Saturday, August 11, 2007

Smorgasbord Saturday

It is getting a bit late in the day for a smorgasbord, but I'm game.

Right now I'm dealing with a really crappy dialup connection at home because we are between providers and well, I'm no computer whiz. Hence the reason I'm slow responding to email and even slower getting this post up today.

In game show news, Merv Griffin the brain behind so many of the great game shows has been battling cancer for awhile now and has evidently taken a turn for the worse. For those of you who know me well, 4:30 p.m. is strictly reserved for Jeopardy! at my house. I'm a big fan of traditional game shows in general (except for Wheel of Fortune) and have always been a fan of Merv Griffin.

For those of you who, like me, think the Idaho quarter is the ugliest piece of currency being produced, please check out this great letter to the editor of the South Idaho Press. I absolutely can't believe I agree with Jared 100% on something, but I do in this case! Good work, Jared.

Received my first purchase from the great Hesperus Press when I returned from vacation. Yes, I bought Shelley's novel Zastrozzi. Haven't had the time to sit down and enjoy it, but hopefully soon. As I've said before, I am absolutely in love with this press and every last one of you who love books should take a look at what they have to offer. Do it.

My fantasy baseball team has moved up this week which is a welcome bit of news for me. I had to trade away Derek Lowe and Edgar Renteria to get myself a decent first baseman (Teixeira). I had a first baseman, but don't get me started on how irritated I am with the Braves sending Julio Franco back to the minors. What a good sport though. How would it be to have a 20+ year career in the majors and at the age of 48 (he'll be 49 on the 23rd of this month) head back to the minor league?

While we are on the topic of baseball, did anyone catch the clips of Ichiro last night? I don't know who the batter was, but they homered and Ichiro is seen in the corner of the clip on top of the wall. Just jumped right up there even though the ball was clearly out of his reach. I just say there and thought about gravity for a moment. Love the guy. Too bad he's not on my fantasy team...

I've been watching MSNBC today waiting to hear news from Utah in the mining story that's been going on since early Monday morning. However, no news. I did however catch the story about Romney's victory in the Iowa straw poll. I'm not a fan of Romney, I'm actually not a fan of any of the contenders at this point. May have been misleading with my Obama bumper sticker commentary, but I'm really not on the Obama wagon. Or any other candidate's wagon for that matter. Interesting that Romney is doing so well in Iowa, though.

That's all I can think up for this Saturday. Maybe tomorrow I can post some news on the Bright Tomorrows progress. Until then, peace be the journey.

7 comments:

Sage Word said...

Disclaimer: I also couldn't care less about things at this point.

Romney did well because Rudy G, Freddie T, Johnny Mac (and the other Sopranos) sat this one out.

I vaguely remember hearing how the straw poll started as a Iowegian wingnut fundraiser: to vote, you pay x dollars at the door. Romney just blasted $5 *MILLION* bucks to win a few thousand votes in a popularity contest.

If you ask me, if he'd wanted to win over Iowa republicans, all he had to do was write their state party a check for $2.5 million, then shrink the rest of his ad budget accordingly.

Jared said...

Sage, I don't carry water for Romney, but I am a Republican that could vote for him, though at present I am leaning towards Giuliani. I don't see it exactly the way you do.

I think Romney hit it on the head when he said that the reason the other three didn't compete is because they could't win. If they were there would, would he have won by so much? Obviously not, but he does have a good lead in the polls there and would have won anyway.

I'm can't say anything about the huge amount of money other than campaigns are expensive. Plus it is a good practice round for the caucuses, given the system they use in Iowa and the campiagn organization required to be successful.

Was it a huge win for Romney? Well, yes and no. It wasn't that big of a win in the sense he had to win, given his competetion. It would have been big news had he not come in first. But then again, it was a big win because he's essentially locked Iowa up, barring an unforseen circumstance, and scared all other GOP frontrunners completely out of the state. Giuliani or McCain can't compete there and Thompson is way too late. He's leading in New Hampshire, and his only way to be competative is to win those two and ride the wave of money and support that typcally come with that. Other than that he's toast, and Rudy or Thompson wins in South Carolina and Rudy handily takes Super Tuesday to become. Those are the only scenarios I envision. The nominee will be either Rudy or Mitt. I'd put money on Rudy though.

