February 04, 2005
Disclosure
This was going to be a comment in response to David, but it got pretty long:
David:
you are so fucking obviously biased (evidenced by selective outrage and selective memory, as well as the different standards applied to conservative vs. liberal writers) yet you try to pretend you are not
No. I don't. I've responded to you a gazzilion times on this. I view my political stance to be in the Libertarian fold. I've told you this. My blog is a place for my opinions, and those opinions are pretty obvious. If it outrages you that I have these opinions, without stating each and every time that they're my opinions, well, boo fucking hoo. I'm not making a secret out of it, so please fucking try to remember it this time. I'm not sure what you want me to admit to, since I've written here, and on many other blogs, including yours, my opinions, countless times.
And I'm not putting myself out as an unbiased media critic. fucking-A, I write for IBM magazines, and my shit gets infused with so much marketing-speak and legal review, it can hardly be considered unbiased. That's my point, that an unbiased media is a fucking MYTH. I've written shit now for daily and weekly newspapers, as well as magazines, and at each job I've had editors tweak the language because "we don't want to appear biased." Well, fine, but the bias is still there, even though it may not APPEAR to be. Do I tend to sniff at liberal bias more? Probably, because in my opinion liberal bias tries to sneak in under the radar. I mean, Fox News, quite obviously, is awash with conservative bias. They practically scream it at you. MSNBC.com stuff, on the other hand, often slides stuff out that is slanted liberally, yet with more subtlety.
The whole Dan Rather flap, for example. That screamed of liberal bias masquerading as unbiased reporting. I mean, come on. CBS officials agreeing to put an arguably delusional source in contact with the Kerry campaign, for a report about Bush's duty-dodging, THE DAY BEFORE the Kerry campaign unveiled their Fortunate Son message? Puh-lease.
yet you try to pretend you are not, and you hide behind some phony-baloney "professional cred"
You know what? Go fuck yourself. Seriously, insert your penis into your ass, back and forth, till you're sore. Rinse, repeat.
I'm a journalist by education and profession. My experiences in the field are entirely my own, and I have my opinions because of those experiences, most of which have fueled my belief that unbiased media is a, let's say it again, MYTH. If you think that my experiences just equal a "phoney-baloney street cred," well, you can just go fuck off.
Again, I've made no secret that I work for an IBM marketing arm. Ooh, you really got me there. On the same token, I've never claimed to be un-biased. I HAVE claimed that non-bias is a fucking MYTH.
My political leanings, such as they are, are thus:
Stop raising my fucking taxes in a futile attempt to stamp out poverty. I'm sick of it. I work at the IBM marketing arm to make money, and I want that money, so stop taking it away from me to feed Tiny Tim. I can handle some taxation to that end, but only so much. You could take my entire paycheck and put it toward social services, and there would still be people who would STILL be poor and miserable. I'd like to keep that money, thank you. I'm pro-abortion, but not within the third tri-mester. I think women should probably keep the right to vote. I'm flexible on this issue. I'm kidding. I think women should have parity with men, except they shouldn't grow penises. That would be wrong. I'm for the right to bear arms, but I think there should be some limit as to what those arms should be; I don't necessarily think people should be equipped with Street Sweepers, in the off-beat chance an army materializes in front of them. I don't trust the U.N. As of just a couple years ago, I thought they were God's gift to world order; now I don't think that. I think the U.N. is a corrupt, do-nothing monolith that enables dictatorships. I think the U.N. is, in fact, an impediment to world stability. I don't think all that much of President Bush. I think entirely less of Sen. Kerry. I think Howard Dean is a self-important ass. I'm sick and fucking tired of hearing that the GOP is a party of evil, fat cat, power-mongers, and permutations on that theme. I think hardcore pornography rocks! I tend to side with the Israeli cause rather than the Palestinians. I think gays should be able to marry whoever they fucking want, just please don't kiss and fondle in front of me because. . . *shudder* Unless you're a lesbian, then please, chow box in front of me. Unless you're Rosie O'Donnell, then please, don't. I think the Middle East is a cesspool that can probably only be changed through aggressive diplomacy with the very real threat of military force. I'm pissed off that all those fucking dinosaurs had to go and die over there, and then decay, and become oil deposits under all that fucking useless desert sand. I think France is silly. I think Great Britain kicks ass. Australia, too. Japan also. I don't trust China. Or Iran. Or Uzbekistan, because they're always up to something. So is Portugal. I love the United States of America, even when it sucks.
