Nobody's "failed upward" more than you, Babs

Barbra Streisand’s at it again, blasting Condoleeza Rice as someone who has “failed upward.” Babs says that Condi has “been judged by **experts as ‘one of the weakest National Security Advisors in recent history’.”

(**Chances are these “experts” are James Brolin and her hairdresser…assuming they’re not one in the same)

I’m noticing a distinct change in strategy from the Hollywood left. They were criticizing Bush himself for many years, saying he was an idiot and illegitimate president, and was handed the Oval Office by a partisan Supreme Court. Now, Bush had a clear, large victory on election day, so that argument has been taken away. They’re working on those who work for the Bush administration now. To Babs, if a black woman makes it any higher than a seamstress, something crooked, dishonest, and dangerous must be in the works.

Keep chattering, Barbra. You’re one of the right wing’s best assets. And keep charging $500 for tickets to your concerts, where you launch into between-songs diatribes about the evils of corporate greed. I like my irony thick, and you provide just that. Thank you.

Nobody’s “failed upward” more than you, Babs

Barbra Streisand’s at it again, blasting Condoleeza Rice as someone who has “failed upward.” Babs says that Condi has “been judged by **experts as ‘one of the weakest National Security Advisors in recent history’.”

(**Chances are these “experts” are James Brolin and her hairdresser…assuming they’re not one in the same)

I’m noticing a distinct change in strategy from the Hollywood left. They were criticizing Bush himself for many years, saying he was an idiot and illegitimate president, and was handed the Oval Office by a partisan Supreme Court. Now, Bush had a clear, large victory on election day, so that argument has been taken away. They’re working on those who work for the Bush administration now. To Babs, if a black woman makes it any higher than a seamstress, something crooked, dishonest, and dangerous must be in the works.

Keep chattering, Barbra. You’re one of the right wing’s best assets. And keep charging $500 for tickets to your concerts, where you launch into between-songs diatribes about the evils of corporate greed. I like my irony thick, and you provide just that. Thank you.

O'Reilly proves that we tend to support charities closest to home

Dan Rather has many sympathetic defenders after his phony National Guard document fiasco. In a Saturday Boston Herald op-ed, Bill O’Reilly believes that Dan Rather “made a mistake… but is not dishonest”, a line Bill himself has no doubt been repeating often in private circles ever since the debut of “The Phone Sex Factor”, and accompanying lawsuit.

O’Reilly completely misses the mark. The point isn’t that Rather knowingly put forward false documents in the hopes that they would be catastrophic to the Bush campaign– It’s that Rather’s Pavlovian response of wanting the documents to be authentic caused his research to be as thorough as your average 17 year old boy trying to do algebra homework while a Baywatch rerun is on TV.

Something else should make seekers of truth as jumpy as a FOX News intern who sees Bill O’Reilly’s number pop up on their caller ID in the middle of the night– Dan Rather’s stepping away from the anchor desk, but CBS is still going to let him do “60 Minutes II”. This is like taking Joseph Hazelwood’s key ring, confiscating the car key, and giving him back the key to the oil tanker.

I’ll cover this more in Monday’s column at WorldNetDaily.

O’Reilly proves that we tend to support charities closest to home

Dan Rather has many sympathetic defenders after his phony National Guard document fiasco. In a Saturday Boston Herald op-ed, Bill O’Reilly believes that Dan Rather “made a mistake… but is not dishonest”, a line Bill himself has no doubt been repeating often in private circles ever since the debut of “The Phone Sex Factor”, and accompanying lawsuit.

O’Reilly completely misses the mark. The point isn’t that Rather knowingly put forward false documents in the hopes that they would be catastrophic to the Bush campaign– It’s that Rather’s Pavlovian response of wanting the documents to be authentic caused his research to be as thorough as your average 17 year old boy trying to do algebra homework while a Baywatch rerun is on TV.

Something else should make seekers of truth as jumpy as a FOX News intern who sees Bill O’Reilly’s number pop up on their caller ID in the middle of the night– Dan Rather’s stepping away from the anchor desk, but CBS is still going to let him do “60 Minutes II”. This is like taking Joseph Hazelwood’s key ring, confiscating the car key, and giving him back the key to the oil tanker.

I’ll cover this more in Monday’s column at WorldNetDaily.

Beer goggles & fertitlity drugs running rampant

The number of women over the age of 40 giving birth exceeded 100,000 for the first time in 2003. There were 1,512 first time mothers between the ages of 45 and 54 last year as well. An inevitable corresponding increase in consumption of fertility drugs, Viagra, and booze is soon to be reported, no doubt.

