Monday, August 27, 2007
Goodbye for now
http://www.beaconopinion.blogspot.com/
Saturday, August 18, 2007
Fred Thompson says get away from me i dont like fried snickers bars
"Don't confuse the lawyer with the client." I'm sorry, but what? Virtuous, angelic Fred Thompson lobbies on behalf of a out-of-luck abortion-rights group. Does Mister Thompson consider his efforts to be on par with public defenders and pro bono publico attorneys? Surely no other lobbyist would have done the job in Thompson's stead. Washington is going through a lobbyist shortage, after all.
How about this, Fred Thompson: don't confuse the prostitute with the drunk guy nailing her in the backseat of his Cadillac.
"It has nothing to do with one's political views," Thompson said of his work for the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, "Lawyering is a profession and it's also a business."
So your conviction stop when you punch the time clock? I call shenanigans.
Also, what's up with the guy being so hesitant to rub elbows with potential supporters at the Iowa State Fair? He's six months (at least) behind the rest of the Republican field at this point. Move it, Fred! Time is running short.
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
I just can't take the guy seriously.
I think the point Mr. O'Reilly is trying to make with the book is that winter is cold, and it is always prudent to bring along a couple extra layers.
Now, my dad is a conservative, and he's entitled to that. Conservatism has contributed immeasurably to the growth of these United States, and although I myself am probably more left than right, I have no problem with my Dad reading a righty book. Whatever. However, at this very moment, conservatism pisses me off, partly because its front men -- the Bush Administration and William Kristol -- are idiot assholes. Idiot. Assholes.
I told my dad I would be black-listed at Emerson for reading an O'Reilly book. He said it would be good to have a counterpoint for all the liberal indoctrination I've been subjected to: university, "the liberal media," and the stuffy, August New England air (I made that one up). I watch the Red Sox pretty much every day. Professional sports. That's pretty right-wing, isn't it?
I couldn't take this book seriously. I dismissed it before I even opened the cover (although I did eye-roll my way through the Introduction and the first chapter).
*This is where a transition would go if I cared enough tonight to write one.*
So anyways, Bill is always finding something to whine about, which is part of my problem with him. The man has a comically strong opinion about everything. It wears on you. Bill is always looking to blame something on someone because of some liberal or secular or elitist doohickey conspiracy. It hurts your head. Nothing can just be--it has to be someone's fault.
Enter Nas. On September 6, Virginia Tech will hold a memorial concert to commemorate the lives of the victims of the April campus shootings. Rap Artist Nas, John Mayer and Dave Matthews Band will perform at the event alongside local and campus artists.
O'Reilly, apparently unable to stomach the inclusion of Nas, posted the following in his blog:
If you would like to express your outrage at the inclusion of a violent "gangsta" rapper in a memorial concert at Virginia Tech this September, feel free to contact the university's president:
Dr. Charles W. Steger
President, Virginia Tech
Office of the President
210 Burruss Hall
Blacksburg, VA 24061
president@vt.edu
(540) 231-6231
Because this is what Virginia Tech needs. A bunch of Bill O'Reilly fans calling up and expressing their "outrage" over hip-hop. These are college kids, Bill, not the American Legion. This music is very much the norm.
I agree with you in this respect, Bill: a lot of hip-hop is detestable. But pick your spots! 32 people died. I assure you, after all the VTech community has been through, there will be no "outrage" over Nas performing at a concert.
I'll prob post again (like, something substantive) later today
Sunday, August 12, 2007
French President comes to Maine, does not Throw Wine in Bush's Face
The visiting French president got American picnic fare of hot dogs, hamburgers, baked beans and fresh dessert.
"If he feels like it, he can have him a piece of blueberry pie," Bush declared.
After indulging the media by fielding questions -- and then prodding the talkative Sarkozy to do the same -- Bush wrapped up their brief appearance on his own terms.
"Thank you," he said. "We've got to go eat a hamburger."
--The Plain Dealer, 8/12 (story)
Get your fill of cheap ground beef and refined carbs, Nicolas. They don't do cuisine like this in la France! With nothing at stake in the meeting, the less-than-elegant spread makes sense. If your country doesn't have a stake in the Iraq War, the Bushies aren't breaking out the shellfish.
