Right Thinking From The Left Coast
Don't stay in bed, unless you can make money in bed. - George Burns

Friday, February 25, 2011

Narcissistic hubris, or what?

There really is no shame:

When the DNC’s Resolutions Committee brought up a resolution commemorating Pelosi’s years as speaker of the House, Pelosi’s daughter sought to alter the proposal at her mother’s behest, adding some of the accomplishments that the elder Pelosi felt the committee had overlooked. “I have some friendly amendments,” said Christine Pelosi, a political strategist, at the committee’s session during the DNC Winter Meeting at the Marriott Wardman Park hotel Thursday afternoon. She is a member of the committee.

“You think I’m kidding,” Christine Pelosi added, to surprised laughter from the room. The proposed changes, she indicated, came out of a discussion with her mother. First, Pelosi wanted to add a mention of her fight against HIV and AIDS, because it was “why she went to Congress.” Then, she wanted to insert a paragraph on her “accomplishments for equality,” mentioning the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 and the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” in December.

Pad that résumé Nancy! Meaningless bullshit tripe all of it, but she is so full of herself she can’t even just show up and thank the DNC for trying to resurrect her corpse after the pasting she caused the donkeys to take in the last election. Come to think of it, this attitude is standard with the democrat leadership right now, starting at the top: a bunch of whiney pissants, full of themselves, with little good accomplished or to be accomplished, that think their destructive actions have done good. Pfeh to the lot of them.

Posted by AlexinCT on 02/25/11 at 09:15 AM in Celebrity Idiots   Elections   Election 2010   Life & Culture  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Monday, February 07, 2011

AOL management pisses away another large stack of cash.

This time the idiots are paying something around $315 million for Huffington Post of all things. Air America here we come!

WASHINGTON/NEW YORK (Reuters) – AOL Inc will buy Arianna Huffington’s influential website for $315 million, looking to the high-profile liberal pundit to rescue it from the dustbin of Internet history. The move, announced Monday, comes at a hefty premium. AOL is estimated to be paying 32 times earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization for The Huffington Post, said Benchmark Co analyst Clayton Moran.

Similar content deals, such as Hellman & Friedman’s acquisition of Internet Brands in September 2010, typically go for eight to 12 times earnings, said Moran. “AOL just spent 40 percent of their cash for very little near-term return,” said Moran. AOL expects Huffington Post to generate around $10 million in profit before interest and taxes and see savings of around $20 million meaning it would be valued at around 10 times 2011 profits.

The Internet company’s name is still a proxy for expensive mergers gone wrong following the unraveling of its $350 billion merger with Time Warner Inc in 2000. Once worth $163 billion, today AOL has a market capitalization of around $2.3 billion. Shares fell 3.4 percent to close at $21.19 on Monday.

Guess many AOL investors figured out this lefty politically motivated move to keep another lefty site bleeding red from going under isn’t worth the risk and showed that. I am glad I don’t own AOL shares. If you do, you might want to shed them too. Maybe The Huff Post will start streaming pr0n for AOl in teh future. That’s where the big bucks are.

Update: Who knows? Maybe they are intending to be “good corporate citizens, like Obama wants every company to be, instead of serving the interests of their shareholders. Hey Muirgy! Look! The marxist/statist/elitist twit thinks corporations are evil if they don’t give away their profits just like you do.

Posted by AlexinCT on 02/07/11 at 08:08 PM in Celebrity Idiots   Fun and Humor   Left Wing Idiocy   Politics   Law, & Economics   The Press Machine  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Monday, December 06, 2010

Free Wesley Snipes!

While Rangel is still free and faces new ethic violation charges, poor Wesley Snipes is being told to stock up on soap-on-a-rope. At least Sinpes was badass in those Blade movies. What the hell has Rangel done for anyone other than bore people to death on C-SPAN?

Posted by AlexinCT on 12/06/10 at 11:57 AM in Celebrity Idiots   Fun and Humor   Politics  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Tuesday, November 30, 2010


Oh, come on:

ON Wednesday, Kim Kardashian is going to die a little. So is her sister, Khloé, not to mention Lady Gaga, David LaChapelle, Justin Timberlake, Usher, Serena Williams and Elijah Wood.

