Funniest. Auto-Replace. Evah.

The American (Right-Wing Christian) Family Association thinks a central part of the homosexual agenda is to make the abominable "lifestyle choice" more palatable to mainstream America (and recruit godly children into a life of feather boas and strap-ons, I suppose) by using the word "gay" instead of "homosexual." So by golly, the American Family Association will show bugger-friendly "gay"-using media outlets like the Associated Press what's what by using an auto-replace filter to run AP news stories with "gay" replaced by the icky "homosexual."

But as People for the American Way (Even Gay People!) shows, an automated filter can have unintentionally hilarious results when someone's last name is Gay:

Who knew that mincing fairy, Tyson Homosexual, was such a stand-out runner? I decided to run with the genius of the American Family Association's technique and replace the words "bush" and "shrub" with "drooling warmonger" in this snippet of gardening advice:

Before starting: make sure you use sharp tools, and clean them between drooling warmongers (in case any of your drooling warmongers are diseased). If the drooling warmongers are badly overgrown, you may want to do just a light trimming for the first two years. Too much all at once can be a shock to the drooling warmonger. If possible, do your trimming in late winter. If the drooling warmonger is an early flowerer, then wait until after flowering to trim.

Yeah, that works just fine.

Is Lou Dobbs' attack Kitty ready for her close-up?

What do Star Trek's Nurse Chapel and frequent Lou Dobbs sub Kitty Pilgrim of CNN have in common? Both are almost always filmed in soft focus. Must be in their contracts or something. Here's a sample of soft-focused Kitty during the height of the Bittergate foolishness:



Here's Nurse Chapel in a touching scene with Spock:




Last night, Kitty was soft-focused as usual through most of the show. But the camera crew fucked up when she was joined by a pair of panelists: The soft-focus lens was trained on Ross Douthat rather than Kitty for that entire segment. (Hmmm, maybe it wasn't a mistake after all. Have you seen Ross? He might be improved by one of those floating blue blobs used to shield innocent eyes from the sight of boobies and genitalia on TV...)

WTF? Is this a consequence of high-def TV? (I wouldn't know -- it's not enabled here in the sticks, even though my TV is ready.) Kitty looks pretty fresh for an old bag. She is my senior by a considerable number of years. In fact, if we were FLDS compound dwellers, she could be my mother. And yet there are more traces of Father Time on the Cracker visage. Unfair.

Or maybe not -- maybe Kitty is pulling the wool over our eyes -- almost literally! Nice trick if you can pull it off. Now, if I could just convince everyone else on the planet to wear blurry glasses...

An Irish cabal? Saints preserve us!

Is a sinister cabal of Irishmen responsible for the Iraq war and the destruction of political discourse in the US? Bob Somerby of The Daily Howler seems to be promising to investigate an Irish media conspiracy comprised in part of Chris Matthews, Mike Barnicle, Pat Buchanan, Tim Russert, Maureen Dowd and Gail Collins:

The time has come to describe Dowd’s lunacy for what it actually is. It’s awkward to do so; we’d all rather not. But as we’ll continue to show you this week, these virulent forms of lunacy have assaulted our culture for many years now. This lunacy has been an illness—a plague. It does explain why we’re now in Iraq. It’s time to say what it actually is—where it actually comes from.

If we don’t explain what it is, many voters will be inclined to assume that it makes basic sense.

Awkward though it may be to say so, Dowd’s lunacy is the expression of a particular culture—a throwback form of Irish Catholic culture which most Irish Catholics have had the good sense to move far away from, long ago. But Dowd, and Matthews, and many others, have propagated this viral illness as it has damaged our public discourse over the past many years. We Irish! We sat on TV all last week and proclaimed how much we love the truth—how superior we are in that regard, thanks to our days with the nuns and the Jesuits. ...It’s time to discuss it a bit more frankly, as we do with other religious cultures which play key roles in
American politics.

This development may come as a relief to Jewish Americans, who are probably tired of being blamed for secretly controlling the media, etc. But is shifting the blame to the Irish (or even a subset thereof) really an improvement?

I saw the cringe-inducing piece on MSNBC to which Somerby refers -- and it was an embarrassing indulgence in tribal supremacy. You can read the transcript for yourself here. It starts off with Matthews saying a Hail Mary and goes downhill from there.

