First the primaries went on for twenty-five years or so (or did it just feel that way?) and one kind of primary (Republicans) counted votes by state so the winner in each state got it all while the other kind of primary (Democrats) counted votes by individuals so the winner was just whoever got the most votes. Then there were other crazinesses such as some states getting convention delegates voided because held early primary voting (Michigan). But now, today, it's apparently fine and dandy to start real voting early in Ohio. Yes, voting began there today, a full five weeks before Election Day and the votes are going to count just like real votes. Which would be unlike the military ballots that were disallowed in 2004 in Florida, so that's good, but really, seriously, how can it possibly be legal to start voting for a president five weeks before Election Day? And they're even announcing who's ahead!? . . . . And to think Cole Porter thought his world was going mad.

Labels: 2008 election, confusion, ridiculousness

Even Joe Biden thought the anti-McCain technology ad was bad (here). One in-the-know friend of mine thinks Biden is the cat's meow and that this is an example of what a decent and clear-headed guy he is. Hope it doesn't get him into trouble with his "boss". Hope it isn't just the first pebbles of a foundation about how they can't be a team any longer - say it ain't so, Joe.

Labels: 2008 election, ridiculousness, ugliness

The current head of the Roman Catholics is in Paris this weekend and appearing to huge crowds. Pope Benedict XVI may be a wonderful human being but when he spoke to a couple hundred thousand at an outdoor mass Saturday, his words fairly shouted a do-what-I-say-not-what-I-do attitude. I don't mean to be disrespectful but his remarks were breathtakingly hypocritical and disingenuous. He condemned

unbridled pagan passion for power, possessions and money as a modern-day plague. . . . [and] he called the faithful to “flee idols” such as “money, thirst for possessions, power and even knowledge”. . . .

While it is true that in the past few commoners had much money or possessions, noblemen and monarchs sought and gathered wealth beyond measure. Remember the Medicis? Catherine the Great? The gold room of Peter the Great? Elizabeth the 1st? Henry VIII? The Russian Revolution? European courts through the centuries were driven to amass power, possessions and money. So it's hardly accurate to say this is the most materialistic time in history.

Furthermore, excuse my sarcasm but he thinks we deserve condemnation for having a "pagan passion for power"?! The pope is the singular and revered head of state of Vatican City as well as the bowed-to head of the R.C. Church. As such he is one of the wealthiest humans on earth. Furthermore, Catholics are instructed to take his word as equivalent to God's because he is the "elected monarch" (nice phrase) of Vatican City, the small territory inside Italy which issued its own money until 1999 when it adopted the Euro. The Church does not pay taxes despite a huge revenue. The basilicas and churches in Vatican City contain some of the world's most valuable art and decorations (the Pieta, the Sistine Chapel being only the most renowned) and some floors and walls are literally covered in gold and gems. In official ceremonies, the pope wears gold- and fur-edged robes as well as the jeweled and gold mitre, not to mention the large and heavy "ring of the fisherman" which he wears all the time and which visitors kiss with obeisance. In some ceremonies, he is carried in a throne held aloft (by human beings, for goodness sake). But we should be less craven in our lust for possessions, power and money. Right. It really is a blatant case of do-what-I-say-not-what-I-do. And it's particularly unfortunate that this man whose words are heard as complete and utter truth and with uncritical acceptance by many would speak such incorrect and hypocritical words.

The pope and his church, after all, have had for centuries and continue to have enormous power, billions of possessions and wealth beyond measure.

Labels: people, ridiculousness

The goof balls are out - surprise - although I'll admit that it is weird how much the two names Obama and Biden overlap the infamous guy's. But check out what's displayed after aligning the letters.

"B.S. 'n L A" presumably reveals the quality of the juxtaposition as well as it's possible source.

Labels: 2008 election, juxtapositions, ridiculousness

(How come the NY Post hasn't used "Georgia on my mind" for a headline? If I've thought of it, for sure they have. Does it sound disrespectful? I don't mean it to. Also, I've put this aside in George typeface just to amuse myself and any other typeface fans. Ah the advantages of being under (over? behind? in front of?) the msm radar.)