That day is World AIDS Day, and each of these people (as well as a host of others — the list keeps growing) will sacrifice his or her own digital life. By which these celebrities mean they will stop communicating via Twitter and Facebook. They will not be resuscitated, they say, until their fans donate $1 million.

What a bunch of self-important twerps.  Here’s a better idea.  How about we raise $2 million to make these fuckers shut up for good?  I’d contribute.

Posted by Hal_10000 on 11/30/10 at 05:25 PM in Celebrity Idiots  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Tuesday, September 07, 2010

You Want to Make an Omelet, You Have to Break Some Eggs

It’s getting pretty obvious, based on Hal’s recent posts alone, that as the elections are drawing closer, the Democrats are acting increasingly desperate, becoming more scattershot than Dick Cheney during hunting season.  Whether it’s a $50 billion “infrastructure” plan (which won’t do anything more substantive than jack up the value of Warren Buffet’s railroad stock), calling Americans a bunch of spoiled brats (way to make friends and influence people, Eugene!), or touting a “small business tax break,” the administration is doing anything and everything it can to try and not do a 180-degree impression of the shitkicking they gave to Republicans in 2006.

The latest evidence of this desperation?  Paul Krugman’s Labor Day op-ed, in which he makes this truly startling observation:

But it’s both instructive and discouraging to look at the state of America circa 1938 — instructive because the nature of the recovery that followed refutes the arguments dominating today’s public debate, discouraging because it’s hard to see anything like the miracle of the 1940s happening again.

The miracle of the 1940s?  You mean a World War that killed millions of people, and set the stage for even more global carnage in the post-colonial Third World?  And while we’re on the subject of the war, Krugman goes on to make this claim:

The economic moral is clear: when the economy is deeply depressed, the usual rules don’t apply. Austerity is self-defeating: when everyone tries to pay down debt at the same time, the result is depression and deflation, and debt problems grow even worse.

Now, Krugman was born in 1953, but surely he had at least one of his relatives talk about the massive consumer rationing that took place during the war--everything from gasoline to sugar to tires.  It’s absolutely stunning that in one breath, Krugman touts the “miracle” of a World War, yet completely ignores the fact that a big reason consumer spending went UP so much after the 1947-48 recession was because people had been forced to scrimp and save by the government for four years.  When the returning veterans finally settled back into the workforce (and their wives and girlfriends left it), people had large stores of money that they were waiting to spend.

In other words, a four-year austerity program contributed to a 20+ year economic boom, which lasted all the way up until the Middle East choked off our supplies of cheap oil.

Regardless of the economics in question, it’s downright sociopathic that Krugman is using the most violent conflict in human history as a justification for increasing government spending, and shows how amoral some of these people are when it looks like they are about to be thrown out of power.

Posted by on 09/07/10 at 02:52 PM in Celebrity Idiots   Elections   Election 2010   Left Wing Idiocy   Politics  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Monday, June 28, 2010

I have a different question than all the others are asking…

If you missed it, the usual suspects in the MSM are all abuzz about some jerk-off by the name of David Weigel, a supposed correspondent hired at the WaPo to cover conservatives, that got dismissed from the after trying to prove his liberal bonafides on some “Journolist” – a secret internet group hosted online were a bunch of collectivist masquerading as a journalist get together to decide what’s news and what’s not in order to help the progressive agenda – by attacking Matt Drudge and the Drudge report. Weigel, which was hired by the WaPo to cover all things conservative, said these real nasty things in order to appease the 400 or so rabid libs that pass themselves off as journalists on that secret list, in order to make them understand he was one of them. Maybe he wasn’t getting the respect he felt he deserved from them because they believed or suspected him of being a conservative for occasionally giving conservative causes and topics what the losers on this list felt was unjust coverage (a.k.a neutral coverage). Forget the questions why a newspaper that supposedly is unbiased would need one of those conservative coverage guys. I mean, do they have correspondents tasked with covering liberals? Yeah, sure. Anyway, this guy was secretly outted by someone on the list, and the WaPo hoping to save face and make the story go away fired him.

