Hiplog Archives

Conservative Corner (my brother, Dan)

Naked and Unashamed (my brother, Scott)

Crazy Aunt Purl
(my friend Laurie)

There's Pie In the Lunchroom
(my friend Chuck)

Too Fat For Ponies
(my friend Sam)

Nashville Junk
(a Tennessean insider)

Recent posts:

2006
Feb. 13-17, 2006
Feb. 6-9, 2006
Jan 30-Feb 2, 2006
Jan 23-27, 2006
Jan 16-20, 2006
Jan 3-11, 2006

2005
Dec 27-30, 2005
Dec 19-22, 2005
Dec 8-16, 2005
Dec 1-7, 2005

Feb. 24, 2006

Recently, Rozzy started playing this game where she decides she's in charge. She came into the kitchen where Dollie and I were sitting. She was Wearing her silver dress up shoes with pink feathers. A Disney Princess Pull-up and a plastic tiara. She had Dollie's purse on her shoulder. She began bossing us around.

She was doing a pretty good impression of Dollie when she gets angry. Dollie speaks in single-word sentences. Rozzy kept repeating this line over and over. It was funny, but she wouldn't break character even when we told her it was time for her to get ready for bed.

And she punctuated it with a thumb over her shoulder as she jutted out her lower jaw. It was an impressive performance.

Speaking of impressive performances, Max is doing a bit better in school lately. He's still getting notes sent home nearly every day, but they're the garden variety stuff, not the bleak assessments of weeks past. Dollie and I long ago decided we have to pick our battles and it seems he's really trying to do better. He's got a field trip today. I told him it was a "gimme" but he should be on his best behavior nonetheless.

As a proud owner of a TiVo, I haven't watched a commercial (except on purpose) for years. This is a problem for advertisers who pay big bucks for the opportunity to influence my spending habits. KFC is trying a new tactic. They've included a secret message in their latest commerical that you can only see if you slow down the commercial and find the hidden frames.

Those who find the message, can get a free sandwich. Eh. I'll still fastforward, thank you.

Paleantologists were recently stunned to uncover a fossil of a prehistoric beaver. This discovery of a mammal flies in the face of current theory that mammals living in the age of dinosaurs were tiny and shrew-like.

This would be the advantage of science and the theory of evolution. When new discoveries are made, such as a Jurassic Beaver, the theory can be tweaked and changed to match the facts. Hence, science.

Back in college, I was managing editor of the student paper for a semester. One issue, we placed a stand-alone feature photo of a student walking around the track at the basketball gym. Below that feature photo was a wire story about a then-recent study which said AIDS patients could benefit from exercise.

Natually, the student pictured was angry, because we didn't make enough of an effort to seperate the photo of her exercising with an unrelated story about AIDS.

The editor apologized, ran a correction and the matter was dropped. Lesson learned.

I bring it up because a magazine in New Hampshire is being sued for running a photo of a woman and her friends next to a story titled "The Mating Habits of the Suburban High School Teenager." The implication being that the woman and her friends were . . . well . . . easy, let's say.

Accompanying the article was a note saying the story's photos were from a photojournalist's ''award-winning five-year project on teen sexuality."

The note included a disclaimer that ''the individuals pictured are unrelated to the people or events described in this story."

That may not be enough. It will be interesting to see how this shakes out.

A group of Marines are in some serious trouble, having been caught selling the unit's body armor online. Man, what a bunch of jerks. Here we have soldiers dying for lack of body armor and these guys are stealing from their own unit to make a few extra bucks.

According to the story, 12 Marines were acting independently of each other and selling the armor to a civilian who ran an ad in the base newspaper. The civilian then sold the armor online.

I don't own an iPod. But if I did, I would certainly consider buying this tie. It has a hidden pocket in the back for holding an iPod Nano. How cool is that? Of course it costs $95 and only comes in pink, so I guess I'd have to pass.

Meanwhile, iTunes celebrated it's one billionth download.

I sometimes wonder how many more times Bush and his buddies are going to go to the "distrusting me only helps our enemies" well before it dries up. Well, what's one more time?

If the furor over the port deal should go on, [Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon] England said, it would give enemies of the United States aid and comfort: "They want us to become distrustful, they want us to become paranoid and isolationist."