I've been reading Somerby for years. He can be a bit of a nutter, but many of his media critiques are dead-on. Certainly Matthews, Dowd and Buchanan have earned the contempt Somersby and others hurl their way. Too much of what passes for reportage and commentary is driven by narcissism, shallowness and an aversion to the real (and important) work of reporting. I guess that's what happens when a media culture is constructed in such a way as to reward those who most flamboyantly display borderline personality disorder symptoms with big fat contracts.

No doubt Somerby will unearth further nasty little nuggets from his incomparable archives to bolster his claim. But no matter how many incidents of Shamrock-stamped inanity he finds, there is no Irish cabal. What we see is merely a motley collection of self-serving media whores, some of whom happen to be Irish.

Islamic extremism -- the new Christ

I remember the exact moment when I concluded George W. Bush was a blithering idiot: It was in 1999 during a GOP candidates' debate. The candidates were asked to name their favorite political philosophers. Bush was the third candidate to answer, and he said:

"Christ, because he changed my heart." Moderator John Bachman pressed for
more and Bush added: "When you turn your heart and your life over to Christ,
when you accept Christ as the savior, it changes your heart. It changes your
life. And that's what happened to me."

Even though he had time while the first two candidates were answering the same question to collect his thoughts, Bush was too dumb to come up with an actual political philosopher. And he hadn't the wit to offer a clever analogy between political thought and, say, a familiar children's story. So he pulled Jesus out of his ass, because in 1999, a GOP candidate couldn't go wrong with Jesus.

McCain had a similar moment recently during an interview with Fortune magazine. He was asked to name the "gravest long-term threat to the US economy," and he said:

"Well, I would think that the absolute gravest threat is the struggle that
we're in against Islamic extremism, which can affect, if they prevail, our very
existence. Another successful attack on the United States of America could have
devastating consequences."

Stooo-pid! Sure, nutcases with bombs can have an effect on the economy. But does McCain really believe a pack of religion-addled, cave-dwelling jackasses are the gravest economic threat to the US? Hell, even George W. Bush blamed the post-9/11 recession on Clinton.

What about the current stock market volatility, mortgage meltdown, credit crunch and spiraling health care and fuel costs? None of that has jack shit to do with terrorism, but I think most people would agree those issues have pretty damn serious economic consequences.

Nope, the fact is, McCain doesn't know dick about the economy -- perhaps even less than George W. Bush knows about political thinkers. So, whenever he's cornered about an issue he is utterly clueless about, McCain will pull Islamic extremists out of his ass, much as Bush produced Jesus from his butt like a rabbit from a hat. Islamic extremism is the new Christ.

Taking out the transcontinental trash

Norm Coleman, the Minnesota senator who's battling Al Franken to keep his seat, apparently doesn't spend much time with Mrs. Coleman. According to The Talking Points Memo, the little lady spends most of her time in California rather than in Minnesota or DC with Norm. (And frankly, who can blame her?) This -- and the fishy camera angles and lighting -- has given rise to speculation that the following ad was shot from two separate kitchens:



Looks phony to me too.

They got nothing else

From ABC News:

Cindy McCain Presses Obama Patriotism Case

June 18, 2008 4:46 PM
ABC News' Ed O'Keefe Reports: Laura Bush may be ready to give Michelle Obama the benefit of the doubt when it comes to her patriotism but Cindy McCain may not.

"I don't know why she said what she said," Mrs. McCain explains in an interview with ABC News' Kate Snow airing on "Good Morning America" Thursday. "Everyone has their own experience. I don't know why she said what she said, all I know is that I have always been proud of my country."

The first sentence is either a big fat lie or a revelation that Mrs. McCain is too clueless to comment about current events: Michelle Obama has explained what she meant by her remark repeatedly. Because every reporter who gets within 100 yards of her asks about it. Meanwhile, Mrs. McCain gets a free ride.

Imagine if, like Cindy McCain, Michelle Obama had started dating her husband when he was still married to another woman and had later been busted for stealing narcotics from her own charitable foundation. The media would be on it as if OJ had married Jamie Lynn Spears and Paris Hilton at a Texas polygamist compound in a ceremony officiated jointly by Jeremiah Wright and Louis Farrakhan during Tim Russert's wake.