Sage Word said...

Wow. You trust Romney's spin on why the others didn't attend, ignore that his win cost him over a grand per vote, and then wave your hands and say 'campaigns are expensive.' That's your game plan?

Um... didjer mom drop you on yer haid, kid?

How on earth does a pay-to-attend straw poll *lock* anything. And how are a few thousand votes determinant of how 3/4 of a million Iowegian wingnuts will vote?

One more thing: You just carried water for the dude with the fisher-price hair. Uncritical regurgitation of a candidate's talking points is the *meaning* of carrying water. And you probably should stop drinkin' the product if you plan to keep your love for the philandering megamaniacal cross-dressing twofaced tell-me-again, what-were-his-conservative-talking-points SOB.

Sage Word said...

As for Rudy Giuliani...

His 9/11 command post *bunker* had security and functional needs compromised from the get-go, when Rudy (atypically) insisted he micromanage the design, making changes that let it serve as his lovenest:

-- spec'd to be within walking distance of the mayor's office.
-- secure room for mayor within, decorated with memorabilia.
-- included a humidor and monogrammed towels.
-- a private elevator for the mayor.
-- visited frequently by Rudy and Judi *before* everyone figured out they were on the make.

I *do* security for a living. One current client is in a building that has a compromising location. Building full of servers, none are vital, yet *still* they plan to move as soon as they can budget the $20 million bucks. So, before you ask: YES. We do pay attention to details like this.

Compromising a crisis-management command post into a lovenest is bad enough. Then being unlucky enough to put it next door to the WTC? Definitely increasing the human impact of 9/11 so he could have an easy place to hook up with Judi Nathan?

Giuliani's toast.

Jared said...

Listen moron, I don't have a game plan! I'm not running for anything! I also didn't make any statement of approval or disapproval about Romney, Giuliani, or anyone, other than I said that I might be able to vote for them. I just presented a different point of view of how things played out and like the good Stalinist you are, you can't seem to handle any other view that doesn't parallel your own. But when I responded I thought I was dealing with someone rational. I didn't carry the water for Romney. I said that in a way it was a hollow victory because he had no competition. Have you heard Romney say anything similar to that? Doubtful. Like I said, the only big story that could have possibly come out of Ames this week was if Romney didn't come in first. But the fact that he had no real competition is saying something. Does that mean I endorse him? No. Oh, you can say the others didn't want to "waste" precious campaign dollars on a straw poll, but I think that ultimately they didn't want to spend money on something they knew they couldn't win. I think Romney will win Iowa. Do I think he locked it because of Ames? No! He’s locked it up, barring some radical change, because McCain and Rudy aren’t seriously competing in Iowa and Fred Thompson is probably too late. I think Ames, while not indicative of how the caucuses are going to turn out, demonstrates just that. I also think either Romney or Rudy will win the GOP nomination, which has nothing to do with Rudy wearing drag or Romney’s hair. Is there something wrong with foreseeing that? I don't give a damn if you hate them or love them. That’s just what I think will happen regardless of who I end of voting for. But then again I probably better check my inbox for my daily talking points from Karl Rove.

You may have a valid point against Rudy placing the command post where he did, but we’d never make a mistake if we had the benefit of hindsight before things happen. I must admit I hadn't heard about him shacking up with Judith Nathan there. Maybe the fact that federal agencies like the CIA, DoD, INS, IRS, SEC, and Secret Service were neighboring tenants had something to do with the decision to put it there. Maybe it was stupid to put all of those agencies there. I’m not quite sure what you want me to say? Which of the 20 clowns running for president do you want me to support?

Sage Word said...