At any given time of the day, somewhere, there are old people having sex. As I soon will begin to plow into my 40’s, I find that fact somewhat comforting.

Could our fascination with idiots be a good sign?

Herbert London writes in The Washington Times, in a column entitled “Dumb, dumber, dumbest“, that America is going through a revolution in “dumbing down” via the moronic TV shows a lot of us watch.

A lot of people have written that the high ratings that can be garnered by shows like Paris Hilton’s, Anna Nicole Smith’s, Ozzy’s, et al, offers proof positive that we as a television audience are getting dumber.

Whenever I hear people talking about how sad it is that shows like these get high ratings, I must disagree. If severe emotional trauma cases like Smith and Osbourne were an example of run-of-the-mill behavior, the ratings going in would be dismal. Nobody wants to watch a show about “regular” people, for the same reason nobody on the highway slows down and gawks at a car and driver that are functioning normally.

The time to worry is when these shows get poor ratings right out of the gate, for it will mean that the behavior featured therein has become the norm. When and if that happens, then it will be time to start worrying.

As London points out in his column, we’ve always liked things that are stupid… The Three Stooges, etc. But it’s never been based in reality, until recently.

Perhaps a better explanation is that, in today’s “self esteem is of utmost importance” society, it makes us feel better about ourselves to see that there are people dumber than we are. Like Rodney Dangerfield said, “If you want to look thin, hang out with fat people.”

We can find those “fat people” every day on our televisions.

(I won’t point out to viewers who watch morons to raise their self esteem that most of those “morons” make more money in a month than most of us do in ten years. That could damage the self esteem…so I didn’t just say that.)

A conservative Thanksgiving

There is so much for us to be thankful for, but for the conservatives who enjoy a good laugh, this has been a truly bountiful year.

We give thanks for the hypocritical left. The “share the wealth” caring nurturers who live in gated communities, whine about fossil-fuel pollution, think that public schools are just dandy, and then drive their kids to Montessori in an SUV. Thanks as well go to staunch environmentalists who will drive a kumquat-powered hybrid car halfway across the country to picket a company that manufactures aerosol hairspray, but think nothing of burning 150,000 gallons of jet fuel to fly to emergency global summit meetings on ozone depletion.

We give thanks for those feminists who champion the cause of women’s rights, while their grandkids are in the backyard playing balloon toss with one of their old breast implants.

We give thanks for those who expose illogic, namely the illogical. The unwise who teach our children that the killing of the unborn is a “choice,” and then expect the kids who are born to grow up with enough of a conscience left to care about saving turtle eggs, whales and rain forests. Mark my words: If that were a whale’s stereo keeping the radical pro-choice advocate awake at night, a turtle egg in front of them in the “10 items or less” line with 37 things, and a rain forest repossessing their car, they wouldn’t give a flying Birkenstock about animals or the environment, either.

We give thanks for Michael Moore, fighter against all forms of corporate greed, except book-publishing companies, movie theaters and all-you-can-eat buffets. Moore’s special in that he has the audacity to urge people to give money to his corporation to see or read his latest attempts at making us hate corporations. To any good hypocritical liberal, the “corporate greed” vehicle must always turn around just before it gets to their corporation. Good left-wingers always make sure their philosophical house is built at the end of a cul-de-sac.

We give thanks for attorneys everywhere for their contribution to the field of science, because they have single-handedly revised Newton’s Third Law to read, “for every action, there must be an equal but opposite lawsuit.”

We give thanks for FOX News. There is one downside, however. If their “information combined with sex appeal” approach keeps raking in the ratings, don’t be surprised if you soon see Peter Jennings in lip-gloss and a push-up bra.

Lastly, and most seriously, we give thanks for those brave souls in the military. Those yappy ingrates you hear in constant criticism are the likes of Susan Sarandon and Barbra Streisand. We give thanks for your fighting for their right to yammer away in dissent, and also for putting up with the frustration of knowing that those same ingrates will hide behind you when trouble starts.

Happy Thanksgiving everybody!

"Turn your back on Bush"… and the rest of us too, please

There’s a move afoot for Bush haters to protest at the inauguration in January by anonymously lining the motorcade route and, when Bush passes by, turning their backs on him. The group is called “Turn your back on Bush“.

The group has developed what one can tell by reading their website they think is a cutting edge new protest technique.

