The Many Faces of My Dog

Oh, look, a blog. I remembered to post to it, too!
So I have this thing where I compulsively take pics of my dog on te iPhone. Generally, I’ll post them if they’re exceptional in some way, although, to be honest, he pretty much looks the same in every photo (concerned and stressed).
So the first photo is your typical one of the Boogs. He’s sad, sleepy, and wondering why I haven’t reverently placed his entire 10 pound bag of dog food open before him.
The second is his new favorite pastime: not walking. As excited as he is to see his leash, he slows to a crawl (or stops walking completely as seen here!) after a quarter of a block.
Frustration, thy name is Boogs.

HAHAHAHAHA!

Teh stoopid, it burns. This is an actual comment on a Michelle Malkin blog post (Yes, yes, I’ll wait while you retch. Done?)

On August 27th, 2009 at 8:00 pm, CO2 Producer said:
Little Johnny comes home from school one day. He skips to the kitchen, where his mother is cooking dinner.
“Hi, Mommy,” says Johnny.
“Hello, Johnny.” Mother responds, ruffling her son’s hair playfully. “So what did you learn in school today?”
Johnny smiles, patting his hair back down. “Teacher taught me about the census,” Johnny replies.
“Oh? The census?”
“Yeah, Mommy. You know you’re supposed to fill in all the blanks on the census form, right?”
“Of course, Johnny.”
“And that when somebody from the census knocks on your door, you’re supposed to answer all their questions, right?”
“Er, I guess so.”
“Because if you don’t, families who’re linguini-isticly isolmated won’t get the food and health care an’ stuff they need.”
“You mean linguistically isolated?”
“Yeah. That means poor people.”
“Oh.”
Johnny gets an anxious look on his face. “And did you know that you gotta do it, Mom? Big Bird says you gotta answer all the census people’s questions, Mom.”
“Big Bird, huh?”
“Yeah. You gotta, or else we won’t be counted. You don’t wanna not be counted, do ya, Mommy?”
“No, of course not, Johnny.”
Little Johnny looks relieved.
“Man, so this is what they’re doing with our tax dollars.”
“Whuzzat, mommy?”
“Oh, nothing, dear.” Mother decides to change the subject. “So what else did you learn today, Johnny?”
“Oh, we learned that abortions are good for you.”
“What?!”
“Yeah, abortions are healthy. You should have an abortion, Mommy. They’re really safe now. Not like the old days when they used to do it in back alleys with coat hangers n’ stuff.”
Mother pulls her son towards her. “Johnny, this is important now. What else did your teacher teach you today?”
“Oh, she taught me lots,” Johnny says. “I didn’t quite get all of what she was sayin’, but I got the idea that babies kinda suck. They’ll eat all our food and breathe all our air when they grow up. An’ I bet they really hurt when they come out of your vagi—”
“Honey! We’ve got a really big problem here!”
“Hey, Daddy! Can you show me how to put on a condominium?”
[What you have just read was a scenario that will never, ever occur. And if it does, parents should take no issue with being lectured by the others through their children. Nor should they take issue with their children being taught about the birds and the bees by people who can do the job better and in a more timely manner than parents can.]

Yes, you dumb ignoramus, this is INDEED a scenario that will never, ever occur! Because this idea of simplistic, moronic sex education only exists in wingnut-land, where you drink Reaganade and think Newt Gingrich actually gives a flying fuck about family values beyond its effect on his wallet! Just homeschool your little ditto-head and save us the trouble of having to offer him free and reduced school lunches. You’re draining my Social Security benefit pool.

