On The Same Old Insane and Inane Blame Game

Today the DOW Jones industrial dropped it like its hot and crashed 777.68 points, the DOW finishing at 10365.45. As expected both candidates and parties came out swinging at the closing bell, hoping to score a TKO while the market already lay long motionless upon the canvas. It was the most shameful display from politicians and media that I have seen in a long time, perhaps ever and it is so utterly mind blowing in its stupidity that it is almost beyond belief. Indeed, if even I think it’s stupid; it’s pretty bad, considering I desecrated my brain long ago with barbiturate misuse. In fact, I didn’t really realize I had a problem until I forgot what a barbiturate was and tried abusing Barbasol with very unpleasant results, but that’s another blog entry altogether.


JP Morgan: "You’re a big huge company, why don’t you back that bank up? It’s my money Washington’s playing with; back that bank up!"


Though JP Morgan/Chase is acquiring banking firms at low cost and making out pretty well, much as they did during the Great Depression (I smell a conspiracy), the rest of us are sitting on the edge of our seats waiting for any solution to come out of Washington, wondering if we will keep our jobs and anxious to see if there will be such a thing as credit next week, though if we don’t have credit, there is a silver lining; at least we won’t have to put up with that Freecreditreport.com ass anymore. At least at this point, I for one don’t care whose fault it is (it’s Christopher Lambert’s) and am more concerned about what is being done or could be done on both sides of the fence to ensure the economic security of our nation and I don’t want to hear the bickering anymore, but rather some solutions.

Yet, the media is flooded with superficial, completely ridiculous, shallow attacks by both parties upon the opposing party and anyone with half a brain knows it. I actually heard on CNN some guy saying that McCain didn’t do enough to convince Republicans to vote on the bill, so the fault rests with him and the Republicans. What a completely stupid, inane globalization. Way to scrutinize just one side of the political spectrum there chief, without applying it to the opposite, like any other reasonable person would. You don’t deserve to be on Wolf Blitzer’s obtrusive Situation Room screen there sport, nor does Jack Cafferty for that matter, but then again, that’s just fodder for another blog. Here is the thing; if you are going to apply a principle to scrutinize people then that principle has to cover everyone, not just those who you are opposed to. Many Democrats didn’t vote for the bill either, yet you don’t hear Republicans blaming Pelosi for not pulling in enough Democratic votes, though the Republicans are saying that her speech beforehand where she tore into President Bush was unfair, which I agree with for a couple reasons, and it had worked in driving some Republicans away from voting aye. If this is the case, these individuals should not be allowed to sit in a senate chair ever again. Because someone’s words are harsh to you, you think that’s a reasonable catalyst to not give approval for a bill? What a way to put the country on the back burner and your personal feelings above the security of the nation. How petty, why don’t you all grow a pair?

We do this with congress all the time though, that is try and batter one party or another instead of viewing them as what they truthfully are, a group made up of individuals. If you want to attack someone, at least have the sense to attack someone individually on how they voted or what they have done, not according to what another constituent of their party said or did. I have done this before in the past and I readily admit it, however I now realize how dumb it truly is.

Another funny thing is that both the parties and presidential candidates claim that now is not the time for partisan politics, but then proceeded to attack each other in the exact same sentence. May I remind them that with the elections so close, now is not the time for such complete and explicit contradictions. With people like these getting elected, is it any wonder that any discourse about the goings on in Washington or in local government is met with a type of hate filled political polarization reminiscent of an almost racial tension from those who disagree with your views?

I think some people are lazy and would rather over characterize a group to attack, rather than actually have to learn something by looking up facts, doing a little research and applying it to the topic or the individual they are complaining or concerned about. It is much easier that way, because you can hold on blindly to your bias without ever really being challenged. To some people there is nothing worse than finding out that what you believed in so strongly was false and that you may have been wrong. It’s just easier for someone not to put themselves in that position where they might be challenged, for some would rather go with the mob rather than follow real solid data or logic.

