What Happens in Vegas: President Obama Visits

I'm getting a late start on blogging, having had an unexpected work night on Wednesday, so that's why my blogging is going to be light.

Following the deaths of a US Ambassador and three other officials in Libya, the news and commentary on the subject has been odd. First, though this seems to have been a coordinated terrorist attack on September 11, the weight of the news doesn't feel very impactful. It's a topic of discussion, everybody is sad about it, but it's just. . .oddly detached or something.

Secondly, we had Mitt Romney weighing in as though he were President, but if this was a preview, it's not a very strong selling point. He jumped the gun, got the facts wrong, jumped on the actual President in the middle of national crisis, and then doubled down on his error when he could have possibly dialed it back. Right-wing World doesn't know what to do with this, wanting instinctively to kick Obama at any opportunity, but also wanting to appear patriotic. Some of them have chastised Romney, others have bizarrely doubled down with him, still using flawed story lines and reasoning (I'm looking at you, Kevin Wall of KXNT).

President Obama had been scheduled to stop in Las Vegas on Wednesday since at least last weekend. There was a scramble for tickets when they were made available. There was talk of whether or not he'd keep the engagement, and he did. Right-wing world is squawking about that--campaigning during a national crisis!--though I'm sure we could find a dozen times Bush campaigned during one crisis or other (Katrina comes to mind). They'd complain if he cancelled too, disappointing all of those people and dissing Las Vegas yet again!!!1!!11!!!  There is literally nothing the man could do that the right wouldn't complain about. If he cured cancer, they'd complain he cut jobs at cancer clinics.

[Excerpt]

Obama's Las Vegas stop waxes somber in wake of consulate attack in Libya


Appearing somber, President Barack Obama on Wednesday opened a campaign visit to Las Vegas by remembering four Americans who died in an attack on a U.S. consulate in Libya, saying they gave their lives to uphold American values of freedom in a dangerous land. . .

Read more at: LVRJ

 

Technology Woes: One More Smart Phone Bites the Dust (Or, Why Cell Phone Insurance is a Scam!)

I've had this blog since mid-2007, at which point I was on my second cell phone, a Samsung flip-phone with very little in the way of extras. Since I've been blogging, I've talked about my new ones, beginning with the Samsung Rant, a pre-smart phone with a slide-out keyboard. With that one, I learned how to text, but was frustrated with its other limited abilities. When it was unceremoniously drowned by The Other Half in the washing machine, I was pushed--finally--to join the smart phone crowd.

This was 2011, and I was holding out to see what the iPhone 5--which turned out to be the iPhone 4S--was going to be like, and if Sprint was going to carry it. But it was in May, and Apple didn't break into the Sprint store until September, so my choice was between Blackberry, Windows Phone and Android. But to make matters worse, we were leaving for vacation the next day, and I had researched nothing. So, I ended up with a Samsung Transform, a low-end 'droid.

In the ensuing three weeks, I struggled with the Transform's limitations, and read up a lot on what else was available, and ultimately paid the restocking fee, and traded up to the Samsung Epic 4G. To this point, I'd had five Samsung phones in a row, two flip phones, and three slide-out QWERTY keyboard phones. Other than the drowned one, I'd never had an issue with any of them throughout their contracts, other than quirks here and there that required reboots. And the persistent spotty Sprint service, particularly in central Ohio. The Other Half had drowned a flip phone once, but like my Rant, it was right about at trade-up time anyway.

My poor, crushed Epic 4G

My good luck with phones-without-insurance lasted from December 2004 to July 2012, when I stupidly left my phone on the hood of my car in the garage, and drove off with it there. Somebody ran over my Epic 4G, 8 months out of re-up time. My solution was to order a used one on eBay, take it to the Sprint Store, and activate it to my phone number. Nice plan, but the phone had been rooted, and would not activate. So, I paid Sprint $35, got my money back from the eBay vendor, and Sprint ordered me another Epic. By this time, I was up to 11 days phoneless by the time the order came in and it would not activate either! My only option was to wait for another one, or accept a substitute: an HTC Evo 4G.

The Evo was a contemporary of my phone, meaning a two-year-old, obsolete model. It was better in some ways, and lesser in some ways from the Epic, mainly in that it didn't have a slide-out keyboard for the first time since my flip-phones. But the upshot was, the screen may not have been as crisp, but it was easier to read outdoors. And, it seemed to be a lot less flaky than my Epic, which was a lemon compared to The Other Half's relatively stable Epic.

I couldn't wait for the iPhone 4S, so I got the Epic 4G.
Now, Apple has sued Samsung, partly over this phone.

Six weeks into the ownership of the Evo, I started to notice dust collecting between the layers of the screen. Very annoyed, I tried to tap it out, I tried to blow it out, nothing would budge the dust. And then, unexpectedly, the microphone stopped working, leading to a comedy of errors when my brother was trying to call. Nothing would make the microphone work, though if I shouted at top volume, it would register, barely, sounding like a blown speaker.

Could I have broken it when blowing and tapping it? Not unless it was on the edge of breaking anyway. So, I took it back to Sprint, taking an hour off of work so that this wouldn't push into next week like last time. They took it, charged me $35 more bucks,  and. . .couldn't fix it! So, guess what? I have another Evo 4G on its way, and I have to queue up at Sprint again Wednesday night. I am not confident that it will go smoothly, but I have no complaint with the Sprint people other than the tedium while waiting at the store.