Please, David, let me know if I've missed anything here.
UPDATE: To augment all of my above points, Simon just provided me with a "picture-worth-a-thousand-words."
February 03, 2005
Things That Keep Me Up At Night
Sometimes, I'll get into comment debates that just burrow into my mind and I can't let go. Such is the case regarding this post which, in turn, got me over here.
The backstory: a graduate student wrote an op-ed piece for the Star-Tribune, attacking the blog Power Line for inadequate fact-checking (on this post), as opposed to the in-depth fact-checking supposedly conducted by newspapers like the Star-Tribune. The kicker, of course, was that the Star Tribune didn't fact-check the op-ed piece. Ironical.
Well, the grad student did provide her "research" to a blogger who requested it, and I think I've spent an unhealthy amount of time over there debating the "evidence," or lack thereof. And, because a lot of thought and time went into it, I thought I'd repost the comment string here, in the extended entry:
Thanks for the link.
Here's were we agree (I think): I don't think blogs in general should be anyone's primary source of news. A combination of news sources, with a few blogs thrown in, would be ideal, in my opinion.
LB | Email | Homepage | 02.01.05 - 2:31 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not my intent to go after Gage, beyond questioning her qualifications to opine within the biggest newspaper in Minnesota. If that's what the Strib is allowing nowadays, I have some pretty strong opinions about low flow toilets that I'd like some exposure on.
But, no editorial oversight on the part of the Strib? That's a tad disconcerting. Checking over this site, I admit that it looks as though Gage did some admirable footwork, but where was the Strib when it came to vetting?
Look at the weird way in which Gage allowed her footwork to veer:
I began by calling Tom Farley, the news editor at the Racine Journal Times. Mr. Farley had no knowledge of the allegations. He pointed out that there is no city position with the title "Deputy Registrar of Voters" (what the post cited).
Gage makes it seem as if Power Line was doing their own reporting, when in fact they were "citing" from and article from Agape Press. If Gage is going to go after anyone, it should be Agape Press. From where I'm sitting, Hinderaker's (never met him, don't know him) actions were the equivalent of circling an article in a newspaper and passing it along.
She declined to name the individual, but said the group was Voces de la Frontera, a group that works with Hispanic immigrants. I asked her directly how she knew the individual in question was an illegal immigrant and asked if she had spoken to them. She quickly admitted that she did not actually know if the individual in question was an illegal alien. I asked her when the alleged voter fraud occurred. She informed me the incidents took place in August and September, 2004. I then asked her which law enforcement agency she contacted and she told me she had called the FBI.
So, Gage is getting pretty close to sniffing out that there may be some real truth to the claim, although she's only lacking a name at that point, which Tully wouldn't give her. But, isn't Tully basically admitting that there was SOMEBODY? Gage basically had a smoking gun at that point, so to say there's no evidence to back up the claim is misleading at best, bogus at worst. But Gage opts to do some sleight of hand by switching gears and doing some Internet sleuthing:
I then did an Internet search on Voces de la Frontera. The first hit was a recent press release, released jointed by Wisconsin Citizen Action and Voces de la Frontera regarding their successful voter registration drive.
And, of course, Voces won't confirm anything, so Gage gets the answers she wants, forgetting, of course, that Tully gave her every bit of evidence except for a specific NAME.
There are some other peculiar things here:
I then called Ms. Moskonas at the City Clerks office. She was unaware of this matter.
Yet, in a JSonline (subscription required) Sept. 28, 2004 article, we learn that:
Moskonas said that in each of the six potential fraud cases, the people named on the Project Vote applications told
Ryan | Email | Homepage | 02.01.05 - 4:01 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whoops. Got cut off there.
Yet, in a JSonline (subscription required) Sept. 28, 2004 article, we learn that:
Moskonas said that in each of the six potential fraud cases, the people named on the Project Vote applications told her office they had not signed the forms and had not been contacted by any voter registration drives.
So, either Moskonas simply didn't remember this when asked by Gage, or Moskonas was lying. And, Gage's research probably should have exposed that conflict, no?
Ryan | Email | Homepage | 02.01.05 - 4:34 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think Tom Farley just didn't know, although he must have been aware of some issues over irregularities. Curiouser, I wonder why Carolynn Moskonas, the Racine County Clerk didn't mention the multiple Election Fraud/PTAC Misconduct in Public Office investigations?