Oy.

China has banned any film or TV show that combines live-action with animation sequences. Wow. That seems rather specific. So "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" out. Paula Abdul and Ah-Ha videos, out. Fat Albert cartoons, out. Teletubbies, out. Blue's Clues, out.

Here's a neat little site. This family in Argentina photographs themselves every year on June 17. When you line them all up, you can watch the passage of time.

Hey! For once, Bill O'Reilly is not an idiot.

Michael Hirsch at Newsweek pretty much lays it all out for us in his article titled "Clumsy Leadership."

Does anyone else consider this to be cruel and unusual?

Military interrogators posing as FBI agents at the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, wrapped terrorism suspects in an Israeli flag and forced them to watch homosexual pornography under strobe lights during interrogation sessions that lasted as long as 18 hours, according to one of a batch of FBI memos released Thursday.

That's from an FBI memo uncovered by Knight Ridder.

How does any of this help us? Word is going to get out. Eventually, everything is going to come out. The experts say torture doesn't work because people end up telling you what you want to hear just to make it stop. Have we received any useful information from forcing men to watch gay porn for 18 hours? Is this the America I'm supposed to be proud of?

Whenever I talk like this, I'm accused of having a "pre-9/11" outlook. Well, pardon me, but that's bull. September 11 didn't turn us into a country of torturers with no common sense. People who support the torture of detainees are cutting and running from the Constitution. America is supposed to be better than that.

To the left, you will see the cover of a book titled "The Scholastic Encyclopedia of the Presidents and Their Times". Look carefully at the four presidents depicted there: Washington, Clinton, Kennedy and Lincoln.

This seems straightforward enough. You've got four great and troubled presidents on the cover.

Now look at the cover of the same book when Bush advisor Karen Hughes is using it as a prop when she pretends she likes children. Notice anything different? I wonder how that happened?

Hughes gave out the book as part of some good will tour she was making across America. I can only assume Scholastic printed special copies with Bush's photo on the cover so she wouldn't feel embarrased. The Amazon customer reviews say the book isn't partcularly kind to Bush. But maybe it serves as a metaphor for the entire administration. As long as he looks good on the cover, who's going to bother looking inside?

We know Bush didn't read it because it's longer than a page and a half.

Maybe she threw a hissy fit until someone at Scholastic made her an alternate cover with her boss on it. That I would have liked to have seen.

"Can someone please get this harpy a book cover that has Bush on it before she spits fire and destroys us all?" 2008 cannot get here fast enough for me, so I can see the last of her.

I checked eBay and Amazon and cannot find a version with Bush on the cover for sale anywhere.

Have a good weekend.

|

Feb. 22, 2006

Bush is threatening to use his first veto to end legislative attempts to halt the sale of six U.S. ports to a company owned by the United Arab Emerates. His argument being that the UAE is an ally in the war on terror and that in a global economy, it doesn't really matter who owns the ports. Besides, not selling to them would make it seem like the U.S. was either playing favorites or racists.

There are two big problems with that argument. One is that the UAE's record on terrorism is not very good. Two of the 9/11 hijackers were from the UAE. The money used to pay for the 9/11 attack was laundered through the UAE. The port of Dubai is known as one of the most wide open ports with respect to smuggling and lax security. It was through this port that Iran received their illicit nuclear materials. The UAE has close ties with Hamas and does not recognize Israel.

Secondly, Bush and his administration have spent a great deal of energy making sure the American people are scared of Arabs. That's how he got reelected. He told us about the Islamofacists and the terrorists who are plotting without making it clear who are our allies and who is not. So the public's first reaction to the news is visceral. We can't let those A-rabs run our ports. Then they figure out that a lot of our ports are run by foreign companies. In fact, the six ports under dispute now are run by a British company that is being sold to the UAE.

Third, the Bush administration has not made port security a priority. The Coast Guard say they can't police them without more money, which hasn't been provided. The 9/11 Commission said that port security is no where near where it needs to be.

Then there are the political conflicts of interest. John Snow, Bush's treasury secretary, ran one of the largest shipping companies in the world before coming to the administration. That company, CSX, was sold to Dubai Ports World in 2004.