Have no doubt that what we had here was some guy that at best pretended to be neutral to conservatives & their causes was covering them. So the leftists in the MSM, now that it is obvious one of their own is under fire, are defending Weigel and disagreeing with his dismissal at the WaPo. Too harsh, or some such drivel. The Kos-nutjobs are even acting like this guy was railroaded in an illegal way. How evil that some lefty turned on another lefty! Forget the questions about the justice of his dismissal, if this guy’s rights were violated, if he was set up or not, or if this was fair or not. These are all beside the point, as well, and of no serious consequence to the real issue at hand. They are all bull to distract us, and all these questions are flying around about the story, are being asked except the one I and everyone of us should be most interested in: there is a secret meeting place where those tasked with providing us the news meet to rig the news to favor progressive causes? W-T-F????

Is it that we have become so used to the bias in the media that nobody but me freaks out when people nonchalantly skip over the fact that the news is skewed to favor the left, and hence one political party, and that these people meet in secret to set strategy, drive the news, and push a disgusting ideological agenda? This is scary stuff. Does anyone doubt that if this had been done by conservatives that we would have the left screaming about a fifth column and demanding an investigation by the DOJ? Do you hear the accusations of the right manipulating the news and people for their advantage? And yet, nary a peep on the fact that the left has just such a list of people that are supposed to be responsible journalists tasked to do just that: manipulate the news to favor the left and their causes. Again, W-T-F???

Posted by AlexinCT on 06/28/10 at 12:16 PM in Blegging   Celebrity Idiots   Deep Thoughts   Elections   Election 2010   Left Wing Idiocy   The Press Machine  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Friday, April 23, 2010

5 reasons why Bret Michaels has to pull through
by JimK

For those who have a thing called a “life” and may not keep up with the latest celebrity goings-on, Bret Michaels is gravely ill. He had acute appendicitis the other day, came through the surgery, but had to be rushed to the hospital due to a massive subarachnoid hemorrhage - bleeding at the base of the brain stem.

Some of you know...we have a personal connection to the man, Donna and her friends followed them on tour back in the day and made friends with the band, and of course I savaged the shit out of two years of that God-forsaken Rock of Love show. And all his douchiness aside, I’m still a Poison fan. If you cut me, I bleed, among other things, neon green.  And so, I have compiled a list of 5 reasons why Bret has to make it:

5. Every group deserves a spokesperson - even douchebags

4. Spray-painted straw cowboy hats. That’s right. I said it. Spray-painted straw cowboy hats. With writing on them. Who the fuck else is gonna rock that look?

3. Paris Hilton and Lady GaGa can’t keep the Los Angeles hair extension industry alive by themselves!

2. VH1 won’t have anything to air anymore, they’ll just have to shut the doors. Especially since Flava Flav is about two weeks from a crack overdose.

1. And the number one reason why Bret Michaels has to survive this health scare: Those god-damned Ed Hardy shirts aren’t gonna sell themselves. That shit is an industry now, and the American economy just can’t take the hit. Besides, folks going to Wal-Mart gotta have something to wear besides Juicy Couture and Miley Cyrus shit.

Posted by JimK on 04/23/10 at 05:45 PM in Celebrity Idiots   Fun and Humor  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

HUH! Take that Kumar…

That’s like what that little dwarf told him after stabbing him in that spoof of the Narnia movie! They always say that a conservative is someone that has had sense beaten into them by the real world. Looks like Kumar, who was working for Obama in DC, just got his dose of the real world. Not saying he might or might not come to his senses, but I wonder if he is wondering why the Unicorn ridding Obama didn’t come to save him. Maybe Bush sent them to get him for making fun of him in that funny movie about Guantanamo. Hey Kumar: how did that cockmeat sandwich taste? I am looking forward to the next Harold and Kumar flik. While this stuff is rife with stupid leftists stuff it makes for good laughs.