I do notice that you limited the focus of discussion to "this matter" & I quote "...She was unaware of this matter. Ms. Moskonas explained to me that at the direction of the state legislature, volunteers involved in voter registrations drives must attend a training. They are then considered "deputy registrars."
To wit, where there's smoke, there's fire;
4 Counts of Election Fraud, 4 counts of PTAC Misconduct in Public Office:
http://www.wispolitics.com/1006/PRESS_RELEASE_COMPLAINTS_FORELECTION_FRAUD_SENT_10_28_2004_.pdf
Racine Journal Times | Failure to validate new voters:
http://www.journaltimes.com/articles/2005/01/21/local/iq_3335724.txt
Ref Racine Journal Times' 6 Oct 04 article:
http://badgerherald.com/oped/2004/10/06/new_voters_fraud_pro.php
AP | Congresswoman's son, four others charged with slashing Republican van tires on Election Day:
http://www.marshfield.net/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=004871
Joel McNally: Right fears voter growth:
http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/column/guest/index.php?ntid=14186&ntpid=2
Compendium of published newspaper articles (28 Sep - 3 Oct 04) regarding voter fraud, arrests & investigations (Pages 198 - 209):
http://www.gop.com/media/voterfraudarticles.pdf
29 Oct 04, Authorities Thursday filed felony election fraud charges against two Milwaukee men accused of falsifying voter applications in Racine and Kenosha:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/racine/oct04/270558.asp
Milwaukee D.A. Expresses Anger About Voter Fraud Investigation (At FAIR, Not the Registration of Noncitizens):
http://www.fairus.org/Research/Research.cfm?ID=2580&c=54
Alas for Mr. McMann, he's now a target of a federal investigation bwahahaha.
Miscellany
Q: Is it true? Lawsuits for-No ID to vote? Illegal aliens to vote? Felons to vote?
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=418921
And the list just goes on & on & on. If you want more, Google "Racine vote fraud register"
Bottomline, both parties should be 100% against fraud of any kind. Otherwise, the day will come when the shoe is on the other foot. It just so happens that the shoe fits the Democratic party.
Andy | Email | Homepage | 02.01.05 - 4:37 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John,
There are sooo many points I wanna comment on here...
First, it is a full 24 hours since Powerline posted it's 'miscreant' slam and promise to deliver it's fact-checked Racine story rebuttal.
I won't hold my breath.
Second, don't you f**king dare lump Lefty blogs in with the Right blogs, judging us equally guilty of sloppy fact-checking. I could offer up examples from La Shawn Barber, Wizbang and Say Anything right now, and dare you to match it in scope.
Just for starters, I have Media Matters, The Progress Report and DU Archives as frequent sources for supportive evidence when I blog. I cannot recall any instance in the last two years of blogging, where my writing has been effectively challenged as Powerline has been.
I also happen to write for the political commentary site WatchBlog.com, and there is a reason why we have a constant problem of attracting Conservative writers.
Wanna venture a guess?
thatcoloredfella | Email | Homepage | 02.01.05 - 5:08 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TCF,
Didn't mean to lump lefty and righty bloggers together on the grounds of faulty fact-checking, just that there is a tendency for hype to cloud reasoning. Reading that last bit over, I can tell it wasn't very clear.
John | Email | Homepage | 02.01.05 - 5:36 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Um, TCF? I wouldn't brag too entirely much about using DU as a reference for anything. Or Media Matters, either.
Ryan | Email | Homepage | 02.01.05 - 6:00 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aw John, don't cave in so fast! Stand fast to your lumping of Lefty & Righty blogs as deficient in fact-checking.
Media matters has dsylexia, and dare I say 2/3 of what should be in DU Archives is permanently filed in the memory hole. So what!
[quote]Second, don't you f**king dare lump Lefty blogs in with the Right blogs[/quote]
What's thatcoloredfool gonna do, if you dare? Come over and slit your throat, like that Coptic family? Please!!! Dude needs to take a chill pill or two and slap McGruder in the morning
Andy | Email | Homepage | 02.01.05 - 6:19 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan and Andy,
Here's where you need to put up, or...
Read what I said about Media Matters and DU:
as frequent sources for supportive evidence when I blog
Pretty clear, huh? I know you CEC dwellers have successfully demonized these groups, but I don't quote them. Instead, I use the wealth of evidence, facts and source links to bolster my case.