But in all my travails in cell phone world, I can give a little advice:

- When buying a phone, don't cheap out. You're going to have it two years, don't start out disappointed. An extra $50 divided over two years is bupkis.
- Even if you like a slide-out keyboard, give an on-screen one a try. You might find you like it, and the phone will be slimmer and--let's face it--less dorky.
- Check your pockets before doing laundry, and never--never--put your phone on your car.
- I'm glad that I've never had phone insurance. It may have saved me a few buck in this case, right now. But if I'd paid $7 per phone per month since December 2004, I'd be up to $1488! Just in insurance fees. My total out-of-pocket cost for all of this so far? $70. Big whoop!

Is Your Religious Liberty Being Threatened? (Quiz)

I have often tried to express the content of this quiz in my writing, but never have I been as clear as this. . .

This simple quiz will let you know if you’re being oppressed.

1. My religious liberty is at risk because:

A) I am not allowed to go to a religious service of my own choosing.
B) Others are allowed to go to religious services of their own choosing.

2. My religious liberty is at risk because:

A) I am not allowed to marry the person I love legally, even though my religious community blesses my marriage.
B) Some states refuse to enforce my own particular religious beliefs on marriage on those two guys in line down at the courthouse.

3. My religious liberty is at risk because:

A) I am being forced to use birth control.
B) I am unable to force others to not use birth control.

4. My religious liberty is at risk because:

A) I am not allowed to pray privately.
B) I am not allowed to force others to pray the prayers of my faith publicly.

5. My religious liberty is at risk because:

A) Being a member of my faith means that I can be bullied without legal recourse.
B) I am no longer allowed to use my faith to bully gay kids with impunity.

6. My religious liberty is at risk because:

A) I am not allowed to purchase, read or possess religious books or material.
B) Others are allowed to have access books, movies and websites that I do not like.

7. My religious liberty is at risk because:

A) My religious group is not allowed equal protection under the establishment clause.
B) My religious group is not allowed to use public funds, buildings and resources as we would like, for whatever purposes we might like.

8. My religious liberty is at risk because:

A) Another religious group has been declared the official faith of my country.
B) My own religious group is not given status as the official faith of my country.

9. My religious liberty is at risk because:

A) My religious community is not allowed to build a house of worship in my community.
B) A religious community I do not like wants to build a house of worship in my community.

10. My religious liberty is at risk because:

A) I am not allowed to teach my children the creation stories of our faith at home.
B) Public school science classes are teaching science.

Scoring key:

If you answered “A” to any question, then perhaps your religious liberty is indeed at stake. You and your faith group have every right to now advocate for equal protection under the law. But just remember this one little, constitutional, concept: this means you can fight for your equality—not your superiority.

If you answered “B” to any question, then not only is your religious liberty not at stake, but there is a strong chance that you are oppressing the religious liberties of others. This is the point where I would invite you to refer back to the tenets of your faith, especially the ones about your neighbors.

Found at VoenixRising [Warning: Some content Not Safe for Work]

From a post at Alternet

Hillary Clinton Responds to Death of State Dept. Officer, Romney Takes Advantage

Mrs. Clinton doing her job. Image from TPM.

Oy. I'm no fan of any religion in particular, and find some reactionary Muslims' hyper-sensitivity to "blasphemy" to be utterly and completely ridiculous. I find the very notion of blasphemy ridiculous, Muslim or not. But to deliberately stoke this irrational beast? To provoke a reaction on purpose? That is insanity, and this "pastor" Terry Jones guy ought to be excommunicated, or shunned, or whatever his idiotic sect does to assholes.

That said, I of course find the use of violence--up to and including murder--to be utterly unacceptable, and unbecoming of this "religion of peace," to say the very least. It takes a couple of typical reactions of religious people--1) overreaction and 2) believing that people not of your faith must follow your faith's rules--and magnifies them to insane proportions.

As for our politicians and their reactions to this terrible turn of events, I find Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's response to be typically very good. I find the Embassy's response to be just fine, provided that it was before the attacks happened, as stated. Mitt Romney has jumped in, trying to burnish his lacking foreign policy credentials, and finger-wagged the White House for "apologizing" for. . .what. . .that we have a douchebag "pastor" inflaming crazy people? I don't know, and Romney really doesn't yet either.

For all the crap President Obama got for "politicizing" the killing of Osama bin Laden--something Bush/Cheney would've had as part of a re-election slogan--Romney politicizing this horrible event right after it freakin' happened shows a real lack of restraint, and I find that inappropriate.

[Excerpt]

State Dept. Confirms Death In Libya; Romney Attacks ‘Disgraceful’ White House

. . .Secretary of State Hillary Clinton confirmed the death at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, according to the Associated Press. Angry mobs descended on the consulate in Libya and the embassy in Egypt to protest an online film by American pastor Terry Jones that denounces Islam. . .

Read more at: Talking Points Memo

Republicans Suck at Math, and Hate the Chevy Volt

Obama in a Volt, or, "Evil in a Failure!" Image from
Wonkette.

I remember when the movie Superman Returns came out, and from the beginning the reports were that the movie would have to make more than $200 million in order to make up its development costs. The movie did clear that hurdle, but was still widely considered to be a failure for not reaching Iron Man or Avengers-level money, in order to make money on top of its investment. Well, it was also derided because people didn't like it (I did, but I'm in the minority). But it was saddled with all of the money wasted on early drafts and hired-then-fired cast and crew from aborted earlier treatments.