Charles Krauthammer has a detailed and reasonable article at Real Clear Politics on the so-called cease fire and what he thinks can be done non-militarily to improve things. All based on the idea that "We have cards. We should play them. Much is at stake." I continue to disagree with people, including him, who think Bush should have bolted from the Olympics when all this happened (I wrote about my reasoning yesterday) but I very much like his suggestion that the other seven members of the current G8 should withdraw on the grounds that Putin has defiled his legitimacy there. Krauthammer says the G7 should then be reformed and that Russia and/or its future permutation forever disallowed. I'm an eternal optimist and believe it is possible that Russia could become democratic but maybe I'm mistaken; it's completely irrelevant what I think anyway since I don't get any influence on it at all.

In a related matter, two little girls who were visiting their grandparents in Georgia (the Baltic one, not the U.S. east coast one) for the summer are apparently unable to return home because of the difficulties there at present. The parents appeared on a morning news show today. Why can't the girls leave? Are the borders locked down? Are things worse there than we have been told?

Labels: places, politics, ridiculousness, tv

The theme of this Olympics' opening ceremonies was "Children are the nation's flowers" but apparently that was true only for children who met the cuteness requirements of the ceremony's music designer, Chen Qigang.

Every blogger and news outlet in the world should display this 7-year-old girl's picture front and center. Yang Peiyi sang the opening ceremony song but her face wasn't shown. Another little girl stood in her place and lip-synched because Yang Peiyi wasn't allowed to be on camera because some Chen Qigang deemed her insufficiently telegenic for the opening ceremonies. He is said to be pleased because he believes he had both "a perfect voice [and] a perfect image."

All of which demonstrates (again) the rigid and misguided control being exerted over the appearance of this Olympics. The purpose is said to be to ensure that China is "seen at its best." But it's both offensive and ridiculous to think that a real 7-year-old with a beautiful voice is anything other than China's best. And how does China "look" anything other than its worst when it makes a move like this? It's particularly ridiculous when you consider that the whole raison d'être of the Olympics is to honor and praise not superficial appearance but extraordinary performance.

Labels: reflections, ridiculousness, sports, tv

Laura who muses is back from vacation (making my reading day much happier, with apologies for such a self-centered remark), and she reports that San Francisco's mayor, he of Kimberly Guilfoyle and gay marriages fame, has proposed that the City monitor people's garbage in order to be sure it is being sorted correctly. New York's Mayor Bloomberg has cracked down on notoriously appalling behaviors such as smoking and making lots of partying noise outside bars and taverns, honking too often in traffic, trans-fats, and so on. Aside from issues such as freedom even to harm oneself, many of his targets are so subjective that it's impossible to know how one measures "ok" vs. "sanctionable."

Meanwhile, some other cities seem to be jumping on this wave. Canton (Ohio) and Poughkeepsie (NY),for example, have new city ordinances that threaten homeowners with fines that increase from $250 to $1000 for insufficiently short grass. One wonders what the job description looks like of the person who has the responsibility of measuring the glass. And talk about subjective!

Did I miss noticing that these cities have all become crime-free and dirtless and perfect from a quality-of-life standpoint?? Because, here's the thing: if there are still murders and burglaries and robberies, if there are still rodents biting children and landlords who fail to make basic repairs to plumbing and heat, if there are still inequities in hiring practices and courtroom proceedings, then these procedures are not merely foolish but actually out of line and downright unethical and wrong.

Labels: modern culture, ranting, ridiculousness

According to an internet news site, "…”American Idol” star Fantasia has been dumped by Simon Fuller’s 19 Entertainment as a management client." The phrase "management client" is germane because apparently she's "still signed to 19 Records and BMG but she needs some sophisticated and caring help to guide her career." I guess that red-haired, almost-bare bottoms, unbelievably shrieky fiasco during the American Idol finals was as appalling close up as it was on screen.