The problem for you, is that you can't (scared?) prove the carefully researched evidence like at Media Matters is wrong, with something more credible than your opinion.
thatcoloredfella | Email | Homepage | 02.01.05 - 8:00 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TCF:
Just for starters, I have Media Matters, The Progress Report and DU Archives as frequent sources for supportive evidence when I blog.
Dude, do you have any idea how often (at least the DU) they've been debunked? Let alone "allowed" their posts to be dropped through the memory hole, for some inexplicable reason? Come on, man, drop the tinfoil hat, if even just for a moment. Read www.noematic.org/mine, he's at least leftist, without the nonsense. And he's smart.
Ryan | Email | Homepage | 02.01.05 - 9:57 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
People, People just read what John said.
If Hinderaker, et. al. really had a problem with Gage's allegation, all they had to do was send her an email and ask her nicely to verify the source and information. But, clearly it was far easier for them to impugne {sic} her credibility than to take a few minutes to check her story out
Media matters and DU are great resources but the do not replace primary sources. Blogs can be a rumor mill (remember High School?), isn't it better to talk to the people directly involved before adopting a position based on hearsay?
Bloggers may want to be journalists but the should first be investigators. Talk to the people who are primary sources and distinguish between those with an agenda and bullshit.
It's the only way for the amateur sleuth to blog....
Scaramouche | Email | Homepage | 02.01.05 - 10:58 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scara, you can talk directly with the raving paranoid on the street. That doesn't make the raving paranoid any more correct. Come on. There are holes so huge in Gage's "research," the Strib should never have run her piece. But, they did. All bloggers may not be journalists, but neither is Gage.
Ryan | Email | Homepage | 02.02.05 - 4:40 am | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bloggers are so sensitive...
I've gotten into arguments with bloggers who claim that things I was an eyewiness to never happened. John, maybe you want to bring up the me and BillC example here about the Ottawa protests. He's an actual columnist on top of that and his piece went to print, plus It's a little less recent, so it might not be such a sore spot and can illustrate your point.
Enjoy the widening interest in your blog! there's definitely some new names in the comments section.
Ottawarotic | Email | Homepage | 02.02.05 - 8:20 am | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan,
You are correct, talking to raving paranoids on the street doesn't make the story any more correct. However, not talking to an eyewitness doesn't make the story any more correct. We can parse witness testimony and consider the source, but if one doesn't do the digging and just make bald statements of fact that doesn't give them any more credibility in my book.
Scaramouche | Email | Homepage | 02.02.05 - 9:55 am | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Danica McKellar, if I read a newspaper, circle an article I found interesting, and hand it on to you, whose credibility would you question: me, or the newspaper? Because, in essence, that's what pretty much most bloggers do, including Power Line. Power Line didn't make a "bald statement of fact." They cited a news source. And the facts, then and now, back them up. So, Gage is barking up entirely the wrong tree, in my opinion. Besides that, she skewed her own research to fit her preconceptions. It's right there in her "research."
Ryan | Email | Homepage | 02.02.05 - 10:41 am | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hinderaker cited Agape Press...not exactly the Washington Post or Wall Street Journal. Either he knew he was passing along info from a shady source, or he isn't as smart as his readers think he is.
Danica McKellar naked. | Email | Homepage | 02.02.05 - 11:10 am | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Considering that commenters here have been gleefully stating that they cite from the DU and Media Matters, I don't think anyone here can really point fingers at Power Line for citing a "shady" source. Pot meet kettle; kettle, pot.
Danica McKellar nude. | Email | Homepage | 02.02.05 - 11:28 am | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That person wasn't posting information from those sources and passing it off as though it were fact. Slight difference there.
The difference between Gage and Power Line, is that Gage did do some fact-checking and went to the source of the issue. Power Line didn't, and not only that, but relied on a sketchy source.
I'm still not sure how you can argue that the facts back them up then and now.
Danica McKellar naked. | Email | Homepage | 02.02.05 - 12:55 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm still not sure how you can argue that the facts back them up then and now.
Um, because they do?
Allegations of voting fraud in Racine had been reported going back as far as August, and it was reported on many, many times (see also: Andy's comment).