Posted by AlexinCT on 04/20/10 at 06:12 PM in Celebrity Idiots   Left Wing Idiocy   Life & Culture   Politics  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Matt Damon ‘s Babysitter Meets His Maker

If there is one historian who has epitomized the Marxist bent of the American university, and the humanities in particular, it’s Howard Zinn, who kicked the bucket today.

I’m certainly not going to weep over his passing.  As a historian, the man was terrible: his works are prime examples of fallacious logic, Marxist hypocrisy, and contradictory, self-centered agit-prop. 

Having read this and few of Zinn’s other works, it’s pretty clear that the only reason he became as huge as he did is because he rubbed all the sections of the id that make leftists swoon, primarily the “the United States, and white people in particular, are responsible for everything bad that’s ever happened in the history of the universe” nub.  That he’s being promoted as an intellectual rebel is particularly humorous, because there’s absolutely nothing being taught or studied in the field of history now, or over the past 40-50 years, that differentiates his work from any other--the Academic Holy Trinity of Class, Gender, and Ethnicity is so common that history as a discipline has pretty much stagnated.  There’s only so many types of subjects entitled “A ______ of Her Own” before redundancy begins to set in.  By contrast, Paul Johnson’s A History of the American People stands out precisely because it doesn’t follow this boilerplate, and as much as I like to rag on journalists, some of them are writing sharp popular histories, such as G. J. Meyer’s A World Undone: The Story of the Great War, 1914 to 1918.

Dennis the Peasant put it best:

Howard Zinn was fool and a hypocrite; yet another armchair communist preaching the evils of capitalism and democracy while living fat off of both.

Maybe someone can spray-paint that on his tombstone.

Posted by on 01/27/10 at 11:34 PM in Celebrity Idiots   Life & Culture  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Friday, January 08, 2010

Arenas Get Your Gun

The latest employment numbers have been discussed and analyzed ad nauseum today, so I’m not going to go beyond what is obvious--we are still deep in the shit, and aren’t coming out any time soon.  I may post a collection of links that explain this over the weekend.

Instead, I want to link to an article that Jason Whitlock wrote about the Gilbert Arenas situation.  Whitlock writes:

Do you think they would paint their bodies in tattoos if they comprehended they were joining a multi-billion-dollar industry tied to presenting a wholesome image of its players?

So there is little reason to marvel at Gilbert Arenas’ stupidity. He’s in crowded company, many of the NBA’s biggest names have as little self-awareness as Agent Zero IQ.

To them, the NBA is not a business. It’s the Senior AAU Tour with bi-weekly paychecks, private planes that double as floating casinos and a potential baby mama (or two) waiting in every city.

I don’t disagree with the last statement.  While many players in the NBA take their jobs very seriously, there’s also plenty of players who haven’t matured emotionally past that AAU stage in high school.  To be somewhat fair, the “baby mama” attitude goes back decades, snaring superstars such as Julius Erving, Karl Malone, and The Sperminator himself, Shawn Kemp.

I’m not sure where Whitlock gets the idea that the NBA is promoting itself as a family-oriented business, though.  Stern’s most brilliant business manuever was taking the Faustian bargain that encouraging the hip-hop “street ball” culture of the ghettos to come to the NBA would result in increased interest and fan devotion has paid off in spades.  And while it’s made a lot of people in the NBA fabulously wealthy, and provided us with some incredible displays of talent and athleticism, the other side of that is that when you allow an environment that gives a wink and a nod to gangster culture to develop, it’s hardly surprising that many players would continue to emulate the worst aspects of the street, especially if they came into riches so soon after high school.  Why bother cleaning up your act when you’ve been coddled as a superstar your whole life for showing your ass in public?

Whitlock goes on to suggest the following:

If I were Stern, I’d use this latest player-instigated embarrassment to implement an elevation of the league’s age limit to 21 and entice NCAA schools to offer elite athletes (and other students) majors in the study of professional sports. If a musician can study music, why can’t a basketball player study sports? Sports have played as significant a role in influencing American culture as music or art.

