July 13, 2004
The Stuff That Movies Are Made Of...
Just found out that Ving Rhames is going to play Kojak in a new television movie.
My eyebrows went up for a minute, but I like it. Rhames is one of the more underrated actors in Hollywood.
He's got Mission Impossible 3 with Tom Cruise ahead of him first, but who loves ya, baby?
While I'm at it, what makes Charlize Theron think she can play the lead in the live action version of Aeon Flux?
Laurence over at This Blog is Full of Crap has it right.
I mean, Mary-Kate Olsen just needs to lose another 10 pounds and she'll fit into the costume, right?
Could she lose the weight if she got force-fed MORE drugs?
Posted by: mhking at
03:30 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 129 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Kojak? Isn't that a Polish last name?
Funny, Ving Rhames doesn't LOOK Polish...
TV (Harry)
Posted by: Inspector Callahan at July 13, 2004 11:19 AM (e7tal)
2
U seemed not knowing much poles ...
Look more carefully and u will see that even in Polish national representation of soccer was man who has a black skin .
In Poland the same as another European country there are emigrants from Africa or middlle east .
Posted by: Max at April 19, 2005 12:33 PM (xVubV)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 12, 2004
NAA(L)CP attacks Project 21 and other black conservatives
I wondered how long it would take before the NAACP began to
go after black conservative organizations like Project 21.
NAACP president Kweisi Mfume did just that in a speech Monday at their national convention in Philadelphia.
Kweisi Mfume, president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, condemned the groups as a "collection of black hustlers" who have adopted a conservative agenda in return for "a few bucks a head.""When the ultraconservative right-wing attacker has run out of attack strategy, he goes and gets someone that looks like you and me to continue the attack," Mfume said in his opening address to the NAACP's annual convention.
"They've financed a conservative coalition of make-believe black organizations, all of them hollow shells with more names on the letterhead than there are people in their membership," he said.
Paraphrasing a line from a 2002 speech by NAACP Chairman Julian Bond, he said, "And like the ventriloquist's dummies, they sit there in the puppet master's voice, but we can see whose lips are moving, and we can hear his money talk."
In a speech punctuated by cheers from the audience, Mr. Mfume said: "They can't deal with the leaders we choose for ourselves, so they manufacture, promote and hire new ones."
P21 executive director David Almasi and I had a conversation Monday afternoon about that very issue, after a reporter called him with questions over whether or not any members (myself included) were paid.
After I stopped laughing, I jokingly implored him, "Pay ME! PLEASE pay me!"
No. I'm not paid to be a member of Project 21.
I wouldn't mind being paid to write columns, and I'm slowly working on getting that under my belt, but I'm not paid to be a member or Project 21. I gladly serve on the national advisory board, and happily speak on their behalf to the press.
I do this of my own volition, hard as that might be for some folks to believe.
David Almasi, director of Project 21, acknowledged there is "probably" an ideological divide between his group and the NAACP but said Project 21 is financially independent from political parties."We take no marching orders from anyone," he said.
"We have received money from people who are Republican, but not from the Republican Party," said Almasi. "But think about the idea that, at one point, Jesse Jackson was getting some of his travel paid for by the Democratic National Committee."
Mind you the "non-partisan" NAACP
is going to be screening Michael Moore's unapologetically partisan
Fahrenheit 9/11 to their membership tomorrow.
And the NAACP, of course, still claims to be "non-partisan."
Non-partisan my eye...
Posted by: mhking at
07:48 PM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 459 words, total size 3 kb.
1
I like the "ultraconservative" part. Reminds me of my grandma.
Posted by: Fausta at July 13, 2004 04:04 AM (WhoVr)
2
Ug, umgawa. Injun red say you speak-um white words, red man speak-um only red words. gods angry. gods send no buffalo. Red man starve.
Posted by: Michael Gallaugher at July 13, 2004 04:51 AM (tl1hw)
3
You'd think these people would come up with something original to say about black conservatives. I blogged about this whole "in it for the money" thing just
last month. Who do I have to talk to to get my check?
Posted by: Samantha at July 13, 2004 04:57 AM (sYFP3)
4
Kweisi seems queasy about becoming irrelevant. It's going to get uglier, I'd take odds on it. It's what happens when one finds out they are truly not needed.
Posted by: Deb at July 13, 2004 06:25 AM (6aoDM)
5
Look, we're messing with Kweisi's money. Once the race hustle is over, what's he going to do for a living? Get a real job? Doing what? He's fighting for his livelihood. Let's just say we're mouthpieces for the Repubs. What does Kweisi have to say about our ideas?
[crickets]
Posted by: La Shawn at July 13, 2004 08:18 AM (Qa+f/)
6
Before Almasi, the person who headed the group was named Rodick Conrad, if I remember correctly.
One email exchange we had concerned who was funding Black groups. The funding of the NAACP came up. I noted that the group, for years, was headed by white people. That's who primarily funds the group if you take into account institutions and place a race on the funding institutions.
But when you consider many Black organizations like the NAACP or Project 21, you'll find the funding isn't from majority Black sources.
When Glenn Loury gave an interview that detailed is movement from the left to the right, and then from the right, it became clear that he lost status and funding when he "left the left" and when he "left the right."
Is the charge legit in general? I can see arguments either way. At this point, I don't care.
Posted by: DarkStar at July 13, 2004 04:06 PM (cnw1A)
7
Call it bad timing. He coulda run for Baltimore mayorship back in '99, but turned it down--sumfin about "fire in da belly". At least as a politician, he would have the incumbent's edge to go with the flow and "convert" if need be.
Yeah, if he gets caught holding the bag when the race hustle is over, it's back to being plain ole PeeWee Frizzell and nary a perk nor perp.
As for ideas, thy don't have any. Whatever ideas they had were sucked up by the Dems, and spat out like stale chewing terbacky juice
Posted by: Andy Foster at July 13, 2004 05:08 PM (WC1fj)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Senator Ditka? It could happen...
Illinois Republicans
are working feverishly to draft former Chicago Bears coach Mike Ditka to replace Jack Ryan as the GOP nominee on the ballot for the US Senate seat up for grabs this fall.
Ryan withdrew his name from the ballot after a sexual scandal came to light involving Ryan and his television actress ex-wife, Jeri Ryan (from Star Trek: Voyager and Boston Public). However, as of this past weekend, Ryan had not officially removed his name from the ballot.
While on the other hand, Da Coach is said to be seriously considering entering the race. DraftDitka.com is pushing for more support across the state.
'Da Coach' was just on Fox News in the Morning from Chicago. He said that he is 'Thinking about Running' and that he is interested! We have come very far in the past week, but now we need to get the push over the top. We need more signatures on the Petition. We want to present them to him this week and we need your help.Da Coach will do this if we push him!