Then, as per Gage's Research:
I asked her if she would name the individual or group in question. She declined to name the individual
Just because she refused to name the individual doesn't mean the individual doesn't exist which, apparently, the individual very much does exist, but Gage chose to ignore that and say there was no evidence, despite said evidence staring her right in the face in her "research." So far, the Agape article and, by extension, Power Line, have been proven correct. I mean, over and over and over again.
How you can't see THAT is what I'm unsure of.
Danica McKellar topless.| Email | Homepage | 02.02.05 - 1:23 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan, ditto, ditto, ditto. Essentially, PL simply said hey, check this out and presented a link to Agape when excerpting a couple of paragraphs.
Gage's implication of PL pooh-poohing the fact-check issue is to make a mountain out of a molehill.
1) the reports of voter registration fraud had already been circulating since August (anyone remember ACT hiring ex-cons to sign up new voters? How stupid is that? Perfect cover for a sex-convict or burglar to get up close to potential victims, scope em out and come back later--anyhoo). PL, along with Cap'n Ed and countless others have already had a running list of questionable activities. The Agape article was just another in the series that ONLY interested Gage because it was her hometown.
2) Instead of taking PL to task, she should have started and ended with the substance of Agape's story. Many oher bloggers also referenced the article, why bring PL into it?
3) Because of fact-checking? Aha, Gage reports that PL blew her off during the lecture about the need to fact-check. Duh??
Since when is someone obligated to fact-check a story by linking/reference? If you're going to write a story, then by golly, you better check your facts.
If you're merely pointing out a story written by someone else, then this is where the so-called self-correcting comes into play -- IOW, I pass it along and you decide.
Reader A sees it and says, "Hey, I'm from there and I know, I have something to add."
Reader B says, "Hey, I saw something somewhere else that corroborates the story and here's the link."
Reader C says, "Hey, that story is bogus and here's why."
And so on and so forth, etc, etc.
Where in all this is PL obligated to fact-check anything within this scope? Only if he's going to write up a story .
Gage fails to appreciate the fact that this is but one type of blogging, as in linking as opposed to pundit-ting (is that a word?) or opining.
Andy | Email | Homepage | 02.02.05 - 2:53 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan,
Do me a favor. Bring me an example of Media Matters.org being 'debunked', and let us decide who is right!
thatcoloredfella | Email | Homepage | 02.03.05 - 6:03 am | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ooh, a last gasp from TCF.
I say:
Dude, do you have any idea how often (at least the DU) they've been debunked?
To which, TCF responds:
Bring me an example of Media Matters.org being 'debunked'
With sleight of hand like that, TCF, you could write op-ed pieces for the Star-Tribune.
Do you care to actually address the debate at hand, or would you like to continue to try and shift said debate?
Ryan | Email | Homepage | 02.03.05 - 6:52 am | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan,
For the record (and hopefully the last time), I haven't been able to find one single source of news information from a credible source since the end of October regarding the SPECIFIC incident of voter fraud alluded to in the original Power Line post.
Are there other incidents and allegations of voter fraud in Milwaukee and Racine being reported in the media? Yes, just yesterday I saw one. But there is no indication that they involve the issue that Gage's editorial, and Power Line's orginial post, addressed.
It's actually you that is using sleight of hand by trying to argue that other voter fraud allegations are equal to the one we're talking about here.
Danica McKellar nude. | Email | Homepage | 02.03.05 - 7:39 am | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*sigh*
John. . . ?
I asked her if she would name the individual or group in question. She declined to name the individual
And now, I ask you to define "credible," because:
http://www.fairus.org/Research/Research.cfm?ID=2579&c=54
Is FAIR any more or less credible than, say, the DU, Media Matters, or even Gage's shoddy research, for that matter?
You know going in that PL is a conservative blog. It's hardly a secret. And even Agape Press touts itself as Your source for issues-related news from a Christian perspective, which also basically screams CONSERVATIVE.
Cross-check that with Media Matters (this is for you, TCF): For the first time, Media Matters for America has put in place a system to monitor the media for conservative misinformation -- every day, in real time -- in 2004 and beyond.
They don't come right out and SAY they're a liberal spout-machine, partially funded by George Soros, but it's pretty danged obvious. Danica McKellar nude.
All of which is beside the point, anyway. You're saying that PL shouldn't have linked and cited from an article from Agape Press, to which I simply say. . . pffft. Under that reasoning, I can never again link to any news item I ever see (or circle a newspaper article and hand it to someone else) unless I first go out and try to find articles that contradict that. I certainly don't see YOU doing that, and it's pretty obvious that your's is a liberal blog, which is fine. Whatever.
