January 24, 2004 by s.z.

I Must Get A New Sleazy Gown for the Awards Ceremony Hey, the fine folks at Wampum, who have been doing a yeoman's job with their Koufax Awards, have come up with their list of finalists.  We were happy to see that many of our friends*, to include The Rittenhouse Review, Eschaton, Orcinus, Pandagon, Whiskey Bar, and Sisyphus Shrugged, made the finalists, in such prestigious categories as Best Blog, Best Writing, Best Post, Most Deserving of Wider Recognition, and more.  *We consider them friends because we like them and they may know we exist. We were muchly gratified to note that we made the finals in the category of Most Humorous Blog.  While we know we won't win against such very, very funny competition as Tbogg, Opinions You Should Have, orNorbizness, this truly is a case of "It's an honor just to be nominated," because having a humorous blog was what we were trying to do, and we're very pleased that some people think we have suceeded.  In having a blog, at least.  Next year we hope that they include a  "Worst Proofreading" category on the ballot, because we think we'd be a slam-dunk for that one. So, if you feel inclined, visit Wampum and vote for your favorites.  In any case, you should check out some of the blogs on the list that you aren't familiar with, because there really are some good ones there.  (As there are on my bloglist to the left.) Oh, and I do urge you to go to the polling station for Most Humorous Post and cast your vote for Sadly, No's The Dickification of the Western Female.   I think I heard him saying something about there being a free car in it for you. 10:46:09 PM

An Opposing View Okay, I shared with you three anoying idiots.  It's only fair that I leave you with three intelligent, charming companions with which to while away your time while I get some rest.  (Did I mention how very, very tired I am?  If not, consider yourself lucky.) So, I give you: 1.  Sadly, No!, and a review of a book which he nor anyone else has ever read: the Adam Yoshida manifesto.  Now with an important message for Andrew Sullivan about how he can avoid hell! 2.   Washing the Blog with a helpful feature called "Fun with wordcount and the SOTU."  Here's the first part: Number of words in SOTU=5326 Freedom = 8 Security = 8 Umpa Loompa=0 God = 3 Tax(es) = 21 Testicles=0 Good stuff! 3.  No More Mister Nice Blog with a couple of timely topics, such as Rod Dreher, Superpope! When the Vatican can't tell right from wrong, that's when they call in SuperPope!  In color. And you also get some charming Wife Beating Humor, courtesy of Lucianne Goldberg, her whelp, and his associates at the Corner.  What a nice bunch! Anyway, that's it for me!  But I'll be back later today, or possibly tomorrow, with more annoying idiots, plus some rays of sunshine and snark to balance them out.  Probably. 4:24:34 AM

comment [] trackback []

Annoying Idiot #3: Rush Limbaugh Okay, a gimmee, but he (and Roy Black) were being especially annoying today in their efforts to counter what TBOGG described as "the best episode of Law & Order ever."  Which I see going something like this: A guard in the parking garage of EIB studios is making his rounds.  He discovers the body of a dead woman.  Brisco and his new partner, Alan Colmes, show up.  Brisco quips, "I hope you have $20 to pay to get her out of here.  Alan digs in his pocket and hands Brisco a bill.  Brisco smacks him.  Commercial.  By looking through her purse, the cops discover that the victim is Wilma Dime, a currently unemployed housekeeper.  Lt. Van Halen tells Brisco and Colmes that Dime was scheduled to testify in the doctor shopping/money laundering trial of one Lush Rimbaugh, noted radio blowhard.  Bank records show he had been paying her blackmail.  He says it was so she wouldn't tell anybody how good he was in bed.  Commercial The National Gossip prints photos of Lush killing Dime.  Lush goes on his radio show and admits to his listeners that he has an addiction to legal murder, but insists that it was caused by his crippling back pain.  He demands to be treated like all other white, rich, powerful murderers who have done nothing wrong.  His lawyer proposes a deal where he'll go golfing for a while, in exchange for not admitting any wrong doing.  And that about brings up to date.  