Everyone went nuts when Vice President Cheney told US Senator Pat Leahy (D-VT) to go "F" himself. Could you imagine what a cigar-chomping Senator Ditka would tell Leahy (not to mention what he'd say to Jabba The Kennedy, Tom "Deeply Saddened" Daschle, Hillary "The Wicked Witch" Clinton and Chuckie "Snidely Whiplash" Schumer)?
Posted by: mhking at
07:47 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 241 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Jabba The Kennedy
Pardon me while I wet-vac my keyboard.
Did you know Dr. Pepper really
burns when it passes through your nose?
Posted by: McGehee at July 13, 2004 02:12 AM (WcMFl)
2
Is there a place where we can submit a petition for Da Coach to run?
Posted by: sam at July 13, 2004 04:11 AM (AevPj)
3
sam, there is a petition at the site Michael linked to: draftditka.com
I still don't know what to make of this one, Michael. lol It's almost funny... but an act of pure desperation, for sure.
Posted by: Deb at July 13, 2004 06:29 AM (6aoDM)
Posted by: Guy S. at July 14, 2004 01:56 PM (6aoDM)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Jihad Cindy is trying to get back on track
Daniel Pipes points out the "eclectic" list of contributors -- all with potentially (and nebulously) Islamist ties -- to the Congressional reelection campaign of noted moonbat Cynthia McKinney. McKinney was defeated two years ago by Democrat Denise Majette in the Democratic primary; Majette handily won the 2002 general election for the seat in Georgia's 4th Congressional district.
We all knew that Cynthia McKinney would be drawing on Arab and Muslim supporters in her bid to return to Congress, but a listing of contributors(with information up through June 2
reveals to what an extraordinary extent this is the case, as shown by the names of her backers.
Some of McKinney's more radical financial supporters include:
Hani Y. Awadallah – president, Arab American Civic Organization, New Jersey.
Jesse Aweida – co-founder, American Task Force on Palestine.
Belal Dalati – a vice president of Arab-American Broadcasting Co. (Orange County Register, February 19, 2002) associated with the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
Hasan Elkhatib –member, board of directors, American Islamic Educational Foundation (MetroWest Jewish News, October 10, 1996)
Yaser Elmenshawy - chairman, Islamic Council of New Jersey.
Rafeeq Jaber – president, Islamic Association for Palestine, a Hamas offshoot.
Oussama Jammal – president, Bridgeview Mosque.
Samer Khalaf – chairman, American-Arab Anti Discrimination Committee's Political Outreach Committee in New Jersey.
Faroque Khan – president, Islamic Center of Long Island, also connected to the American Muslim Alliance and Islamic Society of North America.
Mahmoud A Nimer - member, board of directors, Islamic Academy of Florida, Tampa (an Islamic school established by Sami al-Arian; al-Arian's indictment indicates the school was used as a base of support for the Palestinian Islamic Jihad).
Ayman Osman - member, board of directors, Islamic Academy of Florida, Tampa; employer of Hatem Fariz, arrested on terrorism charges and charged with being a member of Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
Talat Othman - former chairman of the Islamic Free Market Institute; secretary/treasurer of the American Task Force on Palestine.
Khalid Qazi – former president, American Muslim Council of western New York State.
Hareth Raddawi - member, board of directors, American-Arab Anti Discrimination Committee, Chicago.
Allam Reheem - former member, board of directors, Islamic Academy of Florida, Tampa.
Talal Sunbulli – former chairman, Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago.
James Zogby – president, Arab American Institute.
The 4th, in the eastern suburbs of Atlanta, includes the black middle-class bedroom communities of Stone Mountain, Lithonia and unincorporated South DeKalb County. Traditionally, McKinney has enjoyed support from those communities -- where most of the residents remain blissfully unaware of the dangerous support that McKinney enjoys.
McKinney in the past has encouraged and pushed the agenda of the tin-foil wearing conspiracy theorists, while at the same time spending more time and effort on supporting people outside the United States than those in her own district.
I've started receiving nasty e-mails again from folks who have read my columns from a few years back that were very critical of McKinney. So she's pulling out all the stops to try to get back into Congress. And so are her supporters.
The Georgia primaries are a week from tomorrow (7/20); if there's a runoff, it'll come the first week of August. McKinney has a number of people that she's competing against in that Democratic primary.
Most political watchers are anticipating the runoff; if McKinney wins, most likely she would retake the seat in November, giving radical Islamists their own representative in the US Congress. One who simply does not have the interests of citizens of the United States at heart.
Posted by: mhking at
03:29 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 601 words, total size 6 kb.
1
Cynthia Mckinney is absolutely a nut .... i have written about her several times on my blog .... she is evidence that democracy as envisioned by the greeks is doomed to failure
Posted by: william at July 12, 2004 03:49 AM (mNm2O)
2
Cynthia McKinney is the incarnation of evil.
Posted by: Watcher at July 12, 2004 07:07 PM (ROMQ7)
3
On the one hand, I'm ticked at Denise Majette for ditching re-election in favor of a doomed-many-times-over Senate bid. On the other hand, if that district re-elects McKinney, they clearly deserve her.
Posted by: McGehee at July 13, 2004 02:11 AM (WcMFl)
4
I stumbled on this from Google and wanted to say hello
Posted by: Andrew L at November 05, 2004 12:04 AM (WgEFB)
5
I am confused...which one is the clown? hehe
Posted by: tasha at December 05, 2004 07:01 PM (ZhvMb)
6
Congresswoman McKinney is "a champion of the people". May she continue to defy the letter scum, BATF/SS/FBI/KKK/DEA/GESTAPO and the rest of you un American writers. She is "America" at it's best. Bob Morgan
Posted by: robert morgan at July 16, 2005 05:40 AM (5A6OL)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Bobby Brown posts bond on charge of smacking Whitney
Singer Bobby Brown
was relased from the Fulton County jail in Atlanta last night, after posting $2,000 bond on a charge of hitting his wife, singer Whitney Houston in their Alpharetta home last fall.
A Fulton County judge found that enough evidence existed to bring Brown to trial, and ordered that Brown surrender himself by midnight last night. Brown showed up with less than four hours to spare.
His lawyer arrived with him, and stayed with him while he was fingerprinted and photographed. After posting his bond, Brown was released.
Posted by: mhking at
03:08 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 108 words, total size 1 kb.
July 11, 2004
Julian Bond strikes out at Bush yet again in partisan NAACP keynote
NAACP head Julian Bond, in the Sunday night keynote speech of the group's annual convention in Philadelphia,
lashed out once again at Republicans in general, and President Bush in particular.
"They preach racial neutrality and practice racial division," Bond said Sunday night in the 95th annual convention's keynote address. "They've tried to patch the leaky economy and every other domestic problem with duct tape and plastic sheets. They write a new constitution of Iraq and they ignore the Constitution here at home."
The organization is still smarting at the refusal by the White House to accept an invitation for President Bush to speak to the convention for the fourth year in a row. Bush, as presidential candidate in 2000, spoke to the NAACP's national convention, but has turned down invitations in subsequent years.