I do think it's admirable, however, that you contacted Gage directly, despite what I think of her flawed journalistic research. That's a little bit of legwork I couldn't do during my workday, so kudos for that.
And, yes, I can maintain a comment debate for far longer than is probably healthy. But, I'm not as bad as that Joshua guy from www.noematic.org/mine, however. He can go on into perpetuity.
Danica McKellar nude.| Email | Homepage | 02.03.05 - 8:11 am | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh, and for what it's worth, PL offered up a rebuttal:
http://powerlineblog.com/archives/009432.php
So, TCF? You can stop holding your breath now.
Ryan | Email | Homepage | 02.03.05 - 9:05 am | #
News or Not?
I had a considerably fun time chortling over the "hostage" action figure named Cody. It really was, and still is, a good laugh.
But, it also got me thinking about what news organizations believe passes as news.
I mean, here we have a mass media that is typically almost allergic when it comes to the Internet and blogs, saying that it's difficult to fact-check stuff from the Web. Yet, that same mass media acts like a starving dog under a buffet table when it comes to postings on militant Islamic fundamentalist Web sites.
The whole hostaged doll thing speaks volumes about a media that has unwittingly become a compliant gear in the Islamic militant PR machine. There's no way the likes of CNN would think that the musings of a pro-KKK Web site would qualify as news. No, it would be shrugged off as crazy fringe lunacy.
And, I'm not saying that there isn't actual news coming from those Islamic Fundamentalist sites. The beheading of Nick Berg, after all, was widely reported, although I still wonder if the disgustingly cruel beheading of a man really should qualify as news.
Still, I don't think it's particularly healthy for the mass media, and those it serves, that the media is so quick to run with the postings of militant lunatics.
February 02, 2005
Didja' Hear About Da 90 Footer?
Caroline says: This guy isn't anyone's monkey: Sports Illustrated Story
From way downtown
Player hits 90-foot overtime shot for the win
Ryan says: "For this former quarterback, it took a Hail Mary thrown like a baseball"
Ryan says: Huh?
Caroline says: a Hail Mary pass?
Ryan says: Something's not right with those mixed metaphors.
Caroline says: yeah, but he made the basket
Ryan says: I wish I had a high school memory like that.
Ryan says: Somehow, an atomic wedgie from the school bully just doesn't equate.
Now, in an attempt to boost Web traffic, I'll post a name that's been in the news lately: Laure Manaudou. Laure Manaudou. Laure Manaudou. Laure Manaudou. Laure Manaudou.
February 01, 2005
Forged Soldiers? Soldier-Gate?
Iraq militants claim to kidnap U.S. soldier
The figure in the photo appeared stiff and expressionless. The photo's authenticity could not be confirmed.
A gun barrel was pointed at his head, and behind him on the wall is a black banner emblazoned with the Islamic profession of faith, "There is no god but God and Muhammad is His prophet."
NBC News counterterrorism analyst Evan Kohlman said some details in the picture appear to be doctored.
Threatened by his own tiny toy weapon. That's gotta suck!
“God willing, we will behead him if our female and male prisoners are not released from U.S. prisons within the maximum period of 72 hours from the time this statement has been released,” the statement said.
Oh, noooooooooooo!
This just cracks my shit right up.
UPDATE: Great commentary going on about this over at Fark.
Salmon Chanted Evening
You know cabin fever is starting to settle in when you open your refrigerator, find nothing, but then decide it's too cold outside to really do anything about it. That's what I experienced last night.
Yes, my car has a heater, but it's the uncomfortable few minutes I have to endure waiting for it to heat up that keeps me indoors. So, even though I was sufficiently hungry, I wasn't hungry enough to brave the cold and go buy groceries.
I was, however, hungry enough to scrounge. My ensuing search through the mostly bare kitchen yielded a list of ingredients that would never find its way onto Emerill Live.
I found some frozen chicken, about a breast and a quarter, and then I found some fettucine alfredo Chicken Helper way towards the back of the cupboard which, although it was probably five years old, was probably still just fine for human digestion.
Okay, so I had Chicken Helper with an insufficient amount of chicken. There HAD to be something else I could put in there. Oh, there was.
Back during Christmas, my mother sent me a gift basket of assorted cheese and meats and, although I had long since eaten all the really good stuff, there still remained a small box of preserved salmon.