The Chevy Volt is getting a bit of that seemingly unfair treatment at the moment. First, it had a lot of development costs. Second--for some reason--conservatives, led by Rush Limbaugh despise the car.* So, just like conservatives will believe just about anything that makes President Obama look bad, no matter how far-fetched, the calculations about just how much each Chevy Volt is losing is a bit of a stretch. When I heard Limbaugh bloviating about it today on the radio, I knew there had to be more to it. There always is. The bad math comes from assuming there will never be another Volt (or derivative), and dividing the development and production costs between each existing model. Which isn't very honest.

It would be at this point that I should point out that Rupert Murdoch lost millions of dollars on FOX "News" for years, and years, before it posted a profit. Sometimes you have to pump money into a project for a while before it bears fruit. Hopefully, General Motors produces less rotten fruit, though!

[Excerpt]

No, GM Is Not Losing $49K On Every Volt; Reuters Just Fails at Basic Business Math

If there’s one characteristic that distinguishes conservatives from liberals, it’s business acumen, right? Libruls may occasionally be able to sell some patchouli-scented hemp-based iPod cozies at the Lesbian Sisterhood crafts fair, but conservatives are the folks who REALLY understand how Bidness works! That’s pretty much the premise of every Republican campaign in the last 30 years, after all. So how is it that when a journalist made a pretty obvious error in a story, the supposedly business-savvy folks in the right-wing blogosphere went nuts passing on the story’s erroneous conclusions? . . .

Read more at: Wonkette


* Obviously, conservatives dislike anything Obama has done, even if he was enacting conservative ideas. Everything. And even thought the Volt--as the story above mentions--was started in 2007, they link its perceived failure with Obama. But doesn't it bother anyone that Limbaugh is leading the parade of hatred not just against our President, but against an American institution like GM?

My Remembrance of September 11, 2001 [Revisited]

Photo of United Airlines Las Vegas-based Flight Attendants'
memorial service at Sunset Park, September 2001
(Originally published in the Las Vegas Review-Journal)*

The following is my annual repost of my personal remembrance of September 11, 2001, with slight revisions and additions. . .

Today is the day when we look at the calendar, and nearly flinch. September 11, 2001 is distant to us in many ways, but now--amazingly--for the 11th time, we've all looked at that calendar page and have been taken back to where we were that morning.

I'm republishing my personal account of what happened to me that day, written in the early days of my blog. My story is no more special than yours, I know. But on a day when the date is sure to be used by many for political purposes, I wanted to have one post up that just remembers the day.

ORIGINALLY POSTED SEPTEMBER 11, 2007

Posts I've made today, and earlier in this blog's short history, have discussed or are related to 9/11. I'd rather not let the day go by without giving you the reader--and me the blogger--a little more, minus the political rhetoric.

I've become a deeply cynical person, you might say, at least as it regards politics. This is particularly true lately. But on Tuesday, September 11th, 2001 I wasn't thinking about any of that. Everyone who witnessed that day has their own story. Mine is no more relevant than yours, and is surely less traumatic than many.

I awoke that morning at my usual time, somewhere between 6:30 and 6:45 am. I had finished my morning ritual, and was just buttoning up my clothes when the phone rang. It was our friend, Larry, an American Airlines flight attendant, and he was crying. "Two planes have just hit the World Trade Center," he managed between sobs. This was startling news, but not yet sufficiently alarming for me to change my routine.

I passed the phone to The Other Half, and turned on the bedroom TV. There it was, and the slight alarm turned to a sinking feeling. This was big. We quickly learned that it was both United's and American Airlines' planes that hit the buildings, causing high alarm in the room, and on the other end of the phone. The Other Half, and our next-door neighbor/friend, were [and still are] both United flight attendants. And the neighbor was on a trip at an unknown location. My heart sank, and I nearly sobbed myself--with relief--that my partner was right there in the room with me, accounted for.

Not fully realizing the impact of what had happened, I began my journey to work. I switched on the radio, and was very shortly informed that the Pentagon was on fire. They did not yet know the cause. When I pulled into the parking lot at work, the radio announcer said that a plane was believed to have crashed in Pennsylvania. There was an erroneous report about an explosion somewhere else (maybe the White House?).  I said out loud, "the sky is falling." I fully expected at that point that a wave of attacks would continue throughout the morning. Thankfully, that did not come to pass.

Shortly after my arrival at work, The Other Half called, and told me one of the towers had fallen. Not long after, we heard the same about the other. We imagined the worst, that the buildings had fallen over, smashing all below. Thankfully, again, as bad as it was, it could have been worse.

We didn't get much work done that day. Someone went home and got a TV, and we spent much of our time in front of that fuzzy little picture. Later that day, we found that most of our friends, and their colleagues were accounted for. Our neighbor was stranded in New Orleans for over a week. We had quite the celebration upon his return.

The following days were surreal. I'd never seen Las Vegas without planes in the sky, and believe me, you notice. We watched hours upon hours of TV News, of course, like everyone else. And the casinos around town knee-jerk fired lots of people. We feared for our town.

Several days later, The Other Half went to a memorial service at Sunset Park, due east of McCarran Airport, with the Las Vegas United Airlines base crew. During the service, the first plane in days landed, flying right over the park. There was a swelling of spontaneous applause, as you'd imagine.

We were very lucky. We knew people who had friends-of-friends-of-friends who died that day, but fortunately (for our little world), were spared personal losses. One friend was quite well acquainted with one of the [United 93] pilots, and we had his wife to our house, but that was the extent of our direct contact. United, of course, had a very rocky ride of it, as did American. Many of the flight attendants left town, or left aviation. Las Vegas, predictably bounced back.