While the idea is interesting, I think Whitlock is missing the forest for the trees here.  I have no problem if the NBA decided to set the age limit to 21--it’s a private organization, can set its own rules about hiring criteria as long as it doesn’t violate the equal protection measure clause, and players can always try to get a European or Latin American team to hire them if they want to play early professionally.  But I don’t think it’s going to solve the problem; it might help somewhat, but only a fundmental change in the sport’s culture will accomplish what Whitlock wants to see.

There’s anothe issue to consider as well.  Arenas may have shown the gun as a joke, but the other player involved, Javaris Crittenton, is now reported to have actually locked and loaded his own gun that he had brought to the arena.  Arenas was suspended indefinitely, and his guns weren’t loaded; if Crittenton actually loaded his gun, what sort of punishment should he get?

Posted by on 01/08/10 at 11:42 PM in 2nd Amendment   Celebrity Idiots   Decline of Western Civilization   Life & Culture   The Press Machine  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Friday, October 02, 2009

The Obligatory Polanski Post

I’ll admit that I was once sympathetic to Roman Polanski.  That sympathy lasted from the time that I heard something vague about a crime until I the time I read the details of what he had actually done.

I have to wonder if the shitwits signing a petition against his extradition are in the same zone of ignorance I was in during 0.35 seconds it took for Google to find the details.  As my favorite movie critic—James Berardinelli—notes:

The problem is that, no matter how many years have passed, no matter how many great things Polanski has done in the interim, and no matter how sorrowful he may be about what happened, the fact is that a crime was committed. And not just any crime. As part of a bargain, Polanski pled guilty to having sex with a minor (statutory rape). This is one of those typical Hollywood double-standard deals where stars get off lighter than “normal” people because they have high-priced lawyers and are famous. The actual charges were a lot grimmer: drugging a 13-year old girl then having non-consensual vaginal/oral/anal sex with her. That’s “real” rape, not just the statutory kind. No one seems to dispute that this is what happened. It’s in the police reports and the victim maintains her stance that she repeatedly said “no” and asked him to stop, but he didn’t.

The petition, which “demands” Polanski’s “immediate” release from custody, would be laughable if it wasn’t serious. It makes the following assertion: “His arrest follows an American arrest warrant dating from 1978 against the filmmaker, in a case of morals.” A case of morals? Do the drafters of this petition consider rape to be a case of morals? To me, this indicates those who wrote this are unaware of the facts of the case.


Some want to excuse Polanski because of his early life associations with the Holocaust and the murder of his wife at the hands of the Manson Family. In some ways, I find this to be the most repugnant of all defenses because it implies that tragedy excuses heinous behavior. It’s the ultimate in shifting blame.

Read the whole thing.

I have never seen anything as tone-deaf as the defense of Polanski.  Even feminists are sticking up for him.

Look.  You can think Polanski is a brilliant director.  That changes nothing.  You can argue the legal technicalities or ask “why now?” or point out that the victim doesn’t want him extradited.  I think those points are irrelevant but they are at least arguments.

But to sit here and defend his actions; to claim that it shouldn’t matter because he’s some kind of film genius (I’m sorry; did you guys see Bitter Moon?); to trivialize the drugging and rape of 13-year-old is to encapsulate everything every anti-Hollywood nutter has ever said.  It is to say that the law doesn’t apply to famous people.

To their credit, most on the Left are not buying this load of garbage (and his biggest defender is the normally brilliant Anne Applebaum, who needs her head pulled out of her ass at once).  Here’s a round-up from Ta-Nehisi, who also points out that there are far greater injustices to be fought right now, including the Willingham case.  Even Sean Penn and Tim Robbins have kept their distance.

When Spicoli won’t bite on your petition, you may have a problem.

Posted by Hal_10000 on 10/02/09 at 12:10 PM in Celebrity Idiots  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Tuesday, July 07, 2009

Lunatics running the asylum?

Check this out. You can’t make this shit up. Biden says:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Israel has a sovereign right to decide what is in its best interest in dealing with Iran’s nuclear ambitions whether the United States agrees or not, U.S. Vice President Joe Biden said in an interview on Sunday. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has signaled that he agrees with U.S. President Barack Obama’s end-of-the-year deadline for progress in efforts to engage Iran diplomatically to resolve dispute over its nuclear program.