But since it's Mrs. McMaverick, there's nothing but crickets chirping. No wonder Mrs. McCain loves America so much.

How to Lose Florida Part II

First McCain flip-flopped on Social Security privatization, playing with geezer fire. Now he's calling for offshore drilling, which Floridians overwhelmingly oppose -- even, until recently, reactionary asshole Republicans like Mel Martinez:



I've been pretty skeptical of Obama's chances in Florida. But the more McCain opens his yap, the more hopeful I feel about Obama's prospects here.

This could flip Florida to Obama

Wait'll they hear this at the Villages of the Damned. The Red Hat Society will turn into Ye Olde Order of the Torch and Pitchfork faster than you can say "early bird special."

Department of Tee Hee

So did someone really hack Taylor Marsh's site? Or did she stage the attack to rid herself of the bitter chorus of Clinton dead-enders who are impeding her ability to claw her way back into relevancy? Only her hairdresser knows for sure...

Pegs: Build a gnome-podium for McCain

GOP apparatchiks having been soiling themselves in alarm ever since McCain delivered his hideously bad speech the other night. But as usual, magic dolphin believer Peggy Noonan has a unique solution -- build a special podium:

It should not count against a man that he has not fully mastered the artifice of his profession. [Really? I guess my clients won't hold a few typos against me then. Good to know. -- BC] Then again, he should have nailed the prompter by now. Such things show a certain competence. Voters are slower to trust you with big things if they see a lack of skill in small things. In this vein, a suggestion. Podiums always seem to swallow Mr. McCain. He has limited mobility with his arms because of his torture in Vietnam. It restricts his ability to gesture. And he is not a big man. He often looks like he's flailing up there: I'm not waving, I'm drowning! His staff should build a podium for him, one that fits, and take it wherever he goes. For a seal, the great state of Arizona, which he has represented in the U.S. Senate for 22 years. Let him master the podium five months out. Other masteries will follow.

McCain already uses a riser to mitigate the visual effect of his gnome-like stature. But maybe Pegs is right -- a special podium might be the ticket. He could strap it to the back of the Flip-Floppy Jalopy and tour with it nationwide.

The Culprit

In addition to the demands of commerce, house-training this 10-week-old boxer puppy is keeping me too busy to fool around on the internets as much as I'd like.

And yes, my floor does need a thorough scrubbing. Don't judge.

Wingnutty correspondence

As if my life weren't complicated enough, fully 5/6ths of my relatives are right-wing Christian conservatives who are a part of the 25% or so of Americans who still believe George W. Bush is a fine president. As you can imagine, conversation around the Thanksgiving table is pretty interesting.

90-year-old Grandma Cracker lost her hearing several years ago, which freed my sprig of the family tree to swear like drunken sailors. But it made non-swearing communications difficult. Hearing aids didn't make much of a difference. Even less so after my dog swallowed one of them after Grandma deposited them on the nightstand while dog-sitting. Damn. So I taught her to use the emails. And she promptly made me regret it. Exhibit A from my in-box this morning:

Original Message-----From: Grandma Cracker
Sent: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 10:55 pm
Subject: FW [from Grandma's nutty friend]: A MUST READ OBAMA'S OWN WORDS!!

Quotes from Obama's two books.

This guy wants to be our President and control our government. Pay close attention to the last comment!! Below are a few lines from Obama's books. These are passages in his own words:

From Dreams of My Father: 'I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.'

From Dreams of My Father: 'I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother's race.'

From Dreams of My Father: 'There was something about him that made me wary,
a little too sure of himself, maybe. And white.'

From Dreams of My Father: 'It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.'

From Dreams of My Father: 'I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa, that I had packed all the attributes I sought in myself, the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela..'

And here's the clincher: (grab on to something when you read this:) From Audacity of Hope: 'I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.'

He is 50% white, 6.5% black and 43.5% Arabic, and his talk [in books] like his full name is Muslim/Arabic and his interests do NOT seem to be even closely aligned with what the majority of americans want. Wasn't it Arabs that were mostly responsible for 911. If he gets elected, the USA is in BIG trouble!