Per media accounts: Prosecutors say they think they have evidence that Limbaugh committed at least 10 felonies by illegally obtaining overlapping drug prescriptions, according to documents released to the South Florida Sun-Sentinel on Thursday Black wrote to Palm Beach County State Attorney Barry Krischer on Dec. 11, asking whether his office's investigation could be resolved by having Limbaugh enter an intervention program that allows drug offenders to seek treatment and not face criminal convictions. [snip] "It is certainly clear by now that Rush Limbaugh was addicted to prescription pain medication. The latest round of search warrants seizing Rush's medical records will show that he had serious medical problems, was prescribed pain medication and took large amounts of it. He subsequently became addicted to these highly addictive substances," Black wrote in his Dec. 11 letter. "He has admitted as much on his radio show. Not only that, he checked himself into one of the nation's finest drug rehabilitation centers. He has followed his rehabilitation with almost daily sessions with his own psychologist following up on the treatment he received at the center." Since Limbaugh admitted his problem and sought treatment, Black wrote that an intervention program would be appropriate because it would "require him to continue his addiction treatment." RushLimbaugh.com directs you to a statement from his lawyer, Roy Black, who says that the REAL story is the criminal way the State Attorney's office keeps leaking things to the media in an attempt to make potential jurors pay attention to the evidence.  He also says "feh!" to Krischer's stupid plea agreement: “My letter to Mr. Krischer regarding Mr. Limbaugh’s case asked that Mr. Limbaugh be afforded the treatment anyone else would receive. The State's response was preposterous, but consistent with their double standard in this case. The facts are: Mr. Limbaugh went to these doctors to relieve chronic, intractable pain; there was no doctor shopping. Mr. Limbaugh never considered accepting the State’s ludicrous offer. He was not going to plea to something he did not do. We sent them a letter suggesting Mr. Limbaugh be treated in a similar manner that others had been treated. They responded with a preposterous offer. Discussions ended at that time. At no time was there ever a plea agreement of any kind. So, this is the Rush story, per Roy: Rush had a bone in his coccyx removed 5 or 6 years ago.  This resulted in intractable pain.  He was prescribed addictive medication, and became addicted.  Somewhere in there his housekeeper blackmailed him, even though he had never done anything wrong.  Then, in 2003 after she had gone to the authorities and she and her husband were no longer involved in their drug trafficing activities which had nothing to do with Rush, he remembered that he had intractable pain, and went to four different doctors and got large quantities of pain killers from each to them.  But he wasn't doctor shopping!  And then the National Enquirer printed the housekeeper's totally untrue story about his drug addiction, and shortly thereafter Rush admitted his problem and sought treatment.  While he was in treatment it was discovered that his intractable pain could be handled by Vioxx, so he really didn't need to snort 40 powdered OxyContin tablets a day anymore.  And now the liberal State's Attorney's office is persecuting Rush just because he's the Voice of Conservatism.  But in order to save them the trouble of examining his medical records, Rush offered to enter an intervention program for drug offenders.  See, Rush had admitted his problem after being outed by the Enquirer, and had sought help for it (and continues to get private, expensive help for it), so he's learned his lesson.  So, he should be ordered to seek more help instead of being held accountable for the crimes he never committed, because he should be treated like everybody else, even though he's NOT like everybody else, because although he is an addict, he only sought hundreds of pills because of his intractable pain.  Which is gone now, so he isn't using OxyContin anymore. And so Rush and his lawyer spit on the State Attorney's plea, which would require probation and drug testing, and contend that the State Attorney's office is out of order!  The whole judicial system is out of order!  You can't handle the Rush! 4:05:53 AM

2. Lucianne Readers As you know, David Kay is resigning from the position of "Weapons Dowser" and being replaced by Charles Duelfer, who doesn't think there are any weapons to find, and so will instead be looking for the "Iraq's game plan."  (Hint: it's probably in the junk drawer in the kitchen; that's where our Monopoly rules always seemed to end up) And as you also know, Kay was interviewed by Reuters yesterday (Text of Interview), and made some interesting statements: Q: What happened to the stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons that everyone expected to be there? A: "I don't think they existed. "I think there were stockpiles at the end of the first Gulf War and those were a combination of U.N. inspectors and unilateral Iraqi action got rid of them." [snip] Q. What about the nuclear program? A. "The nuclear program was as we said in the interim report, I think that will be a final conclusion. There had been some restart of activities, but they were rudimentary. "It really wasn't dormant because there were a few little things going on, but it had not resumed in anything meaningful." Q: You came away from the hunt that you have done believing that they did not have any large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons in the country? A: "That is correct." Q. Is that from the interviews and documentation? A. "Well the interviews, the documentation, and the physical evidence of looking at, as hard as it was because they were dealing with looted sites, but you just could not find any physical evidence that supported a larger program." Q: Do you think they destroyed it? A: "No, I don't think they existed." Q. Even though in the mid-1980s people said they used it on Halabja? A. "They had stockpiles, they fought the Iranians with it, and they certainly did use it on the Kurds. But what everyone was talking about is stockpiles produced after the end of the last (1991) Gulf War and I don't think there was a large-scale production program in the '90s."  The Reuters story sumarizing the interview has been posted at Lucianne.com.  As one might expect, statements like "Undercutting the White House's public rationale for the war on Iraq, Kay told Reuters by telephone shortly after stepping down from his post on Friday that he had concluded there were no such stockpiles to be found" were not well received.  Being in a masochistic state of mind already, I read through the 100+ posts about the story, and found the various ways of dealing with Kay's remarks  illuminating (because you'll see the same arguments, only cleaned up a little, being used by the Conservapundits tomorrow) and troubling (which is why they're second on my list of annoying stupidheads).  Anyway I categorized the various ideas and listed them here for you (well, for the pundits), along with a representitive comment or two.  Nobody can say I'm not helpful when I'm crabby. 1.  Kay never actually said what Reuters says he said. "Rooters is making up stuff." "Quite frankly until I see this story on FoxNews I just won't believe it. Anyone who believes what they read in Reuters or New York Times is a fool." 2.  Somebody "got to" Kay. "Who got to Kay.  Why this about face?" 3.   Kay did not contradict the administration; he ADMITS there were programs.  And that's what President Bush always said Saddam had: weapons of mass destruction-related programs. "What he said doesn't sound like a 'direct challenge--it sounds like he's saying there were programs but not stockpiles. 4.  Maybe Kay is another Paul O'Neill, and is only saying these things because he got fired or something.  Or maybe he was a liberal mole the WHOLE TIME! "What is David Kay had an agenda? What if David Kay had everyone fooled? What if the White House found out that David Kay was slacking off?"   5.  Kay just didn't believe hard enough, and that's why he couldn't find the WMDs.  George believes, Tony believes.  Maybe we should just send them. "So why don't we send an inspector or searcher who actually BELIEVES THE WMD IS/WAS/WILL BE THERE? I fail to understand why we keep sending another and another who doesn't think the stuff can be found. I believe in Bush and Blair, two moral men of principle and integrity." 6.  We DID find WMDS!  Remember? Aren't guns, rockets, bullets, grenades,bombs, and Sadaam, etc. all weapons of mass destruction in one way or another? 7.  Well, if Bush was wrong, then so were the Brits, and the Germans and your precious Clinton!  And Clinton cheated on his wife and daughter, so who's the real bad guy here? "Even the rapist ex-pres said in 1998 that there were WMD's in Iraq." "Clinton should have been crucified because he committed purjery, and -- lest your forget -- he was the president. Now THAT was high crimes and misdemeaners." 8.  If anyone lied, it was Saddam, who SAID he had weapons -- it's not our fault we believed him.  Iraq deserved what it got because Saddam told fibs! "If there are no WMD's it was Saddam who was misleading the world and pretending and having his henchmen also keep the word out that he had WMD. Memo to the next saddistic dictator that wants to threaten the world, you want to bluff, you'll be called on it and put out of business. Don't pretend, don't make WMD, if you do your gone. " 9.  Shut up, shut up, shut up!  How DARE anyone say anything which implies that the President was wrong about something when there are troops in Iraq this very minute, fighting for our freedom. The wonderful thing about this country is the pests of this world can criticize all day long because their butts are being protected by our troops in Iraq...... Liberal Demoscum should thank God that our troops are risking their lives in Iraq so they can have the freedom to spout their lying crap.   10.  