Target-rich comments notwithstanding, my apologies for mocking you.

Oh, and 'hindsight before things happen' is an awesome malaprop. You quite literally nearly killed me with that one.

I have a weak personal rule against feeding trolls, but 'may be right' about something I'm expert at deserves a smackdown...

Emergency-response command posts should be safely & discretely located and never be THAT near high profile targets. The reasoning is that *if* something bad happens, the command post isn't collateral damage. It's the same as a colonel being a couple miles from the front line vs. being *on* the front line. One is near enough to get good data easily. The other is foolhardy.

Just making the above mistake would be bush-league and a cautionary tale. Overriding experts to force the mistake for marital infidelity makes Rudy Giuliani unfit for leadership.

Wingnut pop quiz: why is Rudy ok, when Clinton deserved impeachment? Fifty bucks says you'll prove you're a troll and/or dodge the question.

Jared said...

Firstly, it was not my intention to insult your expertise in security and if you understood it as an affront, then I humbly accept your smack down. You made a good point, but learn how to take a compliment and I'll practice conveying them better. And if I am a troll in a mischievous game of rope-a-dope, I must have lassoed a big one, because you came back. Hell, I’m probably Karl Rove himself, given I have so much time on my hands now...but seriously, I assure you that my intentions have not been malicious. I simply saw things in Ames differently than you did. But we've moved on to other things...

I'm not quite sure I can buy your Rudy/Judi love nest. I know they committed adultery, but is this blog speculation or is there some documentation on this being the reason it was placed where it was? Please don't misconstrue that if you happen to be an expert in the sultry lives of NYC's social elite. You didn’t, however, answer my question: Was the command center placed there because of its proximity to all the federal agencies I listed as neighboring tenants, regardless of the foolhardy decision it proved to be? It’s a serious accusation to say that Giuliani insisted on it being where it was so that he could have a secret sex den within walking distance from the office. Do you have anything on this? Malaprop or not, it still is pretty easy seven years later to say it was a stupid decision, your expertise not withstanding.

You know, this is getting long and I would end this here, but I don't have $50 to give you. Bill Clinton was impeached for obstruction of justice and perjury. Had he not lied under oath about his affair or not attempted to coerce others to lie about it then it would have been a huge headline for a month or two, but no impeachment. And if there had been proceedings without the aforementioned crimes, I wouldn't have supported it. After all, sex with an intern may be a lot of horrible things, but it’s not illegal. I know, I know, you wanted me to say sex was reason he was impeached, give the unfortunate amount of Republicans that tried to make it a moral, not legal issue. Though I was pretty young when all this was going on (probably not long after my mom dropped me on my head) I remember those opposed to impeachment saying that it was just sex and we should leave people's personal lives alone. You weren't one of those people, were you Sage? I hope not, because it wouldn't be very appropriate to bring up Rudy's sex life if Bill's is off limits? Look, I don't like the fact that Bill Clinton disgraced himself and the office of the presidency. That was a low time in American history, like Watergate. Who wants to relive those days? And I especially don't like the fact that politicians that I tend to agree with can't keep it in their pants either. I'm just as sick of amoral politicians as the next guy, but if we dig for skeletons in the closets of all the people running, too-good-to-be-true Mitt Romney will be the last man standing. He is the only person to my knowledge that has been so bold as to say on national TV that he's never had premarital sex or sex outside of marriage. Not saying that is a reason to vote for him or anything, just an observation. Alright getting to the point, Bill Clinton and Rudy Giuliani are moral equals in my view. Fair? The difference between them is I politically agree with Rudy sometimes and rarely with Clinton. And if forced to choose between two moral degenerates I’ll chose the one I most agree with. I hope that doesn’t make me troll in your eyes. Wingnut I can handle, though.

Sage Word, my friend, I think I like you. If you can stop your snooty laughter long enough, can you forgive the malaprop? The leader of my party gets away with them all the time. I guess I just misunderestimated you when I tried to sneak it past ya.