Labels: a.i., ridiculousness

It's time to revive the oft-quoted, utterly descriptive and apt phrase "it's a mad mad mad mad mad mad world." It is very much needed. This time, there's a story from the U.K., a place I revere for many things - scenery (Cornwall, for starters), literature, television and theater, flowers, gentility and generosity of culture, etc., etc., that challenges one's ability to laugh at the absurd.

The Tunbridge Wells Borough Council in Kent, usually thought of as a particularly balanced and solid corner of the kingdom and certainly neither insane nor off its collective rocker, has edicted that council members immediately cease using the term "brainstorming" and substitute the phrase "thought showers." The Telegraph is a paper thought of fairly well; it's not known for reporting false events or humans who give birth to Martians and asking readers to take them seriously. Nevertheless, today it relates that the TW Council chiefs took this step because they "feared the word brainstorming might offend mentally ill people and those with epilepsy."

But since "brainstorming" is used to describe people working together and stimulating each other's ideas so as to gather better ideas than they might on their own, then even if somehow one made a connection between "brainstorming" and "mentally ill people and those with epilepsy" (although how they might do so is beyond me), how could it be at all offensive?

And it occurs to me that meteorologists should take organized offense at the term "thought showers" and protest that the TW Council is publicly humiliating their intelligence.

Labels: philosophy, ridiculousness, U.K.

I want to be in favor of Obama's candidacy. I loathe Billary's naked opportunism and power-hunger. I am scared of McCain for a host of reasons. But when Obama said he had no idea his pastor had said the outrageous things he said, I was dismayed because it was impossible to have been close friends and an influential parishioner and not know what J.Wright thought. Which meant Obama was dissembling, at best. Time passed and I'd kind of gotten myself to the point of thinking he's ambitious but not nakedly so and evasive about some things but who can blame him since a campaign is hardly even related to an administration. Now comes the "Obama seal" that's clearly modeled on the presidential seal. I mean, is this high school? It's so silly as to be pointless to mention it except that the man is running for the presidency of the United States. Can he seriously think millions won't ridicule him, minimally, or be outright disgusted? Is this the insecurity of a child abandoned by his father, a kind of Clintonesque idiocy, behavior that some waive off as meaningless but others view with (growing?) wariness? I've thought he seemed like an adult, as does his wife, and it would be so nice to have adults in positions of power.

Labels: 2008 election, people, ridiculousness

Hell must be getting chilly and pigs' wings must be flapping. There's a story out today that the Brits refused Martha Stewart entry to their country because she was convicted of obstructing justice. (Story here.) Even if one thinks what she did was dreadful, she has served her time and therefore is legally finished with that. And it's not as if she advocates anarchy or rebellion against governmental rule. Meanwhile, known terrorists come and go into the U.K. with organizations (excuse me: organisations) working to overthrow of British law and order. All I can say is good bleeping grief.

Labels: people, ridiculousness

All the machinations last night nearly sent me into a tizzy. As two rare readers pointed out, the democrats are putting the voters through an exercise that borders on insanity - after having yelled and screamed about the last two elections for what was legally far less problematic. This nonsense is about power playing and refusal to accept defeat in the face of facts whereas the elections were following the constitutional set-up (electoral college, etc.). In the elections, the electoral college is the way we elect presidents whether one likes it or not. In the primaries, clear rules were disobeyed by two states and one candidate . . . all of which is now water under the bridge or over the dam (or wherever it goes) given backtracking solution that the party seems to have decided. What sanctions? What rules? Go ahead and break the rules cuz you'll get just about exactly what you wanted anyway.

From an ironic and head-shaking point of view, the part I like best about what was decided yesterday is that the only actual change is that the goal post for "number of delegates needed to nominate" was moved up by 93. The difference between Obama and Clinton is still around 175.

