Too Real?

Oh, here's one big reason Gov. Palin was so noxious to the traditional media:

She knows how real life works, and she's okay with it.

Not the whited sepulchre of modern politics, (perhaps... although she might know more than the condescending jerks give her credit for); but REAL LIFE. The vital side.

She wasn't bothered by the turkey slaughtering behind her in her recent press conference because it's REAL LIFE.

Eew, the MSNBC commentator sneers.

Yes, Mr. Commentator, much of real life is "eew-y."

What's more, this incident is highly illustrative of the what "the media" doesn't understand about what a lot of people call "Real America:" We in the latter might not want to be in on the slaughtering, but we DO (largely) understand and appreciate where our turkey comes from, and we don't sneer at those who deal with the vital parts of life. They're real, and we're real. The talking heads' powder, teeth, and hair, on the other hand...

Hummmm...

A lawyer is challenging the music industry's anti-piracy lawsuits, proposing alternate solutions and charging that:

...the Digital Theft Deterrence and Copyright Damages Improvement Act of 1999 is unconstitutional because it effectively lets a private group - the Recording Industry Association of America, or RIAA - carry out civil enforcement of a criminal law.

and that:

...the music industry group abused the legal process by brandishing the prospects of lengthy and costly lawsuits in an effort to intimidate people into settling cases out of court.

Agreed.

I'm not certain about the implications, though. RIAA really does seem to have morphed into a vindictive, petulant organization, but those who knowingly downloaded illegally DID break the law. But fining college students hundreds of thousands, or even millions, of dollars? (And so on with the "buts" - back and forth, back and forth...)

In a way, I think it's kind of like seat belt violations: it's a common violation; most of the time nothing happens; and the potential costs to others are huge. And actually, seat belt violations are more important, in a life-and-death way.

On the other hand, there's nothing inherently wrong with not buckling yourself up; whereas there's definitely something inherently bad about wrongly possessing someone else's property. That's where my problem lies. I don't think I have any legal objection to people doing whatever they please with their own property, for their own use.

While the fines and lawsuits are simply ridiculous, there has to be a penalty for wrongful property possession - especially doing so knowingly.

Maybe the problem isn't with the legal system, per se... maybe it's with judges and juries who issue such outlandish fines.

And with the whiny, maliciously-behaving RIAA.

And with the whiny downloaders who - while seeming apathetic rather than malicious - obviously don't have a real principle to cling to.

A Good Reason to Care Whether We're Becoming Russia

The latest in an evil series.

The article lists previous incidents, as well, but the latest is that yet another journalist has been attacked for investigating corruption in Russia. Just local government, so there was no Polonium involved... "just" thugs.

Wonder What the Stop Fee Would Be...

[Update 17Nov2008/18:12 - thanks to commenter Jason for pointing out that there is Congressional oversight; I've updated the pertinent section of the post and must say I feel marginally better... ;-) ]

Looks like there's a movement to act on the little "buyer's remorse" in Congress over Hank Paulson's recent coronation: Sen. Inhofe (who, I must add, DID NOT vote for the Bailout that granted Sec. Paulson unlimited taxpayer funds with no strings attached and no oversight) has called for cutting off the funds.

To quote just some of the gems in the article:

Last week the Treasury secretary announced he was abandoning his plan to free up the nation's credit system by buying up toxic assets from troubled financial institutions. Instead, Paulson wants to take a more direct action on the consumer credit front.

"He was able to get this authority from Congress predicated on what he was going to do, and then he didn't do it,'' Inhofe said.
...
Inhofe recalled earlier comments opposing Paulson's plan because the administration's point man did not have answers for a number of questions. He also recalled questioning the rush to get the bailout passed.

"I have learned a long time ago. When they come up and say this has to be done and has to be done immediately, there is no other way of doing it, you have to sit back and take a deep breath and nine times out of 10 they are not telling the truth,'' he said.
...
"Congress abdicated its constitutional responsibility by signing a truly blank check over to the Treasury Secretary,'' he wrote.

"However, the lame duck session of Congress offers us a tremendous opportunity to change course. We should take it.''

*happy dance*

I'm considering moving to Oklahoma just so I can vote for him.

I Like Anderson Cooper

He's real, he's thoughtful, he's funny, and he's FAIR. I remember him from Channel One days, LOL, and it's great that he's been doing so well. He calls things as he sees them, (which doesn't always coincide with how I see them, and that's okay), and he's earned my respect. Lots of it.

A couple interesting things from last night's episode of The Tonight Show (pertinent segment is "Chapter 3," right after the second ad break, and around the 20-minute mark and continues through the next segment... if I can get a better link from Hulu, I'll post that instead.):

• He said Sarah Palin was very capable. Jay, of course, had to crap all over that assessment, but Anderson's initial statement is actually what jives with statements from people who have met her, not via Katie Couric, but in person.
  
• His comments on the bailout totally caught Paulson's flipping and flopping (and continually changing demands and plans), to the point that suggested we could question whether they actually know what they're doing.
  

He is one of the friendliest, most politically un-readable people I've ever seen on TV. I have no idea how he votes, but he listens, and he appraises people fairly, at least in my estimation. And that independent, fair nature makes me a fan.

Manners

As in, what we've largely forgotten in today's society.

Just basic decency and respect for others.