The Lion

I wanted to make a comment on the hugely momentous death of Senator Ted Kennedy.
I’d like to preemptively note my statements by saying that I think the death of a person is occasion to celebrate that person WHILE remembering their human foibles. However, it is the end of that person’s life; dwelling on their shortcomings seems awfully petty and shrill at this point.
Now, onto my comments.
It is exceedingly funny that, no matter how flowery they get in their prose, a conservative’s desire to boil someone down to their personal failings is always the equivalency of, “but you
stinkin’ libruls do it, too!” With the death of Kennedy, the Chappaquidick comments have come out of the woodwork and almost every single justification I’ve seen falls somewhere along the line of, “oh, yeah? Well, I bet you just can’t WAIT for Dubya to die.”
Funny thing? I can wait! I have zero desire to dance on the man’s grave. In fact, the closest to dancing on a person’s grave was the death of Jerry Falwell and that was mostly of the “well, hallelujah the asshole can’t blame hurricanes on us anymore.” Since he was condemning me up until the moment of his death, I felt relief more than anything. With a politican like George W. Bush, my interest in the man begins and ends with his time in office and what he did there. Now, did I find a lot of the unique circumstances around him interesting and worthy of comment/investigation/discovery? Yes, of course. His military service was suspect, his actions taken while president to erode our rights was very possibly criminal…even today, I support the actions of our current administration to look into this stuff.
BUT GUESS WHAT?!?!?! If they go through with their investigation and it results in nothing, I will respect it! You know why? I respect our rule of law, even when it doesn’t agree with me or what I think should go. This is where I apparently diverge greatly from my more right-wing friends and counterparts. Apparently, it doesn’t really matter what our legal system has decided, it matters what I think should have happened and, therefore, it is up to me to be judge, jury and executioner.
I daresay not a soul around today condemning Ted Kennedy for the Chappaquadick incident was there. Were you? I’ll wait while you check to see if you were even alive when it happened. So, most outrage on that centers on the fact that, according to your own personal beliefs, justice was not served in that instance. He’s a murderer! He killed a woman! Yes, maybe, it’s conceivable. It’s also conceivable what happened that night was precisely as he said it, no matter how implausible it is in your head. Perhaps he was merely guilty of a stupid thing that caused someone to die. It’s fascinating to me how humans desire, not retribution, not redemption, but above all, punishment for the shortcomings of people, especially when they disagree with them. There’s not a thing this man could have done in his life that would have redeemed him in the eyes of his opponents for a crime that our own legal system didn’t incriminate him of.
But it doesn’t matter, does it? Because liberals do it! We’re screaming for blood on Mark Sanford, John Ensign, and the whole holy host of Republicans who can’t keep their dick in their pants for longer than it takes to say, “the sanctity of marriage.” And I really do hate to drudge up the hypocrisy of the right, so I won’t even go into that. I’ll only say, again, my interest in that particular shortcoming is how it fails those particular politicians.

So, after all that – a crime, a coverup, an investigation and trial – thank GOD we have our republicans to dig into the trenches and do our righteous condemnation for us! And god forbid
punishment for crimes be about anything BUT punishment. No, not redemption. Never that.
So, on Ted Kennedy’s death, the politicization of his life continues…unless it’s about healthcare. Because that’s just disrespectful.

(A small addendum, because another funny thing is happening in the news right now and it’s cracking me up. It plays into the the old IOKIYAR idea – it’s ok if you’re a Republican – to do things free of condemnation so long as you’re a Reaganite. In this case, a US Representative from Kansas used the phrase “Great White Hope” when talking about finding someone to stand up to this Administration and be the new Republican leader. People are TRIPPING over themselves to say this thing is anything but racist. Now, I cannot speak for Rep. Lynn Jenkins. It’s possible she said this phrase in total ignorance of its meaning. Certainly, that’s possible. What is NOT possible in my mind is how anyone can state it’s decidedly NOT racist unless they, too, are ignorant of its origins. Plain and simple. But facts and truth never stopped a little political obfuscation, did it?)

(addendum post-posting! Someone somewhere mentions this, along with the phrase “tar baby,” as not being inherently racist. DUMB DUMB! Of course it’s racist. The fucking phrase entered popular use PRECISELY as a race-baiting phrase. It’s more of a dog whistle now since time and disuse have made it fuzzy in most people’s minds, but that doesn’t change what it is)

Some Disjointed Relationship Thoughts

I read a great blog post – old – on a friend’s blog (which seems to have since been removed; I think Google Reader just cached it so I could still see it) that got me thinking about relationships; gay ones in particular.
Now, at their core, I don’t think a lesbian or gay relationship is different at all from a heterosexual one, except maybe given our propensity to be in more alternative-style relationships – but I digress -, but we certainly seem to opt out of our relationships at a high rate.
What I found interesting about this friend’s post was that he mentioned other friends of his who broke up because one had found another guy who did it for him. My friend went on about “it” and how that can change over the years because you’re freakin’ human and you grow and you change…and he’s right!
But! (you knew I had a but, right?)
My take is, a person like that isn’t looking for a relationship to grow or change, or isn’t mature enough to understand that that “it” thing that made him so happy back in the day isn’t sustainable. Things grow and change and you look for those new things that make you happy (like my friend, I love the little things that make life different with my bf right now…I usually wake up several hours before him, make some coffee, read news, play a game, whatever, and I have a cup of coffee ready for him when he gets up…we do our own thing, in other words). The initial attraction “thing” can and will go away, no doubt! Things I didn’t know about the BF when I met him might be things which either infuriate me OR make me love him even more. And I hope he thinks the same about me (god knows I’m not perfect!).
However, this friend who found that new person who pulls his strings isn’t in anything for the long haul. He’s on a lifelong search for that current “it.” As will undoubtedly happen, his new find will eventually peter out and “it” will be gone and he’ll find it with someone else for a short time…
Find, burn, find, burn. It’ll be a continuous cycle until he learns to settle for those changes and to be happy with them.

Ok, this is a bit disjointed (I’m working! I’ve started and stopped it multiple times but I’m too lazy to edit myself), but I hope you see my point. If you’re lucky enough to find yourself in a long-term relationship but you’re finding you’ve got the jitters, take stock in what you do have for a moment. Find out if what you’re missing is just the newness of the relationship-I’ll be it is!