Now, according to Snow's most recent financial disclosure forms, he received CSX-related income of $72.2 million last year, with $33.2 million of that in a special retirement pension. His stock options in CSX became fully vested in 2004 when control of the company was sold to DPW.

And while CSX made more than a billion in profits during Snow's last five years there, during four of them, CSX paid $0 in U.S. income taxes. Not only that, but the Bush administration gave them $164 million in tax rebates.

Scott McClellen says that this deal has been through “a rigorous review…for national security concerns” including the Depts. of Justice, Defense, Commerce, State, Transportation and Homeland Security. However, Rumsfeld says he found out about it last weekend. Bush admitted today that he only just found out about it himself.

Also, the deal may be illegal:

The administration's review of the deal was conducted by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, a body that was created in 1975 to review foreign investments in the country that could affect national security.

[...]

They found no problems to warrant the next stage of review, a 45-day investigation with results reported to the president for a final decision.

However, a 1993 amendment to the law stipulates that such an investigation is mandatory when the acquiring company is controlled by or acting on behalf of a foreign government. Administration officials said they conducted additional inquires because of the ties to the United Arab Emirates, but they could not say why a 45-day investigation did not occur.

None of this may matter at all because the conspiracy nuts are in full-on tinfoil hat mode. They see this as a Karl Rove maneuver. The Bush administration knows that this deal won't go through, so they back it, giving Republicans in the House and Senate an issue to grandstand on (national security) and show how they stood up to the White House. I don't buy it, but I don't completely discount it either. Stranger deals have been cut.

What's missing from this exhaustive post is my own feelings regarding the deal. I'm not overly concerned that DPW will own the ports per se. Someone is going to have to own them and no American company seems to be stepping up. I just want to be certain that the review process has been followed to the letter of the law. It is clear that, in this case, it has not. The law requires a 45-day investigation and that hasn't happened. Additionally, since we're talking about the security of our borders, I want an extra review by Congress to determine if this sale should go through. I would say that no matter which foreign nation was looking to buy a piece of our country.

I just read where one of my favorite professors, Dr. Charles Wolfe, died last week. He was a folklorist and music historian. He was also the only man I've ever known who said "golly" on a regular basis. The local NPR station did a nice obituary on him.

|

Feb. 20, 2006

My aunt made a comment that I haven't written anything about Al Gore's remarks to the audience at the Jeddah Economic Forum last week. The right side of the blososphere had a collective conniption over Gore's remarks, calling him "Oily Al," "Al of Arabia," saying he "sold out to the Saudis" and that he "slandered America."

Let's take a look at the offending passages:

Gore told the largely Saudi audience, many of them educated at U.S. universities, that Arabs in the United States had been "indiscriminately rounded up, often on minor charges of overstaying a visa or not having a green card in proper order, and held in conditions that were just unforgivable."

"Unfortunately there have been terrible abuses and it's wrong," Gore said. "I do want you to know that it does not represent the desires or wishes or feelings of the majority of the citizens of my country."

Now, what exactly is untrue about what Al said? Was it that Arabs have been "indiscriminately rounded up?" The Justice Department issued a report that says it's true. Was it the part about detainees being "held in conditions that were just unforgivable?" There is a UN report and several news stories that say this is true.

Was it the part where he told the, again mostly Arab audience, that these abuses do not represent "the desires or wishes or feelings of the majority of the citizens of my country?" I certainly hope that's the case.

The criticism from the right (and from my aunt, I dare say) comes from the notion that Al Gore dared say something that was desparaging of America in a foreign country. Speaking the truth should never be something to be ashamed of. What kills me is that these abuses are real and the righties are mad at Gore, instead of the people responsible for them. The seem to think that the Arab world doesn't have access to the same information I have. That they didn't know about these abuses before Gore showed up and by telling them about it, Gore is inciting violence against the U.S.

The Bush administration is doing this in our name and no one of any consequence has been held responsible.

One of the big criticisms of the right has been that Gore went to what one person referred to as the "fountainhead of jihad" to make these remarks. That strikes me as funny for a couple of reasons. One is that it is the Bush administration that is so cozy with the House of Saud. It was Bush himself who was photographed walking hand in hand with the royal prince. The right didn't decry the U.S.-Saudi relationship then.

