reflect that some blogs are bringing in more traffic than others, but I can only calculate on the metrics I've been given).
Comparatively, if these numbers from the Marquette Warrior are accurate, and if we're comparing apples to apples, the heavyweights are bringing in:
- McBride’s Media Matters — 1,035
- The X-off Files — 1,025
- The American Mind — 750
- Sykes Writes — unknown
Conclusion: At approximately 472 "page visits" per day, that makes Spice Blog a featherweight.
Kane Watch: A Response to a Response
Earlier today, Casper wrote a post in response to Eugene Kane's blog about the Cindy Sheehan incident in the House of Representatives Chamber at the State of the Union Address.
It may just be coincidence, but it seems Kane was reading. His response:
My earlier post was my attempt to question why peaceful protest is somehow banned during the State of the Union speech and why so many Americans don't seem to have any problem with that.
Slippery slope, people.
I'd like to tackle this one, with the hopes that Casper doesn't mind.
"The President shall from time to time give to Congress information of the State of the Union and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient." Article II, Sec. 3, U.S. Constitution
Mr. Kane, the State of the Union Address is a time-honored and constitutionally protected tradition in which it is the President's turn to talk to the people. It is not, I emphasize, a time for the people to talk to the President. I don't watch the State of the Union because I care one iota about Cindy Sheehan's or any one else's view of the war, or anything else for that matter.
Rather, I watch the State of the Union because I want to hear, from the man in charge, just what's going on with this country, where it's headed and how he expects to get us there. The time for questions, and challenges and protests can come later.
The State of the Union is so protected by the constitution because it is also a time for the President take responsibility for his actions and accountability for the plan he has laid out for this country. In that way, it is less the right of the President to speak without hindrance than it is the right of every citizen to hear what he has to say.
As Americans, we are owed this explanation, and I'll be damned if I am going to have to tolerate "peaceful protests" in the Chamber, much less be upset that they are prohibited.
The State of the Union is a basic right that is guaranteed to every American citizen. To say that Americans should have a problem with guaranteeing that the President have his chance to speak is to completely deny one of our most powerful freedoms: The freedom to hold our President accountable.
Mr. Kane, this one is just plain ridiculous. Shameful, even.
Kane Watch: Sheehan's Shirt
Eugene Kane asks:
...was [Cindy Sheehan] just looking for publicity
or is there something troubling about a vocal critic to Bush's war policy being
arrested for simply expressing her opinon on a t-shirt?
First off, yes, she was looking for publicity. It would be absolutely silly to think otherwise.
Second, there's nothing troubling about it. She was told the rules ahead of time, chose to ignore them and paid the price.
And it had nothing to do with Bush. Such displays are not accepted during the SOTU. That's why the wife of a Republican Representative was also removed for wearing a shirt that supported Bush.
It's also why a man was ejected from the Gallery during Clinton's impeachment trial.
This is nothing new. Eugene and everyone else hoping to make a case out of this need to just move on.
UPDATE: Mr. Kane follows up with another post acknowledging that Sheehan wasn't the only one thrown out for expressing her views.
But I'm unconvinced his original post wasn't a shot specifically at this administration.