UPDATE, SEPTEMBER 11, 2008:

Las Vegas isn't feeling very bouncy this September 11th. Tourism is down, layoffs are widespread, hours (mine included) have been cut at many jobs. United Airlines and American Airlines are seemingly always under threat of going out of business. The neighbor moved to Florida not long after September 11th. The Other Half and I were married this year, and are doing well despite job worries. Whatever happens on November fourth, I think it will bookend 9/11/2001, and hopefully all of this will seem like a bygone era.

UPDATE, SEPTEMBER 11, 2009:

Things in Las Vegas haven't perked up much in the last year. We have, of course, moved from the Bush Era on into the Obama Era. It remains to be seen how that will play out. I'm not a lock-step liberal by any stretch, but I'm willing to give the President time and space.

UPDATE, SEPTEMBER 10, 2010:

Still waiting for the economy to pick up in Las Vegas, personally and city-wide. We lead the pack for foreclosures, unemployment and several other "worst of" lists. We did place first in a "best roads" in the US story, so that's something. All of these woes are put at the feet of: a) Barack Obama, if you are a partisan conservative, b) George W. Bush, if you're a partisan liberal, c) Harry Reid, if you're Sharron Angle, or d) the snowball effect of many factors, with blame to be shared by both political parties. I'm going with the last one. But I do have to wonder what the state of the economy and the United States in general might have been like if that clear blue skied Tuesday in September 2001 had been just an ordinary day.

UPDATE, SEPTEMBER 11, 2011: 

Wow, 10 years. There are parts of that day that seem eerily recent. And then you remember everything that has happened since. Our two (main) wars--started in the immediate aftermath of 9/11--are still going on in one form or other. The economy noted in the updates above, hasn't improved much. Las Vegas is hanging in there, but a bit beaten and battered. And as I noted in 2010, this economic pickle might have been a bit different were it not for that one day. Maybe we still would have had a housing bubble, maybe the bankers and corporate fat cats would've still been crooks. But the whole deficit/debt sideshow might've been in  much, much better shape. Ugh. I wish things were a bit rosier for the 10-year anniversary of that rotten day. Maybe the 20? Or dare I wish it, the 11th or 12th?

UPDATE, SEPTEMBER 11, 2012:

In my yearly updates, I see I've gotten away from "not being political." Sorry about that, but what can you do? Everything is political these days. In 2012, our household actually is better off than we were four years ago, with everything except housing values looking up. Everyone is looking toward November's election, but very little has been made this year about 9/11, other than that this year is the first (oops) second time it's happened on a Tuesday since that fateful day. Though American Airlines is in bankruptcy this year, but United seems to be doing well with its Continental merger. In good news, the Iraq War is over. Still don't know what that had to do with 9/11. And sadly, Captain Dahl's widow died this year, oddly enough at the house of a friend of ours. So, at eleven years and counting, it's kind of a mixed bag. Here's to the day when we have to think about it to remember how many years it's been.

* Full disclosure: photo contains an image of my husband, our friends and his co-workers.

You're Embarrassing Me, Ohio

Some political polls produce results that make you do a double-facepalm. Sometimes, they might even produce tears. This one was close for me.

Though I moved from my home state of Ohio almost 18 years ago, I still consider it "home," though Nevada inches closer to overtaking it every year. This could be enough for me to disavow Ohio all together. I can only hope that the respondents were being snarky and intentionally misleading in their answers. But I'm not at all confident in that position.

[Excerpt]

Ohioans confused about bin Laden’s death 

What does Mitt Romney have to do with killing Osama bin Laden? According to a notable percentage of Ohio Republicans, way more than that good-for-nothing Barack Obama. . .

Read more at: Salon

Sherrod Brown Clashes with Challenger in Ohio

Image from source, Cleveland.com

In an earlier post, I commented on the super PAC activities blanketing our airwaves with attack ads, and specifically one of the contests in Ohio. I grew up in Columbus, and still have family there. What I'm hearing is that well-liked Senator Sherrod Brown is just getting buried in ads from groups like Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS, even though his challenger is kind of twerpy and allegedly quite the liar.

Fortunately, Brown is not new to politics, and he's not going down without a fight. But will a fight be enough? Can Brown beat a 5-to-1 ad blitz? If the other side has a lousy product to sell, will all the advertising in the world be able to sell it anyway? Given Ohio's recent political behavior--some good, some really frightening--I guess it could go either way.

[Excerpt]

Josh Mandel, Sherrod Brown spar at meeting for Plain Dealer endorsement

In their first Northeast Ohio face-off, U.S. Senate candidates Sherrod Brown and Josh Mandel ripped into each other, questioning each other's truthfulness during an endorsement interview Friday at The Plain Dealer offices. . .

Read more at: Cleveland.com

Karl Rove's Big, Sleazy Comeback

Image from Crooks & Liars

Back in the waning days of the Bush administration (not coincidentally, in the early days of this blog), I was eagerly anticipating the "frog march" of Karl Rove, in shackles, into a jail cell. It was a delicious, delirious fantasy of mine back then. I will cop to having had a fairly strong case of Bush Derangement Syndrome, but will also insist that I had a good, honest case of it. This wasn't a day-after-the-election affliction, I gave W's crew time, especially after September 11, 2001.