“The Bush administration has been successful at keeping protesters away from major events in the last few years by closing off areas around events and using questionable legal strategies to outlaw public dissent. We can use these obstacles to develop new tactics. On Inauguration day, we don’t need banners, we don’t need signs, we just need people. We’re calling on people to attend inauguration without protest signs, shirts or stickers. Once through security and at the procession, at a given signal, we’ll all turn our backs on Bush’s motorcade and continue through his speech and swearing in. A simple, clear and coherent message.”

Actually, if they stay facing the other way, the world may be better off. Have you seen some of these people? Some of these groups contain so many Zeroes that they give Pearl Harbor veterans nasty flashbacks.

The perpetual nastiness of the anti Bush bunch means that the inauguration could contain more surprises than Paris Hilton’s strep culture. The protester turnout could be much higher this year, due to several factors– the war in Iraq, heated domestic issues, Kerry losing, combined with a continuing hangover from the year 2000 swan song for Al Gore’s sanity.

That being said, this will probably end up being a non issue, despite what the website says. Protest organizers tend to sound a lot like tin-pot dictators. “You will swim in rivers of dimpled chads, feel the wrath of mother nature, and be buried in ‘You can’t hug your kids with nuclear arms’ bumper stickers!” Then, at event time, only a few dozen show up– some only because they were promised a pint of Yukon Jack or some other such trivial payment accepted as legitimate currency by employees of the left’s largest corporations: “Rent a Mob” and its election year subsidiary, “Lease a Voter.”

“Turn your back on Bush”… and the rest of us too, please

There’s a move afoot for Bush haters to protest at the inauguration in January by anonymously lining the motorcade route and, when Bush passes by, turning their backs on him. The group is called “Turn your back on Bush“.

The group has developed what one can tell by reading their website they think is a cutting edge new protest technique.

“The Bush administration has been successful at keeping protesters away from major events in the last few years by closing off areas around events and using questionable legal strategies to outlaw public dissent. We can use these obstacles to develop new tactics. On Inauguration day, we don’t need banners, we don’t need signs, we just need people. We’re calling on people to attend inauguration without protest signs, shirts or stickers. Once through security and at the procession, at a given signal, we’ll all turn our backs on Bush’s motorcade and continue through his speech and swearing in. A simple, clear and coherent message.”

Actually, if they stay facing the other way, the world may be better off. Have you seen some of these people? Some of these groups contain so many Zeroes that they give Pearl Harbor veterans nasty flashbacks.

The perpetual nastiness of the anti Bush bunch means that the inauguration could contain more surprises than Paris Hilton’s strep culture. The protester turnout could be much higher this year, due to several factors– the war in Iraq, heated domestic issues, Kerry losing, combined with a continuing hangover from the year 2000 swan song for Al Gore’s sanity.

That being said, this will probably end up being a non issue, despite what the website says. Protest organizers tend to sound a lot like tin-pot dictators. “You will swim in rivers of dimpled chads, feel the wrath of mother nature, and be buried in ‘You can’t hug your kids with nuclear arms’ bumper stickers!” Then, at event time, only a few dozen show up– some only because they were promised a pint of Yukon Jack or some other such trivial payment accepted as legitimate currency by employees of the left’s largest corporations: “Rent a Mob” and its election year subsidiary, “Lease a Voter.”

Dan Rather to step down in frustration after his inability to take down a president with nothing but Photoshop software

If you haven’t heard, Dan Rather announced that he will step down from the CBS anchor desk in March of 2005.

Recent problems have no doubt contributed to this decision. Rather’s biggest blunder of late was when CBS News used forged documents to provide phony validity to a presupposition – CBS’s version of basketball’s “triple double.” This sank CBS and Rather even further into the depths of irrelevancy and declining ratings … but I guess that’s why they’re called “anchors.”

What was the cause of this career demise? Many may say an increasing liberal bias caused Rather to slip so quickly that even the most skilled of media paramedics were unable to chest-paddle him back to life. That was partially the case, but the final nail went into the coffin when aging anchors and producers demonstrated an abject inability to understand modern technologies, such as the miracles that can be produced (like fake National Guard documents) by just one agenda-driven person with Microsoft Word and Photoshop.

We’ll miss Dan. With no more of his “Texanisms,” we’ll be, as Rather may say, “as frustrated as a perverted farmhand with an electric cow milker during a power outage.” With no more Rather to offer comic relief, we’ll be “as stressed as the high heels on Kirstie Alley’s pumps.”

Farewell, Dan. Courage.