The organization has called Bush's refusal an insult to all black Americans (as if anyone stopped to ask me), and is at least partly responsible for the very public excoriation by liberal black elected and civil rights officials across the nation against the President.
Posted by: mhking at
07:28 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 199 words, total size 2 kb.
1
One has to wonder just what is causing these folks to go stark raving mad. Maybe Bond needs to be assigned to the same room as Chirac at the asylum for the mentally disturbed.
Posted by: Lola at July 12, 2004 04:09 AM (V1eTE)
2
Look who's calling the kettle black. Nobody asked me, but then again, my family bailed on the NAACP more than 20 years ago, so they prolly lost our contact info.
Julian and PeeWee Frizzell, AKA Mfume, have been divisive from day one. Never mind that Bush has more Blacks and Latinos IN the upper hierarchy of his administration than Kerry has in all of his campaign staff, or any other administration in history.
Posted by: Andy Foster at July 12, 2004 04:51 AM (WC1fj)
3
First, what is wrong with racial neutrality? Isn't the ideal we strive for a society in which people are not judged based on race?
By "racial division," I assume he means the Reps don't kiss the NAACP's ass.
If he believes the tax cuts to be "duct tape and plastic sheets," he truly has no clue how an economy works.
Posted by: S Michael Moore at July 12, 2004 05:49 AM (8OqrX)
4
It appears Julian Bond's problem is that he's loosing grip on the plantation. The only way someone can "control a people" is by keeping them "clustered together". Just like on the plantation- you can make money off people. They make money & have control and influence over blacks. They want to keep control so others have to come through them to get their "PLANTATION VOTES". It's clear that these plantation overseers (Julian Bond, etc.)are loosing grip on they're plantation. Once our people (blacks) realize they're FREE to leave---"THEY WILL."
Just like I did and FREEDOM NEVER FELT SO GOOD. I'M FREE TO MAKE MY OWN DECISIONS AND VOTE THE WAY I FEEL LEAD. AMEN!
Posted by: Rev. Bruce Leonard at October 31, 2004 05:23 AM (WWHZj)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
First Nazis and now this?
Actor Brent Spiner (Data from
Star Trek: The Next Generation) is slated to
appear on at least three episodes of
Star Trek Enterprise this fall as the grandfather of Data's creator, Dr. Noonien Soong.
The Enterprise episodes most likely will air during the November sweeps period.
Excuse me while I find a Louisville Slugger to take to Rick Berman and Brannon Braga's pointy little heads.
No offense to Spiner -- he's a great actor, and his portray of Data in Next Gen is quality work. But Berman and Braga are continuing to shove the Star Trek franchise down the toilet of inadequacy and oblivion.
Posted by: mhking at
07:17 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 114 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I could never stand Enterprise. ST jumped the shark with TNG, I think. DSN was awful and Voyager couldn't save it.
Posted by: gcruse at July 12, 2004 04:51 PM (4Z+c1)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Family, friends and the movie of a fatass
My wife's family reunion was this weekend - it was wonderful to see folks that I hadn't seen in a long time. It was the 75th annual reunion for my wife's family, and we hosted the gathering of about 170 people here in Atlanta.
One of my wife's cousins brought a bootlegged copy of Fatass' Fahrenheit 9/11 with him. We sat down in the den at my In-Laws' to watch, the disgust evident on my face as I settled down in the back of the room.
My sister-in-law, who is convinced that each and every white person on the face of the planet is out to get her, sat off to my right on the other side of my father-in-law, lapping every lie that spewed out of Fatass' mouth.
I began to doze about fifteen minutes in, and got up at some point awhile later when my own snoring woke me up.
She-who-must-obeyed found me about a half-hour later in one of the bedrooms where I had retired with a book off of the living room, where the kids all enjoyed Spongebob or Recess or some other cartoon -- it certainly sounded better as background noise than Michael Moore's constant lies and exoriations of the Bush Administration.
"I woke myself up snoring," I told her. "Plus my butt went to sleep."
She rolled her eyes. "Boring," she said.
"Yeah, and full of innuendo," I replied.
"Yeah! Just full of it! I don't blame you for getting up. I was a little bit more comfortable in the chair I was in -- I could sleep a little better," she said. "I don't understand how people could go see that crap."
"I do," I replied. "Back to that hatred thing again. Although, if I paid money to see that thing -- as if -- I'd be highly pissed."
The less my wife and I say about our conservatism to some of our family members, the better. Besides, I got the last laugh. A number of folks came up to me over the weekend and asked me about my television appearances on behalf of Project 21 for MSNBC and Fox News Channel.
If I get even one person to stop and think for a moment about what I am saying in my writings and in my television apparances, then I think I've done my job well. Given the e-mails and personal communications I receive on the positive side? I'm doing OK -- hate-mail notwithstanding.
Posted by: mhking at
06:55 PM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 427 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Sounds like you're doing great! Thanks for sharing that story.
Posted by: Tom Galvin at July 11, 2004 08:15 PM (jJDc0)
2
Sounds like maybe you should give Blacks more credit then?
Posted by: DarkStar at July 12, 2004 04:00 AM (cnw1A)
3
As if I don't in the first place?
Posted by: mhking at July 12, 2004 04:15 AM (hcPGf)
4
"My sister-in-law, who is convinced that each and every white person on the face of the planet is out to get her..."
That is a pretty rough attitude to get past. If someone is nice to her, then they are obviously scheming or perhaps they just feel bad for being so racist. If someone is rude to her, then they don't feel bad for being so racist. If someone doesn't notice her, then obviously they are pretending she doesn't exist.
It is amazing how we can manufacture our own reality to live in.
Posted by: King of Fools at July 12, 2004 05:10 AM (ktIW6)
5
As if I don't in the first place?
By withholding your opinion, you are saying that your family can't handle it. Maybe some can't. Maybe some can.
Give them credit by giving them positive benefit of the doubt.
Posted by: DarkStar at July 12, 2004 04:46 PM (cnw1A)
6
Been there, done that.
I've had my share of family arguements over my politics. Everyone knows how I feel politically. I make no secrets about it.
My father-in-law and mother-in-law know our politics, and can discuss them rationally with us, even though they both differ with us. The aforementioned sister-in-law goes out of her way to try to pick fights with Rachel and I.
I was not about to ruin a warm, happy weekend by allowing anyone to pick a fight with me over my politics.
In some cases, discretion is the better part of valor.
Posted by: mhking at July 12, 2004 07:32 PM (E7oUW)
7
Michael, tell your sister in law I am not out to get her, but I am only mostly white. Got a good bit of native American ancestry as well. So I guess I might not count after all. Oh well.
Posted by: spacemonkey at July 13, 2004 02:18 PM (qSKHX)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 09, 2004
Ketchup Boy didn't "have time" for terror briefing
When
interviewed on CNN's Larry King Live last night, Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry admitted that he did not have time for a briefing -- even though he did have time to appear at a New York fundraiser and show up on stage, guitar in hand.