But that ended some time after the Iraq War started, and then over the ensuing, torturous months and years, from torture to the outing of Valerie Plame. The Bush administration was an odd amalgamation of evil, incompetence, ego, swagger, bullshit and lies. All smothered in a film of greasy sleaze. His name was Karl Rove. While you could point your finger at Lee Atwater or maybe even Newt Gingrich for the poisoning of our political process, Rove is the one who cranked the dial on the alternate reality machine to 11, with lots of help from Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Tom DeLay, and others.

Sometimes, I still dream about it. Though I don't think
he was ever this svelte. Image from Crooks & Liars.

No lie was too big, no falsehood too elaborate. Rove and crew would say something clearly and on the record, and then deny having said it. They'd pretty much tell you to pay no attention to your lying eyes, and listen to them. They knew the truth. And you know what happened. The administration is so despised, they had little role in either the 2008 or the 2012 Republican National Conventions, nor much in the actual campaigns.

Except for Rove. His twin entities, CrossroadsGPS and American Crossroads are superfunders of candidates all over the country, from lowly, back-bench Congressional candidates to powerful, well-known Senators, and of course the presidential race. Rove--seldom depicted by anyone other than arch conservatives as absolute pond scum--has made himself over as a king maker.  The man George W. Bush referred to as "Turd Blossom" is waggling his piggishness right under our noses, playing a huge part in the electoral process (both with straight advocacy ads, and bullshit "issues" ads*), while appearing on FOX "News" as a paid political consultant, as though he's just commenting upon the proceedings.

Rove's big target in Nevada,
Shelley Berkley. Image from Wiki

If you live in a battleground state, or simply one that has a Congress or Senate seat prime for the picking, you've been seeing Crossroads ads. Here in Nevada, Shelley Berkley, a long-term Congresswoman, is running for John Ensign's old seat. After Ensign resigned in disgrace, Congressman Dean Heller--who now has the distinction of voting for the "Ryan Plan" to voucherize Medicare twice--was appointed to the Senate, and is thus the incumbent. Heller hasn't been a very distinguished Congressman in either house, as far as I can tell. Berkley on the other hand, is a Nevada institution, beloved by her constituency, even treated kindly on right-wing talk radio.
 
Until now. Now, she's apparently just awful. Or you'd think so, if you ever watch television or listen to radio. We are deluged with anti-Berkley ads with vague charges of impropriety, nearly all from outside groups, chiefly Rove's Crossroads GPS. They air nearly as frequently as the anti-Obama ads. Which means, they really, really want to retain Heller's seat, and they're gambling (ha!) that we'll forget about Ensign and of course, Heller's voting record. What's in it for Rove? Apparently, big bucks. It's sure not reputation, except with the Republican establishment, I guess.

Back in Ohio, my home state, one of the main targets it Sherrod Brown, a well-liked and outspoken Democratic Senator. Only, in Ohio, Brown is an incumbent, so he needed a challenger. By all accounts I've heard, the guy they got to run against him--Josh Mandel--is kind of a twerp. And a lying one at that. From the sounds of it, he's kind of like the Paul Ryan speech at the RNC, but all the time. Dishonesty, however, is not a disqualifier for public office in the Republican Party. Especially this year. And it is certainly not a disqualifier for support from Rove's big-money groups.

Josh Mendel, left, challenging Sherrod Brown.
Image from Cleveland.com

Which is a long way to go to say that this political season, all is not as it seems. Political ads have always been down and dirty, but now they are not only more numerous, they are much shadier. Rove's aren't the only groups out there doing this. But like his, a lot of them aren't beholden to anybody, or at least no one we know about. In some cases we don't know who is funding the groups, and in some cases may be of foreign extraction. How would we know? All I ask is that if you hear some horrible, terrible no good "facts" about a candidate, and it's a group like Rove's doing the alleging? Either tune it out, or do your homework, find out if it's just a turd blossom.


*Note: "Issue Advocacy" ads are the smelliest of the bullshit ads. They're the ones that allegedly do not advocate for any specific candidate, but only for an issue. This skirts some legal technicality somewhere, and it's part of the reason why Rove has two groups. In this type of ad, you can still play ominous music, can still talk about a candidate, but you have to couch it in terms like "Call President Obama. Tell him to support drilling in the gulf. . ." or some nonsense, but it's technically not an anti- Obama ad. Both sides do it, true, but guess who's got the pocketbook.

Obama, the iPhone and False Equivalency

That's not an iPhone anyway.
Image from Washington Times.

We talk a lot about false equivalency, and it's because we have to. Constantly, seemingly every single day, there is some sort of news nugget that screams, "bad analogy." Today's item is that President Obama can't work an iPhone. And so, it's the same as John McCain's cluelessness with technology in 2008 and George H.W. Bush's unfamiliarity with grocery scanners in 1992. And fine, whatever, have your fun, but. . .

The reason that this is a false equivalency is that Obama isn't clueless about technology. He is widely known to have been a Blackberry fiend on the campaign trail in 2007 and 2008, to the point of being restricted by the campaign. The iPhone came out in 2007, and the President had been in office for most of its lifespan. Anybody--tech head like me or not--will not know how to use the phone instantly upon first picking one up. I'm an Android user, and though I'm the only one in my office that can figure out how to load paper in the fax machine, change the ink in the printer, map a drive, and get the router online, I am unfamiliar with iPhones.