A Few Small Thoughts on Healthcare

Ok, oppose healthcare reform all you want, I honestly don’t care.
However, please don’t be a moron about it. If you need to find a reason to oppose it, stop making shit up.
Perhaps the most insane one is this bizarre idea that government-run healthcare is so intrinsically bad that we’ll be linin’ up olds and ‘tards to kill ‘em!
Allow me to offer a little bit of personal history here.
My dad’s oldest sister was born and lived her entire life with a severe mental disability. She had, for the most part, the mind of an elementary school child. Bear in mind she was in her 40s when I was born and I can’t remember a time in my life where she could maintain an even level of conversation with ME! So that tells you something right there.
Now, people are right about one thing: people with special needs to require more medical care. And why wouldn’t they? They’re not quite as capable of taking care of themselves on their own and are often susceptible to other illnesses.
My aunt was under a lot of medical care her entire life. She lived with my grandmother until grandma died in 1990. From there, she lived with my aunt for a short while, but no one was able to assume full-time care of her and so she was relegated to an assisted living home (where, by the way, she was so loved they came to her funeral when she finally passed…and still talk about her today).
Now, all of that care, for the entire lifespan of a 60-something year old with severe mental disabilities, adds up, right?
Guess who paid for it?
I’ll wait while you make a list of all the private health insurance companies and check them off one by one.
Yeah. The federal government. They took care of her because there’s not a health insurance company on the planet who would insure her. And the amazing thing is, not ONCE did the government put her before a panel and decide whether or not she could continue being a drain on the precious resources needed to run two wars and consider placing military forces on our own native soil.

So, Sarah Palin, while YOU might be wealthy enough to afford your own private care for Trig, not everyone can. The government is in a unique position to help its citizens out. That’s not socialism (or Nazism, or even Communism, no matter how loudly the Right screams and tries to lump all of those into the same pile). This idea that our government is somehow required to create some Darwinian (it’s funny cuz they hate evolution!) jungle where only the best Americans can survive and thrive is patently ridiculous.

I’m still waiting for all the blowhards railing about the destruction of our country due to rising socialism to opt out of Medicare and Social Security. Go ahead! Tell me how your private insurance is better than government-run healthcare while all signs point to higher patient satisfaction with Medicare than private insurance.
So what exactly is your argument?

Seriously

Either you love this as much as I do, or you have no soul. Period.

Concert Tonight!

Saw a new band, Super Mirage, in the lounge at the Public Theatre tonight. Great band (one of their members is a part of the Fabulous Entourage).

A Little Response

My friend Jonathan is one of those remarkably rare creatures: a gay conservative.
And he lives in New York! Watch it.
Anyway, he blogs now and I find him a fascinating read. We do agree about a lot of things, but obviously we disagree on many things (not the least of which he’s something of a libertarian/conservative and I’m kind of one of those crazy latte-sipping liberal commie socialist bastards). However, I love talking to him about politics, mainly because he’s informed and smart (just don’t quote Gingrich on me, Jonathan!)
Anyway, I read an interesting post of his this morning and tried to respond there, but a long-winded response got eaten, so I thought I’d try to recreate it here:

I think the whole idea of “reverse racism” is sort of figuratively right, but I agree with Jonathan that it’s not really something that exists. Racism, as it’s applied in the real world, really refers to a majority (or plurality) group being able to enact its prejudice (based on race) on a minority group. So reverse racism isn’t really something that can exist. Inasmuch as Sotomayor could be said to be prejudiced against white firefighters, she was able to apply said prejudice against them in her group court ruling.
However, it’s not really racist. But, if you want to call it that, it’s stupid to call it reverse racism anyway, since it suggests racism is a white man’s crime.
But, oh, wait, it is! The White Man(tm) is, after all, still the majority group in this country despite not literally being the most populous group (women outnumber men, just to start.) However, it is the one still wielding the most power, so I’d never expect Jefferson Beauregard Sessions or Grassley or whomever to loosen their grip on that power. However, I’d love someone to point out my opinion on why calling it reverse racism only makes them look bad and see them stutter some more (Sessions already does a great Foghorn Leghorn)

Jeff Sessions Explains It All for You

So I guess we can’t expect Ruth Bader Ginsburg to vote with Roberts, Scalia and Alito since she’s a Jew, and Sandra Day O’Connor might be Irish (clearly of the Black kind) but wouldn’t either, but now Sotomayor must vote the way any other Puerto Rican judge does.

Thank you, Jefferson Beauregard Sessions, for laying it out so succinctly.

Wow. Obama conspiracy theorists are unhinged.
Not only has an army reservist filed suit to prevent his deployment to Afghanistan on the basis that Obama is not legally President, but the commenters on this story are insane!
Read ‘em and weep

Honestly. Fear for the future of this country (and not because we’re becoming a heathen socialistic welfare homosexual gay-monkey-sex state)