Kerry made the startling comments on CNN's LARRY KING LIVE Thursday night.KING: News of the day, Tom Ridge warned today about al Qaeda plans of a large-scale attack on the United States. Didn't increase the -- you see any politics in this? What's your reaction?
KERRY: Well, I haven't been briefed yet, Larry. They have offered to brief me. I just haven't had time.
No time to find out about any threats to the nation, but time to strut his stuff on stage?
And this man wants to be President?
UPDATE: When I grow up, I wanna be able to rip somebody a new one with the same style and finesse and sheer, unadulterated rapier wit of Jay G.
Posted by: mhking at
05:18 AM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 180 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Hey man, that beautiful hair takes time you know.
Can't be fighting terrorism with a mussed doo now, can we?
I wonder everday can this man possibly say anything less presidential, and then like clockwork, boom, there he goes.
Posted by: Tman at July 09, 2004 07:19 AM (Fho+X)
2
Looks like someone is following in the footsteps of Sax playin, Arsenio Hall appearin', Big Bubba!
Liberals love idiocy.
Posted by: Jerry McClellan at July 09, 2004 12:58 PM (WIM/2)
3
"
UPDATE: When I grow up, I wanna be able to rip somebody a new one with the same style and finesse and sheer, unadulterated rapier wit of Jay G."
When I showed this to my wife, she rolled her eyes and mumbled something about my head not fitting through doorways as it was BEFORE...
Glad you liked the rant!
Posted by: Jay G at July 10, 2004 06:03 PM (lWLtT)
4
Kerry did make a public statement without blaming Bush for something, maybe he's getting better.
Posted by: Michael Gallaugher at July 11, 2004 01:36 PM (MTxm4)
5
O.K let me get this straight. You lot are lambasting John Kerry for saying he did not have the time to go to a security briefing yet went on stage with an electric guitar (and a nice looking one) while you support a president who spends more time on holiday per year than the vast majority of Americans do in 5, and a president who lied to the whole world about Iraq, commited electoral fraud 4 years ago and who cannot eat a pretzel and watch a football match at the same time?????
Posted by: Nick Saunders at July 12, 2004 04:15 AM (iVygw)
6
"Intelligence failures" do not equal "lies."
"Intelligence failures did not start with Bush 43.
GW's time "on vacation" was in line with most other presidents (including Clinton).
Bush did not commit electoral fraud; the Electoral College elected him in a process that was delineated by the US Constitution more than 200 years ago. That most people do not understand that four years after the fact is maddening at best.
And if choking on food disqualifies one for anything, then a lot of folks would most likely not qualify for anything, let alone president.
Posted by: mhking at July 12, 2004 04:30 AM (hcPGf)
7
Hipocrisy is rampant on both sides, and this faux outrage is but another example.
Bush gets repeated CIA briefings during the summer of 2001 that state an attack on the US is imminent, then goes on vacation for a month. That, of course, is okey dokey. Junior needs his rest, and it was really a "working" vacation. Sure. Nothing to see here.
Kerry, on the other hand, is (gasp!) campaigning in an election year.
If this "new" risk is so serious, why hasn't the risk level been raised? How on earth is Bush able to leave Washington to go yak at the good folks in Pennsylvania? Are Condi and Tom Ridge riding on the plane? Didn't think so.
It's all BS, I just wish Kerry had the balls to say so.
We're going to hear this endlessly until November - "we have blah, blah, non-specific information that terrorists want to attack the US, blah, blah and your government, led by the Valiant Commander Codpiece and Capable Uncle Dick, is protecting you, blah, blah, blah."
And no, I don't "hate Murka" for writing this.
It's just that this is getting soooo boring.
Posted by: dave at July 12, 2004 06:51 AM (XqnFA)
8
"GW's time 'on vacation' was in line with most other presidents (including Clinton)."?
According to http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1999/08/21/politics/main34415.shtml Clinton had spent "152 days on holiday over his two terms." Now that was as of December 13, 1999, so he still had a year to go. Even if he had taken that entire last year off, I don't think he would have caught up to Bush (too lazy to do the math, sorry
)
That URL also has some interesting statistics regarding past Presidents, but that's beside the point. According to http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1190302,00.html Bush had spent more than 40% of his time (as of April 12, 2004) on vacation.
Granted, "in-line" is a somewhat subjective term, but ((3*365)+31+29+31+30-20)*0.4 = 478 days in a little over three years doesn't come close to 152 days in a little under 7 years.
Have a nice day,
Evan
Posted by: evan at July 12, 2004 10:11 AM (UTYja)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Conservative bloggers are persona non grata in Boston
Wizbang is reporting this morning that most (if not all) conservative bloggers who applied for credentials to the Democratic National Convention have had their applications turned down.
Is anybody really surprised?
The notion of allowing bloggers in is tenuous at best. (I know there are some who will make a big deal about it -- and I'll admit that I was among the first folks who actually posted to the electronic world at a political convention, most notably the '88 Democratic Convention back when I was on The Source).
The concept is not entirely new, Sherwin Levinson, Diane Worthington and Mike Greenly did it (also on The Source, they and CompuServe were the only game in town as far as what we now know as the Internet back then) in '84 at the San Francisco convention.
But everyone is making a big deal now because the National Committees are actively seeking bloggers to participate.
The DNC has posted a half-assed apology to those who didn't make the cut, but we all know the truth: They are only looking for a cheering section, no "visitors from the other team" allowed.
Big deal.
C-Span, PBS, FNC, MSNBC & CNN will be gavel-to-gavel. The alphabet networks are gonna showcase the "stars" of the convention with an hour each night.
The rest of us? We'll be online, jabbering away as usual. And we'll be able to get the real story, even though we won't be in Boston. The "Edison Carter future" of personal reporting is still coming. And the Democrats can't do a damn thing about it.
UPDATE: Here's a partial list of credentialed bloggers bound for Boston.
Posted by: mhking at
05:07 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 290 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Wow, Michael, you'd never make the cut - black and conservative - definately not what the Democrats would ever want the public conceptualizing. The Dems never want blacks straying from their plantation, whose propaganda is that Bush assembled on his cabinate token black useful idiots, the same cabinate that history will probably record as one of the finest in US history.
Posted by: onecent at July 09, 2004 05:24 PM (gOE1K)
2
Hey, it gets worse. The bave Bill at INDC Journal credentials and then yanked them AFTER he had made travel arrangements. So, not only is he not going, he's got dough out of the pocket as a result.
Posted by: Terry at July 10, 2004 04:17 PM (OSzur)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 08, 2004
AQ threatens to behead Filipino; Philippines caves to threat
Terrorist thugs
have appeared yet again on Al Jazeera in a familiar tableau: A hostage in an orange jumpsuit kneels before three masked gunmen. The threat? Same as always. Get out of Iraq, or this guy loses his head.