Why is it that too often our first reaction when things go wrong is to point fingers? Though it may have relevance in the long term, in the short term, when real solutions and vital decisions have to be made, it is completely counterproductive to what needs to be accomplished. The thing is, people feel this situation is beyond their control so something or someone needs to be blamed. Yet, in this race to attach and associate blame, we frequently overlook who or what is truly responsible. Instead of a hurricane, its FEMA or President Bush; instead of two kids shooting up a school at Colombine, its movies, TV and Ramstein; instead of individual companies, its President Carter, Reagan, Bush, Democrats or Republicans; instead of Bristol Palin; its Sarah Palin, so on and so forth. If one is to be held accountable then yes, by all means hold them personally to account, but people just arbitrarily placing blame because of the letter after someone’s name is a flawed completely stupid way of thinking and it unfairly undermines the Republicans and Democrats who are actually hard at work doing great things or the great things they have already accomplished.

Truthfully, the most respectable thing I heard come out of anyone’s mouth today was from Arizona Senator Jon Kyl (R is the letter after his name), who when pressed for his thoughts on Democrats refused to push blame upon anyone only stating that people like Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank and other Democrats did do some good, hard work on the bill. Its attitudes like that we should be encouraging in society and especially amongst our political leaders.


Thank you for reading. Barbasol time!

On Choke

Victor: "The world tells us whether we're heros or victims, but we can decide for ourselves."

Bring the kids because this movie is rated R for strong sexual content, nudity and language. Indeed, a wonderful family film.

Staring: Sam Rockwell, Anjelica Huston, Kelly MacDonald, Brian William Henke and an overabundance of T & A.

After watching Choke, I have to say I have never felt so conflicted about a movie in all my life. I attended a screening of the film, not knowing anything about it except that it was written by the same person who wrote “Fight Club,” which I thoroughly enjoyed. I don’t know what I was expecting, but I certainly wasn’t expecting Choke’s subject matter, nor its explicit soft-core porn content.

Sam Rockwell plays Victor Mancini; a scamming sex addict that works as a villager in a mock up colonial period town and who takes advantage of good Samaritans to keep his mother Ida (Anjelica Huston) in the hospital as she slowly slips deeper and deeper into dementia. He accomplishes this by faking choking attacks in high quality restaurants, hence the movie title Choke, and through this tactic he somehow entices his victims to send him money in the mail.

The movie can be very funny at times, but when it is all said and done it really just amounts to some kind of darkly disturbing psychotic love story porn. In fact, the one word I would use to describe this movie is “disturbing”. The movies main topics are sex addiction, drug abuse, child abuse or neglect, kidnapping and rape. Furthermore (spoiler alert!), Victor soon discovers that he might have come into existence by being cloned from the foreskin of Jesus. For some reason Jesus bashing is something that movie writers love to do nowadays, though in all fairness at the end Choke tends to approach it more satirically than say Hamlet 2, but this line of so called creativity is getting so old that it is almost cliché and I find it to be in bad taste no matter what the context. When a movie goes beyond the characters and plot lines to try and belittle any group of people, belief structure, disability or handicap, I feel it shows a real lack of real creativity and intelligence as well as compassion.

Sex addiction is definitely one of today’s hot-button topics and Choke does more than just touch on it. You are frequently assaulted with overly graphic sex scenes and nudity and after David Duchovney’s recent exploits, of which I am still waiting to hear the details, the timing could not be more perfect for such a film to come out. I must admit however, that I was laughing pretty heartily during the movie, but I just cannot recommend it; that is unless you were a big fan of those movies that came on Cinemax at two in the morning in 1995. Otherwise, you might find the constant sex and nudity to be just a little too obtrusive, as I did. Why is it that all the movies that win at Sundance need to be so depraved? Movies can communicate the complexities of human nature to their audience without being overabundantly crude. The human brain has the ability to conceive of points or ideas without having them explicitly portrayed and I would say that the vileness of this movie transcends and negates any positives the movie may have had in the comedic aspect, dialog or dramatic effect.

Though the movie does have a little twisted twist at the end, it is certainly no Fight Club. However, one thing that this movie did have in common with Fight Club was soap. Not that Choke had any soap in it whatsoever, but after watching Choke I felt so dirty I had to wash my eyes out with a strong anti-bacterial. So in conclusion, this movie was just way too disturbing and despite some loud guffaws and a bit of heart I am going to have to be hypocritical and give this movie 2 out of 4 containers of Johnson and Johnson Softwash liquid soap.

Choke opens September 26th in select and unlucky cities.