Of COURSE Saddam had WMDs at some point in time -- and he was evil too. The Iranians and Kurds who were gassed to death by Saddam must have caught a cold.  The hundreds of thousands of bodies of men, women, and children found in shallow graves must have died of natural causes. And the best one of all: 11.  It doesn't matter whether Iraq had WMDs, because the Iraqis are Arabs/Muslims and needed their asses kicked. "Islam is out to bury US. The attack on our soil -- 9/11 came from Islamic terrorists.  That's all that we need consider......." "Whatever. Arabia needed a massive boot enema after 9-11. We gave it to them. End of story.  Who cares if they did or didn't? " "I second that.  The Arabs have been itching for a fight for over 20 years: Iran hostages, Marines in Beirut, Leon Klinghoffer,World Trade Center (first time),USS Cole.  Just to name a few of the dastardly deeds the US has received in that time". "Well, I am gratified that someone finally stood up to the little bullies and kicked some major Arab a$$. And the ultimate POS Hussein was as good to start with as anyone.  So Huzzah, GWB, Huzzah ! I'm not sure they've got the message yet, though. Let's give them another dose just to make sure. Oh, Yassir ... Yassir ?" So, that's how to deal with the Kay remarks.  I hope TownHall, Fox News, the Moonie Times et. al. were paying attention. 2:35:22 AM

First on the List Okay, I haven't got much sleep over the past few nights, and perhaps this has made me hypercritical, but everywhere I turn today, there are ANNOYINGLY STUPID PEOPLE!  Admittedly, I've turned to Fox News, Rushlimbaugh.com. Zel Miller, etc., but still, people could try to be a little less aggressively clueless when they know I'm cranky.  So, I've compiled a list of irritating twits.  First let's discuss: 1.  Sean Hannity. While channel surfing, I flipped to "Hannity and Cipher."  Hannity was indignantly introducing this story about a homeowner who shot an unarmed burglar and who is now facing a $750 fine charge because his village doesn't allow handguns.  A town banned handguns -- that's unAmerican!  And it gets worse: the homeowner shoots a burglar who entered his home for the second time, and HE's the jerk!  The second time!!!  (Well, the second time that day -- the thief snuck through the doggie door the first time and stole a key, then came back that night, using the key to enter the house; he has been  charged with two felonies.  The homeowner also faces a misdemeanor charge for failing to renew his Illinois Firearm Owner's Identification Card after it expired in 1988.  No charges resulted from his shooting the intruder.) I flip around some more.  When I come back to Fox News, Colmes is interviewing an anti-gun expert; the guy brings up those statistics about how a handgun is several times more likely to be used to shoot a member of the household than an intruder, and indicates that the village's ban makes sense.  Colmes asks if it was fair that the homeowner in this case should be prosecuted.  The expert says, well, the law's the law, and the guy broke it.  But Sean, who apparently has been sulking throughout this segment, has to get in the last word.  Right as they go to commercial he interjects angrily, "The law's the law?  So, Clinton should have been prosecuted for perjury!" No wonder Sean has been called (by his publisher) "the freshest and most compelling conservative voice in the country." P.S.  I can see why the homeowner is being hailed as a martyr by the wingnuts (WorldNetDaily, Mens News Daily, Washington Dispatch, Washington Times, Sean Hannity).  In a letter he wrote to local officials (but sent to two local papers), he called the intruder a "career criminal" (the burglar apparently had a criminal record involving arrests for theft and burglary, but nothing violent), and claimed he got out his gun to protect his little "frightened children" from this monster.  The homeowner concludes his statement with:  If my actions have spared only one family from the distress and trauma that this habitual criminal has caused hundreds of others, then I have served my civic duty and taken one evil creature off of our streets, something that our impotent criminal justice system had failed to do, despite some thirty odd arrests, plea bargains and suspended sentences. Death Wish 12, anyone? Oh, and it seems the village's handgun ban "was a direct response to the Laurie Dann shootings. In 1988, Dann went on a rampage at a Winnetka school, killing one child, wounding five people and shooting herself."  Yeah, we need handguns to protect the frightened little children. 1:06:19 AM