Beyond that, the core of Mitt Romney's base is old white people who are very likely, as a group, unfamiliar with how to operate an iPhone. But as I said, go ahead, have your fun. But you're not going to gain any voters with this one. And you know what? I'll bet that Mitt--unless he's being schooled right now--is unfamiliar with iPhones. . .or Androids.

[Excerpt]
 
Tech challenge: Obama has trouble with iPhone
 
On the campaign trail, President Obama is constantly talking about the importance of technology, but he met his match in an iPhone Sunday. . .
Read more: Washington Times

Blast from the Past: Guilty Pleasures, Part One

I realize that summer is ending, and I've got to get back to the business of blogging, such as it is. But I tell you, when you've got a lazy Sunday, and it is still light out until 7:00 pm, it's difficult to get up from the readin' couch by the window, particularly when the readin' cat is on your lap. But, let's get on with it, shall we?

This week's topic, "Guilty Pleasures" isn't the gentle kind. It's not ABBA or The Carpenters. . .you know, the groups you're shy about admitting you secretly dig. No, I mean specific songs that were often times enormous hits, but nobody will admit to ever having liked! These are the songs that could either fill or empty out a dance floor, depending upon the crowd. And you'd have no way of knowing!

This one is going to be text-light, videos-heavy. The source of the guilt and the pleasure (particularly the guilt) is self evident!

And that will do it for part one. There are so many--so many--others. Meanwhile, have a great week and a happy Monday! I'll be back late today refreshed, and get back to the politics.

Over Time with Bill Maher, September 7, 2012

Ep. 258: September 07, 2012 - Overtime

Democratic National Convention, Day #3

Now that we're on day 6 (or 10, counting the days between) of the conventions, I'm glad to say this stage is over. I anticipated President Obama's speech, but my brain is full, I want a couple of "no politics" days somewhere in here before the election! And, truth be told, days 1 and 2 of the DNC were hard acts to follow. Michelle Obama and Bill Clinton raised the bar so high, day 3 was bound to feel a little slow.

Of course, nobody better say one negative word about former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords saying the Pledge of Allegiance. If you do--and I say this as an atheist--you're going to hell. [Story continues below]



I missed a rather large chunk of the convention due to work and exercise on Thursday. So, I missed speeches by Caroline Kennedy, Scarlett Johanssen and Eva Longoria, though I plan to catch them in the next day or so (so much for politics-free days, I guess). I came in on Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer, who was very feisty, and on message. Former Florida Governor Charlie Crist--now apparently a converted Democrat, or close--gave a nice speech that endorsed Obama while jabbing a finger in the eye of the party that he says left him.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

John Kerry's speech was great, showing much more fire and spirit than I remember from his run in 2004. It was like he was getting his revenge or something, really zinging Romney, Ryan and the Republicans. . .oooh, RRR? Does that work out to 666 in some numerology thing? Never mind, moving on. . . Dr. Jill Biden was lovely and eloquent, which is great because she opened for her husband.

Joe Biden. . .sigh. . .oh, Joe. So earnest, so eager, so long. Joe said "literally" too much when he meant "figuratively" Joe wandered off script a few times. The material of his speech was fine, there was nothing wrong with his message. But I've really never been a fan of his style, and I think it slowed down the whole proceedings. Or, maybe that was the idea? [Story continues below]

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The showcase for the night was of course President Barack Obama, his acceptance of the nomination, and his pitch to the country for reelection. By anybody else, this speech cooked. But from Obama, it was just very good. It wasn't lofty like Michelle's speech, and it wasn't a barn burner like Bill Clinton's. I think by design it was necessary to scale it back from the soaring rhetoric from 2008.

As Obama said--and I know it's going to infuriate conservatives--he's not a candidate anymore, he is the President of the United States. He's not a blank slate as he was (and as Romney is), and can't base the entire speech on hope and change. He had to ground this speech, and build it upon the notion of continuing hope and change begun, but not yet finished. So, necessarily, this couldn't be the spiritual high we all got from Invesco Field in Denver the last time. And though his speech didn't top his wife's, and didn't top President Clinton's. . .he still blew Mitt Romney's speech out of the water. No contest.

DNC, Day #2 Cont'd: Bill Clinton Goes Long, Deep

Image from NBCNews.

Wow. Bill Clinton's speech--as I mentioned at length in the post below--was really something to behold. You know those ridiculous "Miss Me Yet?" George Bush signs? Yeah, well I miss this guy! And this guy whole-heartedly and enthusiastically endorsed, nominated and supports Barack Obama. What more do you need, really? Incidentally, the headline refers to the length of the speech, and the denseness of its content. What were you thinking?

So, without further ado, or prattle from me, here is the best video I could find of the speech. Should this get yanked, I'll replace it with official video later. Enjoy.

DNC, Day #2, Take Two

I wrote earlier that I felt disengaged from the speeches on day two of the Democratic National Convention. I blame that on a spectacular first night, and on a bit of a funk on my end. Despite that, things took a turn for the better, at least in my viewing. I was watching MSNBC, and was delighted to see Lawrence O'Donnell interviewing Senator Al Franken. I've been a Franken fan for as long as I've known who he is, but he's kept a low media profile as Senator. Turns out, he's still quick witted and sharp on policy. Too bad he didn't get a speech. [Story continues below]

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Shortly after that mini interview, Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke appeared, giving the best speech I've heard to that point. It helps that there's an emotional response to her, since she was viciously attacked by Rush Limbaugh, an attack that continues in Right Wing World to this day. Fluke has parlayed the uncalled for abuse into something positive, and good for her. May she annoy Rush and his sycophants (almost typed psycho-phants!) for a long time to come. [Story continues below]