On The Worst Ads Vol. #360rs

At times ads aren't bad themselves; its where they are placed that really jacks it all up.

When you think of PETA, you think of tasteful ads and protests. Again, here they do not disappoint.

Now ShamWoW! (Obviously trying to capitalize off World of Warcraft if you ask me... Come on! Wow? Just a coincidence? Please...)

Here is a weird piece of information for ya. The man with the sagging eye's name is Vince Offer. Yes, the very same Vince Offer who wrote/directed and was featured in the great strait to DVD movie in 1999: The Underground Comedy Movie.

And it even stars Joey Buttafuoco



"Hey! I'm Joey Buttafuoco ova hea!!"


There are some commercials that instill a image in your head that makes you never want to return to that company for any service whatsoever. This is certainly the case with hotels.com and their horribly disturbing ad.

What do you think of PETA and that last hotels.com commercial there Feo?

Ah, yes. Good Feo. Good dog.

On My Current Subscription to The McCain/Palin Ticket

What a week it has been. It has been no secret that in prior weeks the economy has been in a downward spiral, however this week it has gone into a complete uncontrollable tailspin. It occurred to me that because of these events, it would be a great opportunity for me to focus on the candidates to see how they both react in a crisis, and after careful review I have decided to support John McCain for president.

Yes, yes, I was pretty much leaning McCain already, but for some reason I had this urge to give Obama the benefit of the doubt week after week, but after this week and his lack of manifesting strong leadership capability, my vote now goes to the McCain/Palin ticket. In case anyone cares (I won’t blame you if you don’t) I will mention a few reasons why.

Monday, after the feces hit the prop concerning AIG, McCain quickly responded to the nation wide financial peril by saying: “You know that there's been tremendous turmoil in our financial markets and Wall Street. And people are frightened by these events. Our economy, I think, still, the fundamentals of our economy are strong, but these are very, very difficult times. And I promise you, we will never put America in this position again. We will clean up Wall Street. We will reform government."

When Obama jumped right away on this statement, taking McCain completely out of context, I thought that perhaps McCain might have really truly said something completely stupid, but then as I thought about it more objectively I realized that McCain was acting as any leader should during a time of financial crisis. He was reassuring the country about the economy. He came out on the stump declaring that though things looked bad that there was still room for hope and pride in the economy of this great nation. Such statements are needed by our leaders in times of trouble; that we the public may rise up from the ashes of disaster with an optimistic motivation so we may strive ahead to accomplish any task that needs to be completed to better society as a whole. It is extremely important and if we look at it in the context of history; a necessity.

Obama did not do this, but decided his time was better spent attacking McCain on his words and statements in his past, which I feel is counterproductive to what thoughts and feelings a leader should inspire within those who look to him for guidance in times of trouble. Indeed, the only outcome I see when one tries to pass the buck and play the blame game is that we end up focusing on the past when one should be looking to the future in order to find the appropriate solutions in such a volatile situation. I, of course, blame it all on the illuminati though. Mark my words, they have their hand in everything, from the Knights Templar, to my cable going out last night, that spoiled milk in the fridge and Hannah Montana. Sneaky scheming bastards. There is nothing we can really do though, they are too powerful and we might as well just sit back and watch Miley Cyrus usher in the New World Order.

Anyways, it is true that in such an intense, sudden and possibly explosive situation, one may tend to misspeak or draw false conclusions, especially concerning the miniscule amount of information that is available to the candidates. When juxtaposed with the current president, they certainly don’t have nearly as much incoming information, but at the same time, are held to a higher degree of scrutiny than the prevailing commander-in-chief. Therefore, I felt it was only fair to give both candidates some degree of leniency concerning their initial judgments.

However, today McCain came out articulating rather specifically a way to deal with the situation, while Obama said he would wait to hear the plan from the White House before saying anything. When I heard that I couldn’t help but think he wanted to wait on McCain and Bush for two reasons. First, that he could jump all over their plans and attack them on their words, which would benefit him while not really obligating him to offer any real plans of his own. Second, that he could somehow take the credit for any appropriate action proposed by the Republican’s and attempt to connect it to himself.