I located that long-lost salmon in another cupboard, cut open the package, had my nostrils assailed by a pungent, cat food-like odor, and then I crumbled the little fish fillet into the burbling pan of fettucine alfredo.
But, I wasn't done with that culinary masterpiece quite yet. I had to KICK IT UP ANOTHER NOTCH!
You see, I like hot and spicy food. Unfortunately, the bare nature of my cupboards meant that they were pretty much devoid of spices. Even the pepper was gone. But, there was a jar of curry powder about one quarter full, so I figured that would have to suffice.
So, to recap: fettucine alfredo Chicken Helper with chicken and salmon, mixed with a goodly portion of curry powder. I know, I know. . . it sounds too good to be true. But wait, there's MORE.
Because I was lacking bread, I opted for the next, closest available item: Saltine crackers.
There I sat, dipping Saltines into my demented concoction and, I'm here to tell you, the taste was something truly unique. It was, like, ALMOST fettucine alfredo, but then, no, it was mostly salmon, but then, no, it was kind of curry. It was as if there was a small battle being fought between my taste buds, with no one army able to take supreme control.
As I fought my way through half a plate of that vile culinary disaster, I looked out the window, and one thought dominated all others:
Cabin fever sucks!
Here's a list of famous women I'm posting to boost Web traffic: Christina Aguilera. Jessica Alba. Lindsay Lohan. Tina Fey.. Carrie Ann Moss. Kate Hudson. Summer Glau. Jennifer Love Hewitt. Jennifer Connelly. Christina Aguilera. Jessica Alba. Lindsay Lohan. Jessica Alba. Jenny Garth. Jenny Garth. Alyssa Milano. Alyssa Milano. Kate Hudson. Summer Glau. Jennifer Love Hewitt. Jennifer Connelly. Evanna Lynch. Evanna Lynch. Evanna Lynch.
Just Curious Here. . .
But, what the hell is the Minneapolis Star-Tribune doing running editorial content written by "an artist and a graduate student of public affairs?"
I mean, I realize that newspapers churn through new reporters like a lumber yard cuts through trees, but what is the Strib doing running the opinion of someone arguably writing well beyond the area of her expertise (if she has expertise in anything)?
Perhaps more important: what is the Strib doing running an editorial piece that laments the lack of editorial oversight in the blogosphere, while not subjecting that same said editorial piece to EDITORIAL OVERSIGHT?
Just, you know, asking.
But, what the hell is the Minneapolis Star-Tribune doing running editorial content written by "an artist and a graduate student of public affairs?"
I mean, I realize that newspapers churn through new reporters like a lumber yard cuts through trees, but what is the Strib doing running the opinion of someone arguably writing well beyond the area of her expertise (if she has expertise in anything)?
Perhaps more important: what is the Strib doing running an editorial piece that laments the lack of editorial oversight in the blogosphere, while not subjecting that same said editorial piece to EDITORIAL OVERSIGHT?
Just, you know, asking.
Now, in an attempt to boost my site traffic, here's a repeated list of famous women: Namrata Singh Gujral. Cerina Vincent. Lauren Lee Smith. Tawny Cypress. Jayma Mays. Rose Byrne. Natalia Tena. Carice van Houten. Sonya Walger. Michelle Ryan. Alice Braga. Kristen Stewart. Katie Leung. Vera Jordanova. Mia Maestro. Ninel Conde.
Dark Knight. Heath Ledger. Batman. The Joker. Dark Knight. Heath Ledger. Batman. The Joker. Dark Knight. Heath Ledger. Batman. The Joker.
January 31, 2005
Credit Card Wisdom
I've never been in debt. Okay, that's not entirely true. Yes, I've been in the kind of debt where I had to make car payments, and I'm currently in the kind of debt that says I have to make house payments.
I've never been in credit card debt, however. Truth be told, I've never even owned a credit card. I don't trust them. I've been conditioned not to trust them thanks to many years of living with college roommates.
Most of my college roommates had this weird outlook on credit cards. Basically, they thought credit cards were magical pieces of plastic that just magically paid for things and that they were somehow immune from the the ensuing debt that came about due to excessive credit card spending.
I'll admit it: I was sort of jealous of my roommates and their magical credit cards. After all, they always seemed to have money and, if they didn't, they just whipped out their credit cards. Books? Put them on the credit card. Food? Put it on the credit card. Night out at a strip club? credit card.