In the video broadcast by Al-Jazeera television, the group claimed to have already killed an Iraqi security guard who was accompanying the Filipino, the newscaster said. The statement gave no details of his capture.Three armed and masked men stood behind the seated hostage, threatening to kill him if the Philippines doesn't pull out within three days. A banner on the wall behind them identified the captors as a previously unknown group, the Iraqi Islamic Army-Khaled bin al-Waleed Corps.
Thursday, the Philippines government suspended further deployment of Filipinos to Iraq. Philippines officials did not provide details but said the Cabinet would meet later in the day to discuss the situation.
Today, that nation's president, Gloria Aroyo, ordered Philippine contract works not to travel to Iraq, but she did not directly refer to kidnappers' demands to withdraw Philippine troops.
Yeah. Right. She caved. Which means we'll see more of this kind of crap.
Posted by: mhking at
08:42 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 210 words, total size 2 kb.
1
I wonder what Freud would say about the fact that I first read the post title as, "AP threatens to behead Filipino..."
Posted by: Beck at July 08, 2004 03:17 PM (fllfQ)
2
Doesn't that just make you angry? I remember hearing that and thinking the same thing, Mike...."She caved. Which means we'll see more of this kind of crap."
What a pansy-ass country...
I did read that there's less than 100 troops over there so the Filipino involvement was mostly just "symbolic" but still...Sheesh, have a little backbone....
Posted by: dmiller23462 at July 09, 2004 12:23 AM (GSdIn)
3
But note that they seem to be targeting the small fries involved in the liberation and rebuilding of Iraq. The Philipines had only 100 troops on the ground? What's the point of threatening to behead a captive over 100 soldiers? And why is the Philipine president concerned about workers in Iraq but not in Saudi Arabia? I think the terrorists are just desperate to show that they still have power and influence.
Posted by: Samantha at July 10, 2004 01:37 PM (sYFP3)
4
Now it seems that they are NOT pulling out....WTH????
Posted by: dmiller23462 at July 11, 2004 11:49 AM (hR1fa)
5
dragi amerikanci, kad su muslimanski ekstremisti sekli srpske glave po bosni vi ste cutali i podrzavali sve to. sad vam se samo vraca, nazalost.
Posted by: petar at July 19, 2004 11:20 AM (kikO7)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
The strange case of Cpl. Hassoun
US Marine Cpl. Wassef Ali Hassoun is
at the US Embassy in Beirut, Lebanon according to US officials today.
Hassoun had been presumably in the hands of Al Qaeda-associated terrorists. However other information implies that the Hassoun case may be a part of an elaborate hoax.
Late Wednesday, FBI agents showed up at the Hassoun family home in West Jordan, Utah. And Pentagon officials tell NBC News that the Navy has now launched a criminal investigation into Hassoun's disappearance, and the possibility that his kidnapping may be part of an elaborate hoax.
One of the questions, is that if the kidnapping is legitimate, how did he get from Iraq, across SYRIA AND LEBANON to Beirut?
Unconfirmed reports indicate that Hassoun may have been AWOL prior to the alleged kidnapping.
Curiouser and curiouser this becomes. Something is defiitely rotten in Lebanon.
Posted by: mhking at
08:26 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 159 words, total size 1 kb.
Bush declines NAACP invitation
One of the reasons that the Soul Patrol hates George W. Bush came to light today, when the President
declined an invitation to speak at the NAACP's annual convention in Philadelphia next week.
Candidate George W. Bush spoke at the 2000 NAACP confab, but has turned down invitations from the group each year of his presidency.
And since Bush refuses to come and kiss Julian Bond's ring, Bond has continued to rail against Republicans in general and Bush in particular. Bond's excoriations of Republicans fly in the face of claims that the NAACP is a non-partisan group. Bond is President of the NAACP.
In June, Bond compared Republicans to terrorists.
"Their idea of equal rights is the American flag and the Confederate swastika flying side by side," Bond told a cheering audience. "They've written a new constitution for Iraq and ignore the Constitution here at home. They draw their most rabid supporters from the Taliban wing of American politics. Now they want to write bigotry back into the Constitution.""We have a president who talks like a populist and governs for the privileged," Bond said. "We were promised compassionate conservatism; instead, we got crummy capitalism."
As opposed to working with those of all political persuasions, Bond and the NAACP have vilified Republicans and conservatives.
Oh. And Democratic Presidential candidate John Kerry? He'll be speaking to the convention on their final day, next Thursday. If past history is any indication, Kerry will pander to the crowd and the attendees will lap it up.
Then, they claim to be non-partisan.
Perhaps the IRS should look into those claims. After all, if they are truly as partisan as they continue to appear, then they shouldn't enjoy an exemption from taxes.
Posted by: mhking at
07:37 AM
| Comments (17)
| Add Comment
Post contains 293 words, total size 2 kb.
1
I have raised questions about whether is as much a bid by the NAACP to retain relevance as well as an attempt to seem non-partisan (at least enough so they keep their tax free status).
Posted by: Joel (No Pundit Intended) at July 08, 2004 11:22 AM (iGAEH)
2
They made the offer and Bush turned them down. Because they made the offer, to him and some other Republicans I am told, they get to keep the status.
Reagan went.
Bush, Sr. went.
Gingrich went.
Frankly, I think it's a punk move for any politician to not face a so-called "hostile" audience.
Posted by: DarkStar at July 08, 2004 05:23 PM (BbmiU)
3
You know, everytime President Bush has a press conference, he faces a hostile audience. Remember the reporters asking him repeatedly if he was going to apologize for 9/11?
Why should the President of the United States feel obligated to play games with partisans? He answers to the American people, not to the NAACP.
Posted by: Joel (No Pundit Intended) at July 08, 2004 05:59 PM (Jiqi3)
4
Dark Star,
Bush is not going to the NAACP convention for a reason.
Back in 2000, he went to the convention in New Orleans, gave a speech, and went away. He knew that the NAACP was going to give Al Gore all the props they could for the campaign. That's fair.
What he didn't anticipate was that the NAACP would buy time in Texas to run an ad that virtually accused then Governor Bush of complicity in the death of James Byrd, a citizen of his state. Bush's Texas DLE had captured the assailants, and at the time of the campaign, they were sitting on Death Row.
That ad was beyond the pale; the day they ran it was the day the NAACP stopped being "non-partisan", if it ever was.
Bush has told the NAACP to kiss his ass, and that is all to the good.
Posted by: Section9 at July 08, 2004 06:12 PM (BdkNi)
5
I agree with Dark Star that a politician should be brave enough to go before hostile crowds but, as Joel says, he does that
any time he has a news conference. Bush isn't obligated to provide raw footage of himself getting hooted down to the Kerrion for their campaign ads. Let the NAACP come off their high horse and maybe the President can pencil them in. Next year.