This may seem unfair, but it hit me that this is a large component of why Obama is so successful. Not only is he extremely articulate, but he has the unique ability to be extremely vague at the same time. This gives him two huge advantages: one, he can interject a subjective interpretation of his own words anytime into a comment made by the opposing party and relate them to one another as long as it pertains to the same topic. By stretching his words to fit that mold he can then claim that his opponents are merely following his lead. Throw in the statement, “I have consistently said…” and it becomes an extremely brilliant, effective tool.

Secondly, Obama will never say anything unless there is a backdoor to the statement. This is a way to retreat from what he has said in case he is ever challenged. This is why you will never hear the words “yes,” or “no” come out of Obama’s mouth, unlike McCain who frequently answers in such ways. Obama knows that if he says “yes” or “no” then his statements become concrete and he cannot dance around them, which he is quite skillful at doing I may add. These tactics have been extremely evident recently when he speaks about foreign relations and the economy. Another trick he utilizes, as do I at times, occurs when he is asked a question which he really has no answer for. He simply changes the subject to one he knows more about. Tangents and attacks are truly his friends, as we saw today when he took questions about the economy; he decided to swerve around the question and speak on education and health care. Important issues yes, but in the middle of a national panic, not a relevant topic to visit.

I have noticed McCain do similar things, but with less frequency and with what has happened the last few days within the stock market, I believe McCain showed himself to be a stronger, more capable leader and one that we will truly need in days like these. He has also showed himself to be polarized to the Bush administration and I felt truly inspired by his words. We need leaders that inspire, that are willing to stand before the people and bring them hope despite difficult circumstances and not someone who throws his arms in the air and says, “We are done for! By the way; it was his fault.” I am not willing to concede, as of yet, that Obama is incapable of this and he may make a great president further on down the line, but concerning my own observations during the past two weeks; he is not ready to lead.

"That's it man! Game over man! Game over!"


This is not the first time Obama has displayed this either. If you recall a few months ago before hurricane season peaked, Obama wanted to dip into the Strategic Oil Reserves to relieve some of the consumers pain at the pump. If he was in charge and all that oil was released into the market then there would have been no help for those caught in the devastation caused by hurricanes Gustav and Ike. However, I always try to remember that with our politicians no effort can be made without shortcomings, yet McCain consistently seems to come out ahead in terms of presidential leadership and that is why, as of now, the McCain/Palin ticket will have my vote this November. You don’t need to agree with me, that’s cool. In fact, I really do welcome civil, intelligent debate no matter who you are. I above all else would just like to encourage anyone who reads these silly words to register to vote this year. What should always be remembered is that an election doesn’t really reflect the true condition, ideals and needs of country as we might think, but rather just the condition, ideals and needs of those who cast their ballots. Many states, if not all, offer online voter registration. I could have found every state website for you all and posted the links, but its just so much easier to try and persuade you to Google it.

I’m just sayin…

On The Already Infamous Obama Lipstick on a Pig Comment

Try as I might, I just cannot wrap my mind around the possibility that this was just an innocent comment taken out of context. The media seems to have no problem defending Obama, but I have looked at this incident from all angles and I just cannot defend what was said in good conscience, nor can I be completely ignorant of its meaning. I been trying to spin this in every way possible, but even if I give Obama the benefit of the doubt, I still come to the conclusion that what was said was a huge lapse in judgment. Furthermore, his apparent refusal to apologize for the statement is equally disturbing and gives credence to my thought that the unfortunate utterance was, indeed, intended.

On Tuesday night in Virginia during a town-hall style gathering for Obama, he said, “You can put lipstick on a pig, but its still a pig.” The response of the crowd was one of laughter and thunderous applause. My response was quite different; that Obama just may have flushed his political aspirations down the crapper. Surely, this possible Commander-in-Chief couldn’t be that ignorant of what he just said, right? Right? I think any reasonable person, who truly didn’t mean to say what was said and misspoke, would see the crowds reaction, how it was received and quickly retract the statement, adding something to the likes of, “Whoa, I didn’t mean it that way, my bad,” or something similar. This of course was not the case and today he refused to apologize for the statement, saying that the media twisted it, as if drawing the conclusion that it was an attack on Sarah Palin was a completely illogical one.