[Signed -- Grandma Cracker's crazy church lady friend]

My reply:

RE: Fwd: A MUST READ OBAMA'S OWN WORDS!!
From: [Betty Cracker, good and patient granddaughter]
Date: Wed, Jun 11, 2008 6:27 am
To: Grandma Cracker

I've read both of Obama's books. I highly recommend them -- in fact, the lady who originates all these anti-Obama emails REALLY should read them. If she did, I think she'd realize Obama isn't the scary, foreign, half-breed commie boogyman she seems to believe he is but rather just a politician with fairly conventional ideas (albeit more liberal than conservative). I'll lend her my copies if she'd like. She might sleep better at night.

Regarding the quotes, it's easy to pick out random sentences from a book to make someone look bad. Take the Bible for example. What if someone had never read it, and all you pulled out for his review were sentences describing God turning Lot's wife into a pillar of salt, ordering Abraham to kill Isaac (without bothering about the happy ending), flooding the planet, raining fire and brimstone on two cities, etc. -- all
with no context? Wouldn't that person conclude God was a cruel, scary diety? He
would if you only described select incidents, but as we know, there's much more
to the Bible than that.

A similar principle is at work here -- the point of the email below is to gin up fear and suspicion about Obama, so these quotes are presented with no context. And the meaning cannot be fairly understood without the context. For example, "Dreams from My Father" is mainly about how a bi-racial person came to terms with his racial heritage. Obama goes into some detail about what a struggle it was -- how being raised by white people left him alienated from his black heritage and how he deliberately embraced black culture to get in touch with that side, which he could not do naturally since his father was absent. He honestly tells about buying into divisive ideas in the process. But as he grows up, he realizes that racial polarization is wrong and that what we have in common is so much more powerful than what separates us. That's the whole point of the book in a nutshell, and it's a principle I think most Americans -- liberal or conservative -- would agree with. And yet, the quotes below are presented in such a way as to make Obama sound like a black separatist -- the exact opposite of the core message of the book.

Similarly, the quote pulled from "The Audacity of Hope" is meant to scare people into thinking Obama is a terrorist sympathizer. But he was talking about standing up to anti-Muslim hysteria in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks -- standing up for religious freedom in America for innocent Americans who were unfairly singled out. In context, there was nothing very controversial about his position. In fact, it was identical to George Bush's, who went out of his way to convince people not to blame random Muslim Americans for Islamic terrorism.

Anyhoo, let me know if you or your friend are interested in getting the real story by reading the books. As I mentioned, I'd be happy to lend my copies. Thanks for forwarding these emails to me. They raise my blood pressure a bit, but it's good to know what "the other side" is thinking! :-)

See? I can be tactful, damn it! I can reply to the most absurd wingnuttery, using the very wingnutty frame of reference (the Bible and George W. Bush) to shed light on the darkest corners of the wingnut soul.

Unsolicited advice for the Obama campaign

MEMO: Obama for America

To: Campaign Events Coordinator

Subject: Proposed McCain-Obama Debate Format

According to this AP story, both you and McCain's campaign rejected ABC's offer to moderate a townhall-style meeting in New York City. Well done -- the absurd Stephanopolis-Gibson tag-team mugging that was billed as a debate with Mrs. Clinton should disqualify ABC from "moderating" anything more significant than a monster truck rally for the next decade or so.

Clearly you guys know what you're doing. But I have a few thoughts on how you might respond to McCain's offer to conduct 10 townhall meetings.

1. Don't let McCain dictate the venues. McCain wants townhall meetings because he sucks less in that setting than he does delivering speeches. He's a heinously bad speaker -- even Fox News panned his crappy speech the night our man delivered his soaring address in Minneapolis. McCain's hoping to get through the election without having to make another speech. Don't let him. Offer to do 2 townhall meetings in exchange for one televised speech per candidate on the top 5 topics as you see them -- no moderators. Maybe you could even suggest allowing Americans to weigh in on the performances via text messaging, just like on American Idol. Hell, you could even get the Idol crew to provide scathing commentary at the end of the performances. I think we know whom Simon would ruthlessly squash, don't we? And I don't even watch Idol.