Posted by: Toby Petzold at July 08, 2004 09:29 PM (Rq42o)
6
The NAACP has yet to boo any Republican who addressed the group.
Posted by: DarkStar at July 09, 2004 04:19 AM (cnw1A)
7
Darkstar,
A group doesn't have to boo somebody to be overtly hostile, and the NAACP is not entitled to have the President address them just because they invited him. I find the President's willing to hold somebody accountable for their actions refreshing. It would be the height of hypocrisy for President Bush to go and address the NAACP after the partisan hyperbolic crap they dished his way. Maybe the NAACP ought to be asking themselves why it is a President feels no desire to come speak with them?
Posted by: TL at July 09, 2004 01:32 PM (XHqH7)
8
Why should Bush bother? The NAACP has made it very clear that they are only interested in this as a "photo-op" chance to rail at Bush in front of news cameras.
Having the President speak in front of your private-interest pressure group is a privelige, not a right. You're ASKING FOR A FAVOR.
Call someone a nazi and a evil goon often enough and he loses interest in you. Publicly support his enemies often enough and he loses the belief that you are anything other than a tool of his enemies. The ABA found this out in 2001. The NAACP will be getting very short shrift in the next four years, and they have earned it. Besides, just what exactly are thay going to say about him that they haven't said already?
Posted by: DaveP. at July 09, 2004 09:13 PM (1tjAD)
9
In 2003, the NAACP's Julian bond also
pledged to have the organization work to defeat Bush in 2004. Isn't that a pretty relevant point?
Posted by: Patterico at July 10, 2004 12:20 PM (xZfgb)
10
If Bond said that, and said it speaking for the NAACP proper, then the group should have it's status yanked if they follow though.
I hate to be technical about it, but the NAACP didn't do the Byrd ad. A _partisan_ entity "spun off" from the NAACP did the ad. Of course, it was still way over the line.
The NAACP leaders -- meaning the leaders of the NAACP -- have shot themselves in the feet by allowing themselves to be tied so closely to Democrats.
As for Bush holding people accountable, are people going to hold Bush accountable for now supporting the idea of condom use to "fight AIDS"?
Posted by: DarkStar at July 11, 2004 06:42 AM (BbmiU)
11
The ads were paid for by Americans for Equality, a project of the NAACP National Voter Fund. I don't see the distinction, and I doubt many others do either.
Posted by: Patterico at July 11, 2004 08:47 AM (xZfgb)
12
The distinction is purely legal: the entity that paid for it isn't a non-profit or not-for-profit organization.
Posted by: DarkStar at July 11, 2004 11:28 AM (BbmiU)
13
But does the distinction stand up to scrutiny? If it's a "spin-off" then isn't this exalting form over substance? Where did this organization get its money from?
Posted by: Patterico at July 11, 2004 12:08 PM (xZfgb)
14
If what I read is accurate, they brought some mailing lists from the DNC and raised money that way.
Posted by: DarkStar at July 11, 2004 02:08 PM (BbmiU)
15
well first of all Fuck bush, He obviously went in 200 to gain votes and now that he got them there is no reason to come back, did you know that bush is the first president since hoover to decline naacp all 4 years. Bush is screwing us all, and now he doesn't even have to abide by the US constitution, i bet you fucks love the patriot act. its so patriotic.
Posted by: fuckbush at July 11, 2004 08:27 PM (t6I/5)
16
When you are running for office or running to stay in office, you have a responsibility to address all groups and answer all questions. If you are honest and believe in your policies and goals for the country and your acconplishments, you should not be afraid to deliver your message in front of any group. this is how you gain votes, by speaking to non-supporters. I believe Bush wil pay for not appearing by losing many votes. Fear of embarassment for current policies and actions and having to face the truth about his administration has got him in hiding. Shame on him.
Posted by: Belinda at July 12, 2004 06:20 PM (AaBEz)
17
Belinda,
This is why John Kerry will be making a round of speeches to purely conservative groups explicitly opposing his candidacy this election season.
Right?
The first time he does that -- even once -- you be sure and let me know.
Posted by: Patterico at July 12, 2004 08:02 PM (xZfgb)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Railing on Rall
From my comments on
Michelle Malkin's comment section this morning:
I'm furious.I'm beside myself.
I have to endure being called Uncle Tom and Oreo and other such things on an ongoing basis. I have to live with and through my family and friends being desirous of having my head examined for being conservative day in and day out. I have to listen to moonbats invade my blog and insist that I'm an "unwitting tool" of conservatives (after, since I'm black, I couldn't ever have an ORIGINAL thought of my own!).
Now I'm supposed to sit still while white trash idiots who draw worse than my two year-old insult not only my intelligence, but my race as well?
Notice the crickets coming from the Soul Patrol? They wouldn't dare attack one of their own.
I guess it's supposed to be OK, since Rall is calling a black conservative that vile name.
I get upset when I hear blacks use that term; I'm supposed to sit still when idiots like Rall use it? When did he get a pass to be offensive? And when did the Universal Press and the 140 newspapers that run Rall's excuse for a column get a pass to use the term?
Michelle, if there's any list you are spearheading, any sort of extra means you have at your disposal that I can add my name to, please allow me to do so.
I'm beyond and beside myself with anger over this thing!
Posted by: mhking at
07:18 AM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 251 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I plan to blog about this, too. I share your anger, my brother. A few years ago, a white MD legislator called Michael Steele, Republican Lt. Governor an "Uncle Tom." The Baltimore Sun implied Steele was being used by white conservatives. Not a peep was heard from any black liberal in MD, DC or the Congressional Black Caucus.
My reaction was much like yours. I was angry to the point of distraction this morning as I got ready for work. I thought, "Are they going to let this white boy get away with that???"
We will wait in vain for Jesse to come out against this one, Michael. This is how unmanly men defend a woman.
Posted by: La Shawn Barber at July 08, 2004 07:34 AM (Qa+f/)
2
We shouldn't wait for black liberals to raise hell about this mess, because they won't. Rall is a fellow liberal, and they believe that Condi "deserves" such abuse. We should do it ourselves!
Posted by: molotov at July 08, 2004 01:57 PM (h3FX8)
3
Condi Rice could mop the floor with Hillary Clinton when it comes to smarts, class and looks. She's self-made. Her accomplishments are hers. She isn't the free ride from a politico husband. Ironic, isn't it.
The dispicable message in Rall's cartoon and leftist wags is that the remarkable black members on Bush's cabinet are useful idiots to him. What's so cynically revealed is the real inner logic of the left: blacks are tokens to us,
therefore they must be to Bush.
Every time I see Condi on the news I think what an elegant and intelligent woman she is. Since 9/11, I thank God she is the National Security Advisor. You can see in her demeanor how seriously she works helping to keep us safer.
Rall is a creep, a racist, and sadly representative of the Democratic party and media elite today.