But then Obama says:

US President Barack Obama on Tuesday strongly denied that the United States had given Israel an approval to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities. US President Barack Obama gestures during his speech at the New Economic School, in Moscow, Tuesday. Asked by CNN whether Washington had given Israel a green light for such an attack, Obama answered: “Absolutely not.”

What’s this kind of diplomacy called? Bush was labeled a cowboy for talking straight and though. I bet the usual leftists and the MSM will call this wishy-washy stuff “Ivy League” diplomacy. The hallmark of genius! A blessing and breath of fresh air compared to what we had before! It gets even funnier though.

Check this out! At 4:15 AM our time Obama said this:

“The future does not belong to those who gather armies on a field of battle or bury missiles in the ground.” - President BARACK OBAMA, calling on the U.S. and Russia to overcome Cold War mistrust and reduce nuclear arsenals, in his commencement speech before graduates of Moscow’s New Economic School

At 7:45 AM our time, just some 3 1/2 hours later, this happened:

ISLAMABAD – Suspected U.S. missiles and Pakistani fighter jets attacked followers of a notorious militant leader close to the Afghan border Tuesday, but the army complained the American strikes were hurting its campaign against the country’s public enemy No. 1. Between 12 and 14 militants were killed when two missiles hit a training camp run by Pakistani Taliban chief Baitullah Mehsud in South Waziristan tribal region, intelligence officials said on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to media. The missiles were believed fired by American drones.

Another contradiction. This seems the be SOP with these kids. Now I know that Obama is a true believer, and the article explains a lot of the terribly idiotic decisions being made and actions taken - damaging both to our economy, our security, and to our future – by the idiots in charge. Can you imagine how Bush, or any non democrat for that matter, would have been treated if they were pulling these kinds of stunts?

For Christ’s sake this lightweight, which keeps telling the Russians they want to “reset” relationships, f*cks up and calls Putin the Russian President - it’s Medvedev for those that are ill informed, and despite the general held belief that Putin is the puppet master – adding another blunder to the chain of idiotic and offensive mistakes made by this diplomatic genius core. Again: how would Bush have been treated had he or his people made such a terrible mistake? Have no doubt that the Russians think he is both weak and stupid. Any optimism is because they see their country gaining big at the expense of America.

And these gaffes like this are not the occasional exception either: they are the norm with these people. After Biden admits that they have no clue what they are doing we are now being told they want to pass another stimulus bill, throwing likely another $1 trillion into a bottomless pit. Wasn’t one patronage bill that funneled hundreds of billions of tax payer money to democrat lobbyists, operatives, organizations, and past and future donors enough? How greedy can these crooks be?

We are getting told that America finally has risen and now has experienced and smart leadership, but to me it looks like all we have are a bunch of immature, egocentric children that are unable to even realize they are way out of their element. Thank god so many are distracted, or they might get in trouble.

Cross posted at Wasting time with Alex

Posted by AlexinCT on 07/07/09 at 06:52 AM in Celebrity Idiots   Left Wing Idiocy   Politics   Law, & Economics   The Press Machine   War on Terror/Axis of Evil  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Thursday, April 30, 2009

Stewart Bombs Out

Generally, I like Jon Stewart and the Daily Show.  But last night, he said something so dumb, my jaw dropped.  It’s about five minutes into this clip.

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c
Cliff May Unedited Interview Pt. 2
Daily Show
Full Episodes
Economic CrisisFirst 100 Days

He says that Harry Truman was a war criminal for dropping the A-bomb on Japan.  According to Stewart, we should have dropped one off the shore of Japan to demonstrate it.