And yet there I was writing checks and budgeting like a fool. I remember thinking that I was doing everything all wrong. I mean, there I would sit, meticulously lording over my finances, while my roommates went waltzing all over town swiping their credit cards with the careless glee of a six-year-old with a loaded pistol.
Then, one year, I was a roommate with a guy named Chad. Chad was actually a former high school classmate of mine. He was, and is, a tech-head. He's one of those guys who was born to know technology. Way back in elementary school, he taught me how to write simple programs for the Apple IIc, and he always just seemed to know everything about computers.
But he didn't know shit about personal finances. He whipped out any one of his many credit cards with the swiftness and ease of a Old West gunslinger. By the time we became roommates, he had already accrued over $10,000 in credit card debt.
I remember thinking what an incredibly large amount of money that seemed to be, especially when I factored in the understanding that he also received financial aid, and that he also worked. Granted, he worked at the local Brach's candy factory on the Gummi Bear line, which paid about as well as you might imagine, but it was still money, so I came to the conclusion that old Chad was a pretty carefree spender.
Well, one day, I popped into Chad's outrageously messy room where I noticed, tucked between two huge bags of pilfered defective Gummi Bears, a credit card notice that was slugged "Urgent!" and another that was slugged "Immediate Payment Required" and still another that read "We Break Fingers And Toes."
Then the calls started coming in, usually two or three a day. "Is Mr. Haugen available? We really need to speak with him." No, he's not here. "Are you sure you're not really Mr. Haugen?" Yes, I'm sure. "Well, when he comes in, have him call Mike at Discover immediately." *sound of shotgun cocking* Will do.
Chad was masterful when it came to avoiding creditors. He always seemed to leave the apartment just two or three minutes before a creditor called. It was like he had some sort of sixth sense. Which was all fine and dandy, except that I ended up being the intermediary between Chad and the creditors, so I got to absorb all the impatient anger and suspicion of basically every credit card company on the planet.
It was the day a creditor appeared, in person, at our doorstep that I realized Chad's debt situation was probably more dire than Chad cared to admit. There was a knock at the door, I answered, and a gentleman in a suit that looked both impressive and threatening stood before me. He asked to see a Mr. Chad Haugen, at which point I heard a little scuffling emanating from Chad's room as Chad scurried out the back entrance which, conveniently, was located at the far end of his bedroom.
We chatted together, the ominous creditor and me, for about an hour, waiting for Chad to get home, even though, of course, there was no way in holy hell Chad was going to make an appearance while that guy was in our apartment. I even had to produce my ID, so the creditor was satisfied that I wasn't, in fact, Chad Haugen.
After that, I believe, Chad ended up getting a loan from his parents, or somebody, so he could pay off his credit card debt at least enough to keep the creditors at bay. He eventually got a job working at IBM, which was a long-assed commute from Winona to Rochester, but paid a whole lot more than the Gummi Bear line.
As for me, Chad's experience with credit cards pretty much scared me away from plastic for good.
Take One Down, Pass It Around. . . Pee On The Snow
"I was scooping the snow from above me and packing it down below the window, and then I peed on it to melt it. It was hard and now my kidneys and liver hurt. But I'm glad the beer I took on holiday turned out to be useful and I managed to get out of there."
Link Hubris?
So, I have this mental hang-up that, to me, seems rather ridiculous. It has to do with hyper-links on this blog.
Right now, I have hyper-links set so that, if you click a link, you are whisked away from this page to whatever page I link to.
Now, there is another link method, utilized by such bloggers as Andrew Sullivan and, recently, James Lileks, whereby, when you click a hyper-link, and entirely new browser window opens up, taking you to the link while still allowing you to stay on the original page in another window.
Now, I've toyed with the idea of switching over to the "new window" method of hyperlinking, but I just can't do it. It just seems like such self-important method of linking. "Oh, here's a cool link, but since my page is also cool, it will stay open while you look at the page I link to."
On the other hand, it's convenient, I suppose, so you don't have to hit the "Back" button after you've viewed the page. But, again, that assumes that the reader really WANTS to come back to your site which, you know, isn't necessarily the case. Besides, it gives the whole impression of a pop-up ad and. . . okay, maybe I'm thinking too hard on this.
What do you think? Just a plain hyper-link, or a pop-up window? Which is better?