Posted by: onecent at July 08, 2004 04:25 PM (UkQjR)
4
LaShawn. As I remember, WOLB talk show host Larry Young spoke out against the comments.
Larry Young is a former state senator for Maryland. He's very liberal and he said it was wrong. In fact, Steele and Erlich call into the morning show occasionally. Steele is on the station more than Erlich.
Michael Steele also had a weekly radio show on WOLB where he addressed the majority Black audience.
Clarence Mitchell, III also spoke out against the comments. He's a Democrat.
So, your "not a peep" comment is not correct.
Posted by: DarkStar at July 08, 2004 05:29 PM (BbmiU)
5
Not really. Not a peep was heard by me. What did they say about Mike what's-his-name's "Uncle Tom" comments?
Posted by: La Shawn at July 09, 2004 04:57 AM (Qa+f/)
Posted by: mhking at July 09, 2004 06:17 AM (tgIqB)
7
Not really. Not a peep was heard by me.
Your location has been given as D.C. Can you get the signal of WOLB there? I can't get the signal past the I-495/I-95 interchange.
Again I'll say, there were comments made against what the The Sun wrote and Mike Miller's comments.
They said the editorial and Miller's comments were out of line. On WOLB, Larry Young has stated he likes Michael Steele. When Larry Young was in the hospital, Steele gave Young a call. When Young was out of the hospital and was in a public meeting, Young said Steele came by just to see how he was feeling.
So, again, if you didn't hear it, does it mean it didn't happen?
Posted by: DarkStar at July 09, 2004 11:58 AM (BbmiU)
8
In response to Le Shawn's comment abouit Jessie Jackson..the only time you will hear from him is if there is a profit in it for him..sorry
Posted by: James Kotthoff at July 09, 2004 01:47 PM (TuD7C)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
A Møøse Once Bit My Sister...
|
David Hyde Pierce (top left), Tim Curry and Hank Azaria will be playing Sir Robin, King Arthur and Sir Lancelot (respectively) in Spamalot, the Broadway musical version of Monty Python & the Holy Grail when it hits the stage in December. |
Spamalot is the long-hinted-at
Broadway musical version of the legendary comedy
Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
Casting has finally shown up for the December premiere of the musical in Chicago.
(David Hyde) Pierce, who was Dr. Niles Crane in the long-running U.S. sitcom "Frasier," will play Sir Robin. (Tim) Curry, known for his star turn in the cult film, "The Rocky Horror Picture Show," will play King Arthur. (Hank) Azaria, best known as the voice of Moe the bartender on the animated series "The Simpsons," will portray Sir Lancelot.The corresponding film roles were performed by Eric Idle, Graham Chapman and John Cleese of the British comedy troupe.
I'm really looking forward to this one.
And as luck would have it, I'm going home for Christmas this year. I wonder if my brother can get me tickets...
Spamalot premieres in Chicago December 21, 2004, to January 16, 2005, before beginning Broadway previews on February 7.
Posted by: mhking at
06:40 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 206 words, total size 2 kb.
July 07, 2004
Chris has a Homer Simpson moment...
What's $5 billion between friends? Even the best of us are mistaken once in awhile.
Then again, I couldn't imagine Aaron McGruder ever admitting when he was wrong. That's why Chris Muir is a far better cartoonist, and a far better man that McGruder ever could be.
Posted by: mhking at
08:22 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 62 words, total size 1 kb.
Ted Rall scrawls racial slur against Condi Rice
Ted Rall is
so damned brainless that it isn't funny.
But the worst part of it is that he'll get a pass, even from the NAAC(Liberal)P. Why? Because he's liberal, and he's railing against and about an "Aunt Jemima" who's "sold out her soul" to the "white devils."
God, this makes me so damn mad!
I'm posting the "cartoon" (and I use the term loosely -- my two year-old can draw better than Rall can) below the fold...
more...
Posted by: mhking at
12:11 PM
| Comments (18)
| Add Comment
Post contains 98 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Yikes...that was foul. I don't care who he mocks...its just too foul for human consumption is my conclusion.
Posted by: King of Fools at July 07, 2004 12:20 PM (ktIW6)
2
What a sophmoric little prick he is.
Posted by: Madfish Willie at July 07, 2004 02:46 PM (yN46R)
3
Please don't insult sophomores like that.
Posted by: radish at July 07, 2004 03:17 PM (95fiz)
4
I came by and saw that a few hours ago... and was so steamed I couldn't put words together coherently. Rall is a sad, sick, small person. I hope he lives a very long, lonely life.
Posted by: Deb at July 07, 2004 05:09 PM (6aoDM)
5
Rall is a degenerate moron who passes his pathetic scribbles as politcal commentary. Did I mention he's an asshole as well?
Posted by: ibejo at July 07, 2004 05:19 PM (JP8gA)
6
Liberals blame others for McCarthyism and practice it. They blame others for racism and practice it. Liberals blame others for elitism, yet work hard to maintain the classes.
Why is this tolerated by so many "progressive" thinkers?
Posted by: Joel (No Pundit Intended) at July 07, 2004 06:58 PM (Jiqi3)
7
Wow. I just don't understand how Rall can look at this cartoon and not see how racist it is. He's gone through the looking glass to an alternate reality. Scary.
Posted by: Mary C. at July 08, 2004 09:21 AM (hZyOq)
8
Ted Rall is a lost soul. Like many of the left Bush hatred has destroyed his mind and soul. I can say this because he use to be a clever thoughful cartoonist, now he is just spewing hate.
His 2024 was an excellent satire on our culture
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1561632791/103-2888736-9977448?v=glance
Unfortunetly I can't go back and unbuy the book. But its just sad that he can't control his hate.
Never in history has any government taken more verbal abuse, without doing anything about it.
The left is self destructing.
Posted by: Scott at July 09, 2004 05:33 PM (vc4s4)
9
Thanks for posting it. I was wondering what Rall's latest idiocy was, but refused to click on his official stie to find out.
I think he is totally unhinged, much like many of the L-cubed.
Posted by: david at July 10, 2004 01:33 AM (YP/5A)
10
How did this crap get past the editors??? Whatever happened "the news that's fit to print"??
Posted by: Diane at July 26, 2004 10:30 AM (GtWU1)
11
Isn't there supposed to be some kind of rule against flagrant racial slurs in the press? People have lost their jobs for FAR less than than what ted rall wrote.
Posted by: jake at July 29, 2004 02:39 PM (NvIb0)
12
*chuckle* even though i care less for republicans than i do most bigots, ted rall went a little too far over the line. while condi is nothing more than a token puppet in my eyes, she didn't deserve to be called a "house ni-"...err.. you get the point. being a black republican must be tough.
Posted by: Goku at November 18, 2004 11:23 AM (slf9T)
13
The problem with the sensors that they have moved to far to the left right along with the editors. And above all else subscription rates show us that if America hates anything its a radical.