Just to explain my bias: I am loathe to apply retroactive judgement to historical decisions.  I force myself to remember that hindsight is 20/20 and that people usually don’t make bad decisions because they’re evil or stupid.  They often don’t have complete information.  In this case, let’s punt for the moment on the wisdom of the A-bomb.  Truman had no way of knowing about long-term radiological effects.  The devastation did not seem particularly worse than what fire-bombing had inflicted on Tokyo.  We were in a brutal war that had dragged out for four years.  Truman knew an invading army would face thousands of kamikaze planes and millions of armed civilians.  It’s possible to argue that Truman did the wrong thing.  But it’s not possible to say it was an indefensible decision.  And war criminal?  Truman didn’t vaporize two cities because he hated Japanese people.  He did it because he thought it would end the war.  And, while there’s controversy aplenty, there are solid reasons to believe that the bombing did end the war.

Moreover, Stewart is also specifically ignorant about the situation.  Jon, we only had two bombs.  Would Japan have surrendered after an offshore test? Are you willing to expend half your nuclear arsenal trying out that theory? There’s very good reason to doubt they would have surrendered even after Hiroshima.

People are praising Stewart for the interview in general, but I wasn’t terribly impressed—I’m usually not when he tries to play serious pundit.  He muddles the arguments against torture and can’t really respond to much of what Cliff May is saying.  I tuned out before I could hear if Stewart pointed out that MacArthur was insistent on humane treatment of Japanese prisoners—even after the horrors of Bataan.

Stewart is a funny guy and a good talk show host.  He’s good at satire and getting in the occasional good point.  But put him in a serious debate and he’s out of his element, Donnie.

Posted by Hal_10000 on 04/30/09 at 06:53 PM in Celebrity Idiots  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Monday, April 13, 2009

The Spector Of Guilt

In case you missed it, Phil Spector is going away for a while.

Phil Spector is likely to die in prison after the legendary music producer was convicted of murder for shooting the actor Lana Clarkson in a drunken and “sadistic” bout of Russian roulette.

The Los Angeles jury spent nearly nine days deliberating over the case in which the prosecution portrayed Spector, 68, as a misogynist with a history of pulling guns and “playing Russian roulette with the lives of women” while drunk. Prosecutors said it was only by a miracle that Clarkson, star of the cult film Barbarian Queen, was the first to die.

Spector was taken to prison to await a sentence next month of at least 18 years following his conviction for second-degree murder at his mansion six years ago.

However long he remains in prison, the trial has destroyed the reputation of one of the most influential music producers of the 60s, who pioneered the “wall of sound” with groups such as the Ronettes and went on to work closely with some of the most renowned musicians of the next two decades, from the Beatles to the Ramones.

Spector’s wife, Rachelle, sobbed as the decision was announced.

“By the grace of God, five other women got the empty chamber and lived to tell,” said the prosecutor, Truc Do. “Lana just happened to be the sixth woman who got the bullet,”

Do told the court that Spector was used to tormenting women without suffering any consequences because he existed “in a world where money and fame buys you the VIP treatment.”

“Behind the VIP was a very dangerous man, a man who believed that all women ... deserve a bullet in their head. In every single one of these incidents, Mr Spector demonstrates conscious disregard for human life. Her death was a death waiting to happen in his world.”

Spector’s influence on rock and roll cannot be denied. It also cannot be denied that he is a seriously disturbed individual, with a pattern of behavior that goes back several decades. They say that the line between genius and madness is a thin one. Spector appears not only to have crossed it, but taken a swan dive to the other side.

Posted by West Virginia Rebel on 04/13/09 at 06:10 PM in Celebrity Idiots  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Axis Of Evildoers

Frazier offers his opinion on the stimulus:

“The only problem I see with the stimulus package is that, as a rule, it rewards the people that are evildoers—all of them—and that’s a problem for me, personally,” Grammer told CNSNews.com at the reopening of the Ford’s Theater in Washington, D.C.

“It may not be a popular position to take,” said Grammer, “but I honestly believe that the bill is fraught with the idea that those who did the most damage to our country - from the bottom up and the top down - are the ones that are actually going to get the most rewards.”

You know, he seemed much more reasonable as Hank McCoy. I guess Sideshow Bob is hoping that people still yearn for a Republican who will rule them like a king.

Posted by West Virginia Rebel on 02/18/09 at 08:29 PM in Celebrity Idiots  • (0) TrackbacksPermalink
Page 1 of 26 pages  1 2 3 >  Last »