A gay "rights"*** group interrupted a church service, yelling and throwing fliers at people (which, I might note, is technically assault), as well as protesting outside the church.

This kind of intimidation is absolutely unacceptable. What are the consequences of the "protest?" Let's see:

churchgoers were unclear as to the purpose of the demonstration.

The Eaton County Sheriff's Department responded to the scene Sunday but no arrests were made.

Moral of the story: It's okay to act like a violent, spoiled child, as long as you're acting that way toward the politically-unpopular people who disagree with you - those oh-so-threatening religious fundamentalists who, I hope the "protesters" noticed, didn't attack them and yell hateful things back...

***in quotes because they already have specially protected rights - it's not a matter of rights anymore, but rather a matter of shutting down those who disagree, which is neither right nor respectful of others' rights.

Perestroika? Hmm...

Drudge has linked to an article about Gorbachev's recommendation for President-elect Obama: PERESTROIKA.

Hmm.

(Showing age...) I was fairly young when Gorbachev came to power, but I remember hearing perestroika and glasnost and some other seldom-used member of that triad... and I remember that they were "good things."

Anyway, that word caught my attention, and I looked it up.

Here's Wikipedia's definition:

the Russian term (now used in English) for the economic reforms introduced in June 1987^[1] by the Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. Its literal meaning is "restructuring", referring to the restructuring of the Soviet economy.

And here's another - from Gorbachev himself in 1987 - read the whole thing if you're up for night terrors:

...overcoming the stagnation process, breaking down the braking mechanism, creating a dependable and effective mechanism for acceleration of social and economic progress and giving it greater dynamism

...utmost respect for the individual

...the revival and development of the principles of democratic centralism in running the national economy, the universal introduction of economic methods

...a resolute shift to scientific methods

...the combination of the achievements of the scientific and technological revolution with a planned economy

...ever better satisfaction of the Soviet people's requirements for good living and working conditions, for good rest and recreation, education and health care.

...elimination from society of the distortions of socialist ethics

ACK!!! Run like the wind, people!!!

*ahem... regaining composure* Let's take some of these one at a time:

• "Breaking down the braking mechanism?" You mean, like what's left of our divinely-inspired Constitution's checks and balances? In favor of "accelerat[ing]... social and economic progress?" Bad idea, especially since it depends on who's allowed to define, "progress."
  
• Combining science and technology with a planned economy? It's not too far from those words to "eugenics."
• Satisfying "people's requirements for good living and working conditions, for good rest and recreation, education and health care" - like FDR's Second Bill of Rights?
• Eliminating "the distortions of socialist ethics" - (I'm assuming he's not referring to the distortions that ARE socialist ethics...) - that sure sounds like shutting down criticism and silencing disagreement, to me.

We must fight these things!!!

Granted, from reading up on it at Wikipedia, it seemed to be a move in the right direction, the way it was sold: freeing up the economy - to a point. Freeing up political discourse - to a point.

But everything was still ultimately under state control - it seems like the populist Gorbachev and his glasnost were able to make the people (and world media) happier about it, though.

Let's be careful what we let ourselves be made happy about, because "utmost respect for the individual" is incongruous with the rest of those definitions.

One Great Bird

A parrot helped save a two-year-old's life by squawking like crazy when the sitter was... indisposed. (h/t: Drudge)

I think every parent can relate to this sort of thing - although in our house, it's historically a mess that explodes all over the kitchen in less than two minutes in lieu of a life-threatening situation...

And while I've been dead-set against having a live bird in the house, (after the mess left by a family pet when I was growing up), it might not be the end of the world, LOL...

Although... since the babysitter was the one who actually did the Heimlich, maybe we'll just settle for a great babysitter.

Instant Comments

Just a quick note - after having quite a backlog of comments (for the scale of this blog's usual comment traffic) awaiting moderation; and me being unavailable for an extended time (again, for the scale of how quickly I try to publish comments), I've removed moderation for posts within the last 30 days. Older posts' comments will still go through moderation, but I'm going to see how it goes.

So... you'll be able to have more real-time discussions, and hopefully we won't get too much spam, LOL!

The Weight of the Presidency

Everyone knows that the Presidency is not an easy job. You get the blame for pretty much anything anyone wants to throw at you, and most of your accomplishments won't even be known for a few decades. In fact, a recent article at the Onion - ever a source of keen satire - was titled, Black Man Given Nation's Worst Job.

That was the funny spin on the job (among other things... lingering racial tension, our propensity for demonizing people after we vote for them, etc.).

Then I saw the video I'd missed of Obama's press conference.

The biggest emotion I felt when I watched it (aside from the normal critique of his plans and a "that was unnecessary..." about his Nancy Reagan slam) was compassion. Empathy. Even pity.

He looked like he'd aged a decade overnight - did you see those bags under his eyes? And he seemed rather tired and distracted - so off his usual cool, collected presence that he couldn't remember what he was saying much after looking away from his prompter. I felt like I saw the thought, "Oh, crap... what have I gotten myself into" crease his forehead a couple times.

Why is this? My guess: he's getting more Presidential intelligence. He's starting to find out how big the problems really are - especially the ones we don't hear about.

In other words, I think the real weight of the Presidency is beginning to settle on him, and I pray that he really will be granted the strength and the wisdom to keep us free.