2. Insist on green backdrops for all joint appearances. McCain delivered the aforementioned crappy speech in front of a green background, probably to make some subliminal point about his mavericky record on the environment or something. But it backfired horribly: It made him look like a scoop of cottage cheese on a bed of wilted lettuce, unappealingly backlit like a much-rejected side-dish fronted by a smudged Luby's Cafeteria snot-guard. We need to repeat that image as often as possible. Plus, Stephen Colbert issued a Green Screen Challenge! We need more opportunities for mockery.

3. Advise Obama to smile at McCain -- a lot. Obama would be right at home on a Crest commercial -- he has perfectly spaced, even white teeth and a smile that looks like it's connected to actual feelings. If he smiles at McCain frequently, McCain will be forced to employ his Montgomery Burns grimace in response, revealing his maize-colored choppers.

4. Challenge McCain to meet Obama in "real" settings. Like say a loading dock, the floor of a manufacturing plant, the produce section of a supermarket or at a gas station. The point, aside from the obvious symbolism? Imagine this -- no podiums or platforms, just two guys talking (a tall, lithe handsome guy and a squat, gnome-like dude -- you get the picture).

5. Make McCain go boom. Everyone knows McCain has a vile temper; Obama needs to find a way to make him explode on national TV. According to practically everyone he's ever worked with, it shouldn't be hard to do. I recommend a mild criticism of McCain's failure to support Jim Webb's veteran's benefits bill. McCain thinks he owns veterans' issues by dint of his personal history. This interminable, self-aggrandizing, spittle-flecked response to Obama's statement on McCain's opposition to the bill tells us all we need to know. Go there.

Hope you find these pointers helpful. Good luck with the upcoming debates and the general election!

McCain's bid for disgruntled Clinton voters

For reals:

Posted at 8:24 PM on 6/6/2008 by Michael Goldfarb

Take a Chance on McCain
Attention disaffected Hillary supporters, John McCain is a huge ABBA fan. Seriously.


Rate this: Avg. Rating (1) Permalink

So what if McCain once told attendees at a Republican dinner that a teenage Chelsea Clinton was ugly because "Janet Reno is her father"? Who cares if he recently voted to deny women the opportunity to receive justice for pay discrimination? Or responded to a supporter's question, "How do we beat the bitch?" with, "That's an excellent question"? None of that shit matters -- hell, he probably even has an ABBA turd.

Of rodents and relevance

The folks on the Democratic side who have made a cottage industry of trashing Barack Obama are quickly sliding into irrelevance -- a well-deserved development -- and I am more than ready to turn the page on them, as much fun as ridiculing them has been this long primary season.

But I can't help but spare one backward glance for Taylor Marsh, whose timing seems to be as bad as her idol Hillary Clinton's was. Marsh's attempts to parlay dicey credentials into a national role as a pundit and radio talk show host were ably chronicled here by the late, lamented John Brown.

A self-styled "Democrat," Marsh was a fairly obscure blogger and podcaster-talk-show-host-wannabe before she hitched her wagon to Clinton's doomed star and turned her blog into an all Obama bashing, all the time venue. She shrewdly tapped into the rabidly anti-Obama zeitgeist prevalent among a certain subset of Clinton supporters and milked it for all it was worth, including a few TV appearances and an apparently unsuccessful shot at a real radio show.

But along the way, she created a monster, or rather a pitchfork and torch mob in search of a monster, which Marsh obligingly created with a constant stream of innuendo about Obama. Marsh's relentless Obama-bashing created a vocal following that made her interesting to media outlets eager to highlight party disunity. True to her nature, Marsh sucked every drop of second-hand fame out of that sour grape. She even got a recent WaPo feature out of the deal.

But alas, that fame may be short-lived: If I were a betting woman, I'd wager that taste of the limelight may be Marsh's last. Consider the opening grafs of the WaPo piece:

LAS VEGAS -- Blogger Michelle Marshall has a confession to make. She's one die-hard Clintonite who has already moved on. She's ready to vote for Sen. Barack Obama.

But don't tell that to the legions of Hillary Clinton fans who have made Marshall their de facto leader. They're the faithful, the ones who call themselves Marshans," read her posts every day, send checks to her Web site and refuse to believe that anyone other than Clinton can beat Sen. John McCain.