So it becomes ever more evident that Clinton's truly driving motivation is power no matter what. When the Michigan primaries were held she said it didn't matter much because the votes would pile up for her everywhere else. She flouted the rules and stayed on the ballot, just in case. When the votes didn't pour in, suddenly Michigan did matter. One can only conclude that she doesn't particularly care about the party, she just wants to be the nominee, come h*&^ or high water. Her spokesperson, Harold Ickes, was amazingly angry and vitriolic after the rules committee's decision. Which was decided by 19-to-8, by the way. Ickes (and, one assumes, Clinton) refuse to accept Obama getting any Michigan delegates. Which I find incomprehensible. What logic earns her all the Michigan delegates? She deliberately ignored the dnc sanction to stay off the ballot while Edwards and Obama followed the rule. So technically no one else received votes. But if all the votes for "Other" weren't for Edwards or Obama, who were they for? Wait! I know. Remember that famous statistic about how high Clinton's negatives are? About how 40+% of the voters wouldn't vote for her if she were the only person running?? Well, maybe she's heard that so often that she just thinks all those "other" Michigan votes were the people who simply won't vote for her even if it means voting for a blank space.

Labels: 2008 election, ridiculousness

I was wondering who would be the first page one person to object to Geraldine Ferraro's patently ridiculous comments. I'm glad it was the candidate himself. Ferraro - the beneficiary of soft treatment at the hands of a wary media when she ran for Vice President - has nerve to say what she said and I'm mighty glad someone reacted straightforwardly. Neither Clinton nor Obama are getting special treatment, if you ask me, since both are being ridiculed and excoriated, at different points in time. Can Ferraro seriously think that the media is going easier on the black man than they do on the white Clinton woman? Get real. The media is a hungry shark from whose teeth no one escapes unshredded.

Labels: 2008 election, people, politics, ridiculousness

Last week I called a local toy store that's reputed to be wonderful, to see if they would be open today. The owner said yes, definitely. I expressed my pleasure because I've never been there before and have been looking forward to going, but their hours are 10-5 all week when I'm 70 miles away gathering rosebuds, bread and bacon. So just to clarify, I asked whether for sure they'd be open since it would be President's Day and she said, oh yes, because it's a big shopping holiday. I said see you then, then, and she said something along the lines of indeed.

I picked up my friend at 2:30 and drove the ten or fifteen miles and . . . you guessed it: it was closed. No sign on the door, no note saying how sorry they were but they were closed on account of no one could work because everyone wanted to stay home and recite the Emanciation Proclamation followed by James Polk's inaugural address followed by Roosevelt's declaration of war followed by homilies about George Washington. No, they simply were not open.

Labels: about me, ridiculousness, shopping

In case you don't think the Dems are starting to sweat, read Frank Rich's column in today's New York Times. He notes some of the same issues that I've written about (he calls the Florida and Michigan delegates "ghosts delegates" which I wish I'd thought of) and how utterly nasty it may get given how the Clintons have already been - several examples of which he cites. Curiouser and curiouser.

Labels: 2008 election, politics, ridiculousness

I have an excel spreadsheet with all the votes and all the delegate counts if percentages of votes were used as the basis for delegates. It includes lines for CNN's and AP's and the NYTimes' delegate counts and it turns out that the actual delegate count has little logic at all. My favorite Dem example is New Hampshire where Edwards came in 2nd but received one more delegate than Clinton. My favorite GOP example is California where McCain's percentage should earn him 71 delegates to Romney's 58, Huckabee's 20 and Others' 20, but where the assignment is McCain 149, Romney 3 and everyone else zero. Fifty percent of the states do not assign delegates simply based on percentage of votes. Weird, scary if we're really a democractic society, but true.

At least the electoral college is based on actual votes, however, so if the majority of Kansans voted for Billy Bob Thornton then Kansas's electoral college delegates would have to vote for BBT on the first ballot. But not primaries. Not in the GOP.

Labels: 2008 election, politics, ridiculousness

Laura wrote yesterday about this article and an amazing list compiled by Dr. John Brignell, a British engineering professor, that contains over 600 links of media stories ascribing the cause of everything under the sun to global warming. Aside from patent absurdity, I think this must mean that global warming is replacing George Bush as the identified source of all bad things as far as the rabid nay-saying alarmists among us are concerned. I guess they need to migrate from GWB since he'll be out of office in a year.