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

As expected, Elizabeth Warren, Massachusetts candidate for Senate, was great. This is a woman I'd be banging on doors for if I lived in her state. She's just amazing, and what have they got on her? Maybe she got a story about her ancestry wrong? Boo hoo, my Grandma always told me I was related to Davy Crockett, Daniel Boone and General Patton. I'm sure I've told others that, but who knows if Grandma was right.  So, if that's all they've got, they've got nothing. If there is any complaint from me, it is only that Warren may be a little too soft-spoken for an arena speech. [Story continues below]

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Of course, the really big part of the show--including the official nomination of Barack Obama for President--was the appearance of Bill Clinton on the stage. Still popular after all these years--and despite all of the Clinton Derangement Syndrome over the last 20 years--Clinton just knows how to give a speech, and to hold an audience. As with Fluke before, I'm delighted that he likely still irritates the shit out of them! Hey, I'm ornery that way.

Clinton put to rest any lingering doubts that he supports President Obama and his reelection. I still have to wonder if Hillary might run in four years, but there was certainly no sabotage going on here. This was not a tepid endorsement. And if my Twitter feed was any indication, Bill's speech was blowing the barn doors off, the screen doors off, the bomb shelter doors off. He was smokin', and not strictly off prompter either, there was a heap of ad-libbing going on there. Too long, by half, I'll admit. But stellar, just stellar.

No speaker at the RNC last week matched a quarter of the wattage Clinton displayed. No speaker offered a hundredth of the personal endorsement, nor positive arguments for their candidate. Whatever doldrums I was feeling in the early part of today's coverage has been eclipsed, dwarfed, obliterated by Clinton's speech.  It was the best single political speech I've ever heard in my life. I actually kind of feel sorry for the President that he has to try and top it!

Clinton's speech isn't yet ready for embedding, but it deserves its own post anyway. I'll post it as soon as I can get it!

Obama Forces Issue: "God," "Jerusalem" Back in DNC Platform

Image found at Indexed.

Previously, I kind of gave a combined shrug and soft applause to the DNC for not putting "God"--by generic name--into their 2012 platform. I don't see why it would be a requirement, or why it would be controversial not to have it there. We are not a theocracy, there "is no religious test" for public office. . .so WTF, please tell me? And what in the world does calling Jerusalem the capital of Israel have to do with a damned thing?

Sigh. So, it is with a combined shrug and a soft eye roll that I respond to the subsequent insertion of both God and Jerusalem back into the platform. Why the DNC would blink when Right Wing World squawks, I have no idea. But on the other hand. . .

Do you remember when RNC chairman ReiNCe PRieBuS was being asked about the inconsistencies between Paul Ryan's, Mitt Romney's and the RNC's positions on abortion (including no exceptions for rape or incest)? Reince pleaded that the platform was for the party, but Romney was the candidate, and had his own views? That muddled message was never really sorted out. I mean, what is the platform if your party's leader doesn't follow it? In the case of the DNC, Obama spoke, and the party followed. Obama led, in other words.

As an atheist, I find the issue ridiculous. But this is not an election-deciding issue for me. I'm resigned to the very public flogging of religion by both parties, regardless of its Constitutional appropriateness. We're not getting God off of the money, and we're not getting "him" out of documents like this one. . .apparently.

[Excerpt]

In turnaround, Democrats reinstate language on Jerusalem

Democrats resurrected language in their party platform on Wednesday declaring Jerusalem to be the capital of Israel after Republicans accused them of showing weak support for the longtime U.S. ally. . .  

Read more at: NBC News

Democratic National Convention, Day #2

Bill Clinton speaks on day 2 of the DNC.
Image from NBCNews.

Oh dear. Do I have political burnout? I suffered through last week's trip through the RNC Bizarro World--and with a persistent headache yet--to be rewarded with a positive, uplifting, very well-done DNC on Tuesday. But, today, I got home a little earlier than usual. The sky was bursting with grey clouds, and my 4-mile walk didn't seem wise. So, I started watching this day of convention coverage much earlier than I caught any in the last two weeks.

I think the mixture of gloom outside and too much politics has pervaded my brain. I've been finding it difficult to get engaged on the DNC Day 2. As I type this, it's still early though, only 6:15 pm PDT. For those of you on the East Coast though, I have to wonder if you're awake! Okay, maybe that's not entirely fair. The audience in North Carolina seems entertained. The commentators aren't yammering about it being boring or an "off night." I think it just might be me. I will stay tuned to catch Elizabeth Warren and President Clinton. Something tells me I'll perk up by then. Updates to come. . .

Paul Ryan, Lie, Lie, Lie (Rocky Mountain Mike Parody)

Thank goodness Rocky Mountain Mike (famous from The Stephanie Miller Show) is so prolific. I always have something fun and funny to plug into the blog when my brain is toast, or time runs out, or life interferes. The Democratic National Convention (both viewing and writing about it) took the majority of my time for this blogging session. So, thank you Mike!

This one is a riff on Paul Ryan's lie-filled speech at last week's RNC, parodying the classic Meow Mix cat food commercials. Simple, clear and well done!

Much Ado About "God" in the DNC Platform

Oh, good GOD. Image from MediaMatters.

As an atheist, I'm delighted to hear that one of the nation's two major parties has no reference to "God" in its platform. We're not voting for bishop or priest or vicar, are we? We do have separation of church and state--something that's good for both church and state--right? The platform does address religion and the Democratic Party's positions on same, right? So, what's the friggin' problem?