Both Bush and Sarkozy stressed that their meeting was to involve eating and eating only. Not policy, not pressing world affairs. Eating. And for all involved, this is just as well. Sarkozy is a conservative (by French standards), but he has no interest (or means) of throwing shit (that has not been sticking, mind you) at the wall with Bush in Iraq. Realizing this, Bush labeled their get together as a "casual" meeting, meaning: "I'm not going to try to get anything done because I can't get anything done," or "We've got to go eat a hamburger."
Saturday, August 11, 2007
Hey, I don't like drinking directly out of the can. Cold Sores. Can I borrow an IOWA STRAWPOLL?
Rudy Giuliani and John McCain's campaigns both bailed out of strawpoll contention (and for the moment, Iowa as a whole) as it became clear that Mitt Romney (and his endless bundles of personal cash) would be the clear-cut victor in today's nonbinding contest. A consultant on Fred Thompson's campaign cited fear of a poor showing in Ames as a contributing factor for Thompson not yet officially declaring his candidacy.
This may be Romney's biggest victory today: forcing the other top tier candidates to clear out of Iowa while his campaign digs in. Also significant is the media exposure Romney will experience in the days after the vote. Mitt has made it clear: his (personal) money is his campaign's money, and he's not hesitant to spend either.
Ron Paul (to the surprise of everyone who doesn't post in politics-related internet forums) is also expected to have a strong showing.
EDIT:
"The straw poll was held on the campus of Iowa State University and is viewed as a test of organizational strength in Iowa. In almost every case, the candidates paid the $35 per person fee charged to vote in the straw poll. It's a major fundraiser for the state Republican Party." --CNN
I implied that Romney's paying voters for their support is extrordinary. In fact, it is not.
Thursday, August 09, 2007
Trojan in a child-proof bottle
Two weeks ago (who said the Internet is the way to stay current?), a Washington State law mandated all pharmacies be able to prescribe the Plan B contraceptive to customers went into effect. A pharmacy owner and two other pharmacists sued the state, saying the law put them in a comprimised position, forcing them to "choos[e] between their livelihoods and their deeply held religious and moral beliefs." According to state legislators (who, of course, do not serve on the federal court reviewing the case) nothing is expected to come from the lawsuit.
In my opinion (prepare ye for a completely out of place football analogy), contraceptives equate to interceptions, not punts. In other words, the morning-after pill acts more like a condom than an abortion, not killing an embryo, but preventing it from coming to exist. However, the pro-abortion rights/anti-abortion rights battle is not what interests me with this story.
So these pharmacists say that Plan B is contrary to "deeply held religious and moral beliefs"? Ok. For the moment, let's accept that Plan B is morally objectionable.
What about selling Ambien to an 80-year-old woman whose only sources of income are social security and the 3% interest on the $46.34 in her checking account? Is that not immoral? What about suggesting a patron cut pills in half because they can't afford the proper dosage? Selling the Glaxo Smith Cline pill for $120 when a generic brand is sitting there on the shelf for $50 to get a fatter cut on your commission? That's not immoral?
Can I sue my government for the FDA turning a blind eye to inflated drug prices while people all around the world can buy the same drugs for a fraction of the cost?
Yet when we put a condom in a pill, everyone freaks the heck out.
Wednesday, August 08, 2007
BLOG post #1
Last night's AFL-CIO Democratic debate and Sunday's "This Week with George Stephanopolis" Republican debate had me wondering. What if instead of separating debates by party lines, we had debates split up by the alphabet?
The A-H Debate: Democrats Joe Biden, Hilary Clinton, Christopher Dodd, John Edwards and Mike Gravel. Republicans Sam Brownback, Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee and Duncan Hunter.
The K-Z Debate: Republicans John McCain, Mitt Romney, Tom Tancredo, Fred Thompson, Tommy Thompson and Ron Paul. Democrats Dennis Kucinich, Barack Obama and Bill Richardson.
How cool would that be? I vote very cool. This way, when Democrats hate on Republicans (or vice versa), they'd be there. Candidates would be forced to defend what they say, and bolster claims with logic or fact-based argument, not by making partisan snipes across the aisle. Such a debate would have to be moderated quite closely to keep things from getting too unruly, but the overall result would be worth the trouble: a wider range of expressed opinions within each debate and a more revealing look at candidates and their policy views.
However, it is unlikely something like this would ever happen, as candidates have to agree to the format of debates. Kucinich would debate in a Rotary Club in Kansas at 3am, but as far as the top-tier candidates - Clinton, Giuliani, Obama, Romney - go, I doubt they would subject themselves to something so unorthodox and potentially damaging.
It would be cool though.