And speaking of insane, how about the Sudanese who want to execute the teacher whose classroom named a teddy bear Mohammed? In Britain, the Daily Mail (among others) is organizing a petition to get her freed from her jail sentence (yes, 15 day jail sentence, believe it or not) but in the Sudan, some machete-wielding maniacs took to the streets demanding her execution. Apparently it's perfectly all right to burn American flags and effigies of American government officials, just not to be affectionate and cute about Mohammed.

And in Dutchess County, NY, three high school students were planning to orchestrate a Columbine anniversary blood bath. (The local newspaper's idiotic headline says they are "good" kids. Gee, what would count as "bad"???) The good news is that a student reported having heard the rumblings about it. The bad news is that Arlington is an otherwise unremarkable community with no economic or social extremes. My conclusion, therefore, is that employing unspeakable cruelty and violence has at last made its disgusting way into all layers and kinds of human beings.

And on a much different front, the U.S. presidential candidate debates continue to be run as if it's a high school election. Planted questions, paid advocates of the opposition masquerading as completely neutral and innocent audience members, and media apologists saying they didn't know and/or it doesn't matter ("questions are questions regardless of who asks them") which means they're either incompetent or stupid (or both). It's hard to avoid concluding that the candidates and media must think, first, that candidates won't be able to put their ideas forward without manipulative help and, second, that voters are so naïve and unobservant that they (we) need to be steered and controlled rather than allowed to listen and think on their (our) own.

What is WRONG with people?!? Why are so many people in the world absolutely stark-raving nuts?

Labels: headlines, modern culture, reflections, ridiculousness

Top Chef is often delightful to watch, in my opinion. Good food, lively personalities, crazy nutty people, competition, enviable kitchens, on and on. This week was odder than usual, however. In the quick round (which was not an elimination round even though it's touted as such), they were told to make awesome burgers. So no one made anything with hamburger. Sure. Salmon, mushrooms, etc., but no plain old hamburgers, which was supposed to be the point, for goodness sake. Trying to out-thinking instructions wouldn't seem the way to win anything, it seems to me, but what do I know. Anyway, in the long part, they were divided into two teams and had to conceive of a restaurant and prepare a dinner that was served to 30 people in each place. The reactions of the judges, who were among the guests, was the brass ring. But instead of amazing them, the contestants appalled everyone both with the restaurant designs and with the food. Apparently the food looked and tasted ghastly, in some instances, and one of the restaurants smelled so heavily of vanilla that it was off-putting. Plus, one server smelled, which must have been horrifying; I mean, can you imagine going to a gourmet meal and being greeted with body odor? In the end, the judges either have an agenda to which viewers and contestants aren't privy or just plain wimped out; they decided that everything was awful so they'd not send anyone home this week but they'll have to do the restaurant again next week. Properly, one devoutly hopes. Anyway, if any of this interests you, you should read the TV Guide blog about it, here; it's a riot, especially the imaginary conversation with a grab-him-off-the-street dinner guest.

Labels: food, ridiculousness, tv

Apologies, but I am borrowing the NY Post's front page headline today about Don Imus and his maybe, rumored, dreaded (by some of us) come-back now that the suit has been settled. But I also have to say that if ABC really does hire him, I will never watch or listen to another thing on ABC again. Partly because it will thereby seem as if the whole thing was such a ridiculously loud exercise in self-promotion. But even more because if he displaces the awesome Curtis & Kuby, it would be unfair, despicable, mean, nasty, disgusting, and any other negative word you want to use. One report says "talks are underway" but another says that ABC has "no interest at all" so who knows. Better not happen, that's all I can say. C&K are the best - they're challenging without being crude, witty without being snotty intellectuals, funny without being nutty. To replace them with the idiotic, smug, nasty and (worst of all) unfunny Imus would really be a crime.

Labels: entertainment, headlines, ridiculousness

Some people have done it - blamed the Bridge of San Luis Minneapolis's collapse on George. But of course. Put the blame on Mame George, boys, put the blame on Mame George.

Labels: gwb, headlines, huh?, ridiculousness