Honestly, I've actually seen it written that "the name of God" has been stricken from the DNC platform. It was never there! "God" isn't a name, it's a noun. "God's" name is Jehovah or Yahweh or Jesus Sr. or some such, yes? And if this really bothers you. . .attention evangelicals: you have a Mormon and a Catholic on your ticket. Both are uneasy allies with your more "fundamentalist" faith. Sort that out, and forget the party platform of a party you weren't going to vote for anyway.

Sorry, but stirring religion in my politics really ticks me off.

[Excerpt]

Dishonest Fox Graphic: God Edition

Fox News has fixated on the fact that the Democratic platform for 2012 does not mention the word "God," and used a misleading graphic that points out that the Republican platform for 2012 references "God" more often than the Democratic platform has in any of the last four election years. The graphic ignores that in 2000 and 2004, the Democratic platform contained the word "God" more times than the Republican platform in those years; moreover, the 2012 Democratic platform has a section on faith. . .

Read more at: Media Matters

Democratic National Convention, Day #1

Yeah, as a graphic artist, I'm not digging the logo.

Wow, what a difference a party makes. Well, the party and the fact that I don't have a brain-splitting sinus headache as I did all through the RNC last week. And I know that I'm biased as a liberal. But, so far, the mood of the DNC is quite different, much more uplifting and positive. And the crowd seems to be connecting, rather than just hooting an hollering (and booing).

This being the first day, you wouldn't expect the speakers to be the top-shelf speakers. You'd be wrong, or rather, I was. There were a couple of clunkers in there, some only suffering for placement after a spectacular speaker. But from what I saw, the DNC's first night was a spectacular sucess, and there was at least one star born.

I'm in the Pacific time zone, so after work (and after my nightly exercise), I could only watch from about 5:30 pm (8:30 EDT). The first speaker I caught was Tammy Duckworth, who was quite good, very engaging and inspiring. I was watching MSNBC while also preparing dinner, so the next speaker I caught was Kathleen Sebelius, and she was fine. Boilerplate speech, nothing bad, a few good points. Rahm Emanuel spoke next, and I'll be honest: I'm not a fan. I had the mixer on, and didn't pay a lot of attention to him. He may have been great, I don't know. [Story continues below]

Following Rahm though was one of the best speeches of the night, by actor Kal Penn (of Harold & Kumar), who has worked with Obama on youth outreach. His tone was strong, his interaction with the audience intuitive, and he had a perfect balance between seriousness and humor (even getting a zinger off on Emanuel). The energy in the room for Penn's speech was warmer and more engaged than anything I saw at the RNC last week. And it was just getting warmed up.

I saw Lilly Ledbetter next, of the Ledbetter Act, the first legislation signed by President Obama. Her speech was great--though with her thick Southern accent, she reminded me of Flo from TV's Alice on occasion. She was emphatically for Obama, and got in some digs at Romney. Very good for a non-professional. But it was Deval Patrick, Governor of Massachusetts (since Romney vacated) who had the first real barn-burner of a speech. Like a revival preacher--but without the annoying evangelical theatrical speech inflections--Patrick steered the audience everywhere he wanted them to go. If you could see a crescendo, it would have occurred a couple of times during his speech. [Story continues below]



The Governor of Maryland, Martin O'Malley came out next and. . .well, he was okay. He had a hard act to follow. And he had a line he kept getting the crowd to repeat that quickly became tedious. It had a great payoff, but the buildup was far too prolonged. But he ended strong, and set the stage for quite possibly a future star. Or two.

I'll be honest, before Tuesday night I'd never heard of  Julian Castro, Mayor of San Antonio. He had the crowd in his hand, much like Patrick, but with a much different style. Castro is very youthful, energetic, personable, charming. And he also comes off quite intelligent and well spoken. It's quite the package, and surprise, surprise, he has a twin brother who is also active in politics. Keep your eyes on these guys. [Story continues below]



A gauzy (but well done) Michelle Obama video followed, and then the First Lady was introduced by military mom Elaine Brye. Mrs. Obama then came out, and proved every single right-wing hatemonger wrong about her. I'm sure they don't see it that way (but I don't know what inspires their hatred in the first place). Mrs. Obama was warm, well spoken, charming, and had the audience in the palm of her hand like some of the others, but much more so. The major difference between Mrs. Obama and, say, Ann Romney is easy: realness. She seems like a real, approachable woman. The appeal of Mrs. Obama's speech is difficult to encapsulate, because it's an emotional reaction. Which is likely proof to critics that it's style over substance. [Story continues below]


And you may have noticed that this writeup is about the style of the speakers. That has to do more with my writing ability and the late hour that I write this, rather than a lack of substance. Almost all of the speakers I heard spoke out about helping the poor, gay rights, the right to choose, the military, veterans, health care. And all of them were clearly there to support the re-election of Barack Obama. While Patrick and Castro may get some mileage out of their speeches, none of the speakers seemed to be auditioning for 2016 as they did at the RNC.  The speakers were clear on the President's accomplishments, and on the point that they think we need to let him continue to complete the job.

Oddly enough, the digs at Romney (and to George W. Bush, for that matter) were fairly mild. . .except for former Ohio Governor Ted Strickland, who I caught in a replayed clip. He was clearly the attack dog of the night! But I'll give the night a solid A grade, particularly in comparison to the RNC.