Second, the Bush administration is turning over control of six of our largest ports to a company in the United Arab Emerates. Giving the UAE maritime control over ports in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia. Where is the outrage at something real that's going on?

Look, you want to slam Gore over his speech, knock your socks off, but don't pretend that he's the source of any of the ill will that Arabs may have for the U.S.

I watched the finals of the Women's Snowboard Cross -- a new event at this Winter Olympics. Americans pretty much dominate the sport and this was to be no different.

Snowboard Cross is a race. Instead of tricks in a half pipe, you're actually racing three other people down a track. There is bumping, rubbing and crashes. Think of it as NASCAR on snowboards.

Anyway, the women's finals were on and the favorite was American Lindsey Jacobellis. The race starts and she breaks out of the pack early and takes a good lead. Soon, two of the others have crashed, leaving Jacobellis way out in front, followed by Tanja Frieden of Switzerland. Jacobellis, with a commanding lead hits the last jump before the finish line, grabs an air method (a trick in which you grab the board with your lead hand before landing, as opposed to an "indy" which is the same trick with your back hand. I learn a lot from watching the Olympics).

Anyhoo, she does the trick, lands on her heals and falls. She gets back up and heads for the finish, but not before Frieden took the gold.

It was an amazing Olympic moment, Jacobellis blew the gold medal in the first ever finals for this competition on a stupid hot-dogging maneuver. To her credit, she didn't cry. She told the reporter that she tried to do the trick and it didn't work out and while she was dissapointed, there is no shame in Olympic silver.

The Olympics are full of moments like that: good and bad. I am not a sports fan. I don't care much about football, baseball, basketball or hockey. But I watch the Olympics. Sure, I think ice dancing is stupid and cross-country skiing is boring, but the Olympics are a chance to be exposed to different people and cultures. The Olympic ideal is one in which nations compete on equal footing and do so in the spirit of fair play and sportsmanship.

And while Jacobelis blew her shot at Olympic gold by getting cocky before the race was over, Americans love a hotdog and she'll be more famous for that mistake than if she'd won the event. After all, Dan Jensen got his FedEx commercial based on his fall, not his gold medal run.

Why, do you suppose, did Cheney decide to give his first post-shooting interview with Fox News? I don't know, but my guess is that he knew they would go easy on him and cover his butt.

After the interview, for example, it came out that Cheney admitted to having "one beer" with lunch. But when Fox News aired the interview, they left it out. They also left it out of the transcript and the online video which promised viewers "the complete interview."

That's not exactly fair and balanced.

Bush has yet to veto a single bill. That's a testament to the power he has over this Congress. They won't send him a bill he doesn't like. Amazing. So one wonders why he's even bothering to ask for the line item veto. Every president wants the LIV because it will give them unilateral control over spending. Clinton almost had it, thanks to Gingrich's Republican Revolution. But the Supreme Court knocked it down.

So, I'm unsure of how Bush plans on getting around that. Not that there is much support for the LIV in congress anymore.

I purchased the Marvel animated film "Ultimate Avengers." Yes, I'm a geek. No, I'm not ashamed of that fact.

It follows the comics pretty well, but they leave out some interesting stuff. It's kind of short, but I guess they're hoping I'll buy part II in August. Which I will.

Reading comics as a youth, the Avengers were always the superhero team of choice for me. You can have your Superfriends, your Justice League, your Fantastic Four and your X-Men, for me it was always the Avengers.

For one thing, they had a great battle cry "Avengers assemble!" Probably not as great as Thing's "It's clobbering time!" but a great battle cry.

Over the years, the Avengers has changed its roster so often that there is hardly a character in the Marvel universe that hasn't been on the team. That's cool, though, because every comic book geek worth his mylar bags and acid-free backboards will have a favorite roster. Mine is:

Iron Man
Capt. America
Wasp
Yellowjacket
Scarlet Witch
Vision
Wonder Man

"Ultimate Avengers" is a retelling of the origin story and as such falls into the comic book movie trap of not being able to get into the real action until late in the narrative. That's why the second comic book movie is nearly always better than the first.

The AP is reporting that there are plenty of discrepencies in the Cheney shooting story.

|