Posted by: JB at November 19, 2004 02:48 PM (DI4ZA)
14
Brilliant. The righties can't take the truth, and as always, run to "racism" (or worse, refer to Bill Clinton) when they feel a need to cry foul when someone calls their crooked little political party out on the carpet for inspection.
Posted by: Condomdasleeza Rice at November 22, 2004 03:53 AM (1vQtW)
15
"The righties can't take the truth, and as always, run to "racism" (or worse, refer to Bill Clinton) when they feel a need to cry foul"
Yeah, it's really "running to 'racism'" to suggest that calling a black woman a "n*****" is racism. Uh huh.
Posted by: MoonbatBane at January 29, 2005 07:12 AM (YDQcu)
16
The dim-o-crats just can't STAND it when an African-American dares to believe something other than the leftist party line. It makes them foam at the mouth. It's amusing to see how quickly the left resorts to racist caricatures in these cases.
Posted by: Abaddon at January 29, 2005 11:27 AM (xjkwy)
17
Mr Rall who did this cartoon,used to get his butt
kicked by blacks and he had a love affair with his mother but that beside the point, my point is should you really get mad at somebody who sits at home all
day to come up with a stupid cartoon strips, that not even funny or is it supposed to be? To be honest with you I feel sorry for poor boy but I guess hate
will always be embedded into our society.
Posted by: Crumb at February 22, 2005 10:55 AM (D7lcY)
18
I just wish all of your conservative freaks would chill out. You all need to spend less time worringy about a stupid cartoon and more time figuring out how you are going to control the world and turn it into a theocracy.
Posted by: TSTEXAS at September 07, 2005 12:55 PM (iqzOB)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Saddam: PLACE BETS NOW!!!!
When will Saddam be ushered into the magic room to take the eternal celestial dirt-nap?
Place bets NOW!!!!!
Go! Go! Go!
Bet! Bet! Bet!
You must place your wager before "Betting Ends!"
(And yes, there will be prizes given...)
Posted by: mhking at
11:38 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 47 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Oh, it is Shake-Hands-Man! And he shake hands with Lady One Question!
Posted by: Laurence Simon at July 07, 2004 11:43 AM (SLZec)
2
Don't be silly. Saddam will be acquitted of all charges, set free, and go on to win re-election to the Iraqi presidency.
Posted by: Beck at July 07, 2004 07:16 PM (fllfQ)
3
I don't think so, but hope so.
Posted by: Kris at July 08, 2004 12:24 PM (M1h04)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
More football? That's a good thing.
"Hi, my name is Michael, and I'm a football addict."
"Hi, Michael..."
The National Football League and the Canadian Football League announced an extension of their joint working arrangement started in 1997. The extension ties the two leagues at the hip through at least 2006.
"The Canadian Football League is in a new and stronger position," CFL commissioner Tom Wright said in a statement. "We look forward to the continued development of our game in Canada with recent solid results as our foundation."NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue agreed.
"We support the CFL and its unique role in Canada, and share its goal of strengthening the interest and support of football among Canadians," he said in a statement. "As partners we have worked successfully to strengthen the sport of football in Canada, and the NFL looks forward to working with the CFL to build on these programs."
The NFL will still be able to sign CFL players in their 'option year' as in the past. In addition, players coming from the CFL will not be eligible to play on NFL Europe teams, also as in the past.
The CFL will benefit from increased exposure in the US, with live games running on a non-exclusive basis on the NFL Network. CFL games already run on NESN, MSG, Empire and Fox Sports New York.
Posted by: mhking at
04:36 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 232 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Crazy Canuck football...
Gettin' excited about this NFL season, though. Finally got my name on the Broncos season ticket waiting list (only 19,000 ahead of me. D'OH!), and I think they look good headed into camp. Too bad about getting rid of Portis, but I think that the "D" looks solid with the additions of Lynch and Bailey. Bring on the fall.
Posted by: Jared at July 07, 2004 11:31 AM (IZmGb)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 06, 2004
The Democratic ticket: Lurch & the Kid
Posted by: mhking at
03:11 AM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 14 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: Jane at July 06, 2004 07:10 AM (b/7hi)
2
now that picture is absolutely dying for a funny caption. Sort of thing where the two are smiling for the cameras but thought bubbles tell a different story.
Posted by: Nick Saunders at July 06, 2004 07:50 AM (Tyikr)
3
had a look on FOX news web page earlier on to find something about Edwards as i know nothing about him. Found his platform and with the exception of increasing capital gains tax and opposing gay marriage it's as good a program as i have ever seen.
be interesting to see how he'd finance all the stuff though.
on Captial Gains can someone who knows economics reasonably well give me a brief description of it. From my extremely limited economic knowledge it seems to be this. Taxing the money that people earn from investments. now to me that seems nonsensical. If person A invests his money then that money goes into the economic cycle thereby creating jobs (most of the time). now taxing someone for that is like punishing them for investing when surely you want people to invest in the economy of the country. Money that is hidden under the bed does no one any good at all.
Posted by: Nick Saunders at July 06, 2004 09:34 AM (Tyikr)
4
Alrighty, Nick Saunders, here ya go.
Edwards: "Paper covers rock."
Kerry: "Dang!"
Posted by: Hal Duston at July 06, 2004 10:24 AM (3hZer)
5
Edwards adds nothing but relief from snoozeville!
The Dems took an old, grey French Poodle, bought it a new collar, put a nice blaze orange vest on it and set it out in the wheat scrub - anyone but the liberals know that dog ain't gonna hunt!
Posted by: Joel (No Pundit Intended) at July 06, 2004 10:28 AM (Jiqi3)
6
http://www.morticiasmorgue.com/af/4.html
Posted by: Bill at July 06, 2004 12:20 PM (HTnm6)
7
I called it Lurch & Leech; let's hope that one catches on.
Capital gains is appreciation in value as compared to income from an investment. Suppose you bought a rental property. The income that you received from it would be taxed as income. Then suppose you sell the property for some amount more than you paid for it--that would be your capital gain. It's a little more complicated than that--there are things like depreciation and improvements to consider, but that's the essence--what you get for owning something is generally considered income, what you get from selling something less the original cost is capital gain.
Posted by: Brainster at July 06, 2004 10:03 PM (XQEqy)
8
ok brainster cheers.
Still a nonsensical tax.
Posted by: Nick Saunders at July 06, 2004 11:29 PM (Tyikr)
9
I only Allah would photoshop Edwards's hand into a Vulcan "Live Long & Prosper", it'd be perfect!
Posted by: Fausta at July 07, 2004 09:41 AM (WhoVr)
10
I wonder what's the deal with that thumb thing Lurch, I mean Kerry, keeps doing.
"Lurch & The Kid," I like that :-)
Jennifer Martinez sends
Posted by: Jennifer Martinez at July 07, 2004 07:10 PM (MB3UQ)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
109kb generated in CPU 0.0308, elapsed 0.0782 seconds.
57 queries taking 0.057 seconds, 236 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.