In recent weeks, as Clinton's withdrawal from the race has become all but inevitable, Marshall has tried to tiptoe toward leading her followers to accept Obama as the nominee. But every time she suggests that it might be over for Clinton, she is bombarded by comments to the contrary.

Bombarded with comments is putting it mildly. Denounced and threatened with wholesale abandonment is more like it. Here's a sample:

You mean to tell me (sorry Taylor) that in a few days/weeks people will suddenly be OK with this and then support BO?How about more people standing up for principles and giving the bird to the DNC?They won't learn a thing if we the voters don't teach them a lesson. Shame on Sheep!
No BO 06.04.2008 - 12:11 pm

No, we won't be ok with this and we also won't be staying on this blog much longer. Many of us have departed, coming back once in a while but we are on
other blogs, hillary's site and sending out lots and lots of SD emails.I am VOTING MCCAIN in '08 and whoever says I am not a real democrat is right!...I will vote for Senator John McCain if Senator Hillary Clinton is not the democratic nominee.
ainnj 06.04.2008 - 12:25 pm

Good luck walking that lot back from the ledge, "Democrat" Dr. Frankentaylor. You've ably convinced at least a few dozen "Democrats" to support the man who once said that Chelsea Clinton was ugly because she was fathered by Janet Reno. If there's any justice, it'll soon be time to kiss the ad revenue and dreams of radio stardom buh-bye. As iconic movie hero Willard learned, from small things come great power, but also the potential of being gnawed to death by ravening rodents when they finally turn on you.

Lieberman's continued douchebaggery

GOP wolf in Independent clothing Joe Lieberman is demogoguing the Iran-Israel issue in an effort to polish his BFF McCain's withered old knob at the expense of Obama. But unlike spineless nancy-pants Harry Reid, Obama is pushing back on the vile, smarmy turncoat:

...During a Senate vote Wednesday, Obama dragged Lieberman by the hand to a far corner of the Senate chamber and engaged in what appeared to reporters in the gallery as an intense, three-minute conversation.

While it was unclear what the two were discussing, the body language suggested that Obama was trying to convince Lieberman of something and his stance appeared slightly intimidating.

Using forceful, but not angry, hand gestures, Obama literally backed up Lieberman against the wall, leaned in very close at times, and appeared to be trying to dominate the conversation, as the two talked over each other in a few instances.

Still, Obama and Lieberman seemed to be trying to keep the back-and-forth congenial as they both patted each other on the back during and after the exchange.

Afterwards, Obama smiled and pointed up at reporters peering over the edge of the press gallery for a better glimpse of their interaction.

Obama loyalists were quick to express their frustration with Lieberman's decision and warned that if he continues to take a lead role in attacking Obama it could complicate his professional relationship with the Caucus.

"Complicate his professional relationship"? What the fuck?!? Lieberman's ill intentions toward the Democratic nominee and his former colleagues in the Senate couldn't be more clear if he planted his wingtip in the crotch of each and every one of them.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: When the Dems gain a stonger majority in the Senate this fall, they need to kick Lieberman to the curb so hard he bounces back into the street and gets squashed by the tow truck that'll be hauling The Straight Talk Express to the repo man.

Yes we did!

And so the longest, most hard-fought primary campaign in modern history comes to an end:

All of you chose to support a candidate you believe in deeply. But at the
end of the day, we aren't the reason you came out and waited in lines that
stretched block after block to make your voice heard. You didn't do that because
of me or Senator Clinton or anyone else. You did it because you know in your
hearts that at this moment—a moment that will define a generation—we cannot
afford to keep doing what we've been doing. We owe our children a better future.
We owe our country a better future. And for all those who dream of that future
tonight, I say—let us begin the work together. Let us unite in common effort to
chart a new course for America.

Meanwhile, Senator Clinton doesn't concede even though Obama locked it up last night. Will she give it up today? Later on in the week? It doesn't matter any more. What matters now is defeating McCain, who put all his weaknesses as a candidate on display last night in a ghastly speech in which, to put it in Simpsonian terms, he combined the warmth of Montgomery Burns with the shrewdness of Grandpa Simpson:

So here's your choice, America. Make me proud -- again!