Let us all assume for a moment that this comment wasn’t made right on the heels of the RNC, where Sarah Palin mentioned her famous “pitbull in lipstick” line. Let us all say, rather, that it was made six months down the road, assuming we had the time, which we don’t because of the election in November. If this was the case though, I could see Obama’s argument that it was taken out of context or that people were overreacting and being hypersensitive. However, this is NOT the case. Instead, it hasn’t even been a week since Palin’s comment, where she mentioned both an animal and lipstick. Then, at this event, Obama mentions an animal and lipstick and we are expected to believe that it was an innocent coincidence.

I was shocked, because I thought it was stupid, and surely Obama was smarter then that, but with how the media is writing it off, he may have been brilliant after all. People say his comment was in context and that’s why he couldn’t have meant it in such a way. I say, of course it was in context! He is an eloquent politician, and with his skill in dodging questions, I can completely see how he intended to say what he was feeling and have the ability to back out of it at any time because of this “in context” loophole. Truth is, he obviously wasn’t going to come out and say, “Sarah Palin is a pig.” No, Obama is more subtle and smarter than that and everyone has bought it hook line and sinker.

We should also take a look at the crowd surrounding him. They, more than anybody watching on TV, would understand the context, and their response is very telling. They completely knew what he was saying, who it was to and why. They even stood up laughing and cheering, but we the public and media are being unreasonable when thinking this way? Obama didn’t even apologize to those who may have been offended, nor did he apologize to Sarah Palin for the comment. If I had said something on a national stage and didn’t mean how it was being interpreted, I would be so horrified that my statement was being perceived in such a way I would be out in front of the media ASAP attempting to make amends and retracting or clarifying my statement. However, this is not what Obama is doing, rather he is just blaming the media and public for mishearing the exact words that came out of his mouth.

Another argument being used to defend Obama is what could he have possibly gained by saying such a thing? Why would he say it? It makes no political sense, so therefore anyone who draws the conclusion that Obama meant it in a derogatory way is stupid. You can’t be serious! The conclusion is completely based in logic and reason, and it is not as if his words were really twisted; no it is word for word what he said himself. So what reason would he have for saying it? I doubt if Obama was still ahead in the polls this would have came out of his mouth at all. Truth is, he is beginning to panic and is feeling under pressure by Sarah Palin’s popularity and the Republican party gaining ground in the polls. He is angry and is responding just like millions and millions of other American’s would. His judgment is decreasing as his anger increases and if I were him and truly repentant I would be jumping at the chance to take it back, but he won’t because he is pissed and meant exactly what he said.

To which of us has this never happened before? I have said several things in anger that I wish I could take back, but let us remember that just because it is said in anger doesn’t give anyone an excuse for uttering such things. No, the simple fact is that Obama is getting nervous and his tact is going out the window and I believe it will continue to happen if the Republicans keep improving in the polls. It was really quite genius of Obama if you think about it, he completely and explicitly expressed himself, and is brilliantly able to flip the blame elsewhere. Anyway you slice it though, what occurred was a huge lapse in judgment. It could also be said that it gives us real insight into Obama’s character and how he would respond under pressure. Yes, what he said is truly an old southern saying, but one Obama stretched and used to his advantage to express himself, his true feelings about Palin, and still have the ability to back out of his statement whenever anyone raised the issue. He must think people are stupid, but they aren’t and people are seeing through it, even if the media doesn’t want to.

On Breaking News Over at BSNBC

Due recent in depth studies by the federal government, it has come to my attention that my readers are the most brilliant, good looking people in the world (keep reading and recommend to your friends!) and of this fact I am truly convinced. Therefore, it probably has not escaped your attention that I have been rather critical of MSNBC within my past blogish musings. Well, today I actually have something positive to say about the almost obtrusively bias cable network.

Honestly, the possibility that I would live to see the day where MSNBC would exercise sound judgment in upholding some kind of journalistic integrity has never even occurred to me. Indeed, I suspected the lost city of Atlantis would arise from the ocean depths before such an event would ever occur; her unstoppable robot armies marching across the surface of the globe, conquering every nation in her path.

Over the weekend it was announced that Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann would be stepping down as anchors from the election coverage and go back behind the commentary desk where they belong. As much as I hate to admit it, due to my disagreements with the men, they do have a right to express their views, but I believe an anchor position requires a tact and professionalism which lies beyond what Matthews and Olbermann were willing to provide to their audience. The need for quality reporting is especially true when one is covering such an important event like a political convention or election.

Even amongst channels like CNN and Fox News, there are traits of political bias. However, there are a couple important differences between MSNBC, CNN and Fox News. The latter two keeps editorial commentators separate from anchor roles and provide ample guests and dialog along both sides of the aisle. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for MSNBC. Often, only the Democratic viewpoints are represented and vital information concerning the issues is frequently omitted.

I, of course, have been complaining endlessly within my blog, e-mails to MSNBC and the Huffington Post (Who, by the way, felt my comments weren’t worth posting; probably because I wasn’t defecating on right wing ideology.) and apparently many others were as well, including those who actually work for NBC and MSNBC. The network finally took a couple steps to improve their election programming, but because there continually seems to be this innate underlying motif of misinformation, I still find them unbearable to watch. I will commend them though for removing Matthews and Olbermann from the anchor position. It’s a step in the right direction. The most amazing thing about this situation is that it gives a little confirmation to some of my past blog articles. So, perhaps my blog isn’t complete BS after all, though I do concede certainly most of it is. I don’t know whether to be encouraged by this or scared. Very scared.

On Sarah Palin and The Bridge to Nowhere Flip-Flop

Just when you thought this whole flip-flopping issue had finally quieted down within the confines of political mudslinging and the media, Sarah Palin has to join the McCain ticket and it starts anew. This time it has to do with Sarah Palin’s so-called, “bridge to nowhere.” This whole deal concerns the Gravina Island bridge in Ketchikan, Alaska that she supported when she ran for governor in 2006. However, she changed her mind and decided not to build the bridge, but rather spend the money on what she and voters felt were the more important transportation issues. We of course do not get the full story from the media, for some reason, and again the Anchorage Daily News comes out on top of the national media when it comes to in depth quality reporting.

Support for the bridge dramatically declined amongst the Governor and people as the cost of building the bridge kept climbing, eventually to the point that it would cost the tax payer 400 million dollars to complete. The Anchorage Daily News even wrote an editorial pleading to the Governor that she would cancel the building of the bridge, which she did due to the climbing cost of the project and the fact that the public wanted more pressing issues to be accomplished. This bridge, that the Governor and public concluded was not worth the time, money or effort, was then shot down by Sarah Palin who worked in correlation to sound fiscal responsibility, her previously demonstrated views on cutting excessive arbitrary spending, and the will of the public. How that is bad, I do not know.

Thing is, I have always disliked the flip-flopping argument amongst all the candidates. What is important is the outcome, not how one reached their conclusion. We, the voters, do this all the time concerning issues within our personal lives, but cease to think twice about them. Even when friends, family and co-workers do the same it usually doesn’t occur to us, probably because its not in the public arena and blasted all over TV. However, concerning our politicians it, becomes issue because apparently everyone thinks that our elected officials need to be above the normal human thought process, emotion or mistake. We should examine our elected officials, this much I am not disputing, however we need to keep our expectations reasonable as well. I guarantee that every one in politics or running for political office has these flip-flops in their past. (Now to plagiarize a little off one of my previous blog posts concerning the subject...)

I don't mind a political figure changing their perspective on important issues, for socially our country is in constant flux concerning all issues. We need our candidates to be sensitive and not ignorant of this. The constant change and fluctuation of conditions and opinions within all forms of communal issues requires this; that our political applicant is willing to concede and alter his political views for the good of the people if such a situation arises, especially if that situation remains unforeseen.

This term, "flip-flop," however needs to be distinguished from a real relevant change in policy, and one that is completely arbitrary. This is the first factor that should be looked at in defining a true "flipfloppian," viewpoint. Is the change in policy relevant to pressing political or social circumstances? Second, that catalyst which has shifted ones perspective needs to be examined as well, if there even is one. Could it be concluded that it was a reasonable decision based on the data avalible? As mentioned before, because the catalysts concerning Sarah Palin and the bridge to nowhere were sound fiscal responsibility, the cutting arbitrary spending, and the will of the public; I feel her decisions cease to be a flip-flop because her conclusion had a solid, logical basis.

I therefore conclude that this flip-flopping argument holds no water realistically. If you are going to use this argument against Palin, which is your right as a voter, remember, you have to use the same degree of scrutiny against EVERY politician. Good luck in November.

Just because I hate whiny musicians...