This post contains my patented Tort Reform Quiz For Dummies. At last you can find out if you support tort reform or not! You’ll find the short quiz after the introductory crap. Wade on!
The punch landed bone-jarringly hard and the boxer in the red trunks suddenly ate canvas, a little puddle of drool forming quickly under his bloodied face. The referee counted it down then, with so sign of movement, called the fight. It was a knockout!
The blue corner jumped up and down ecstatically. “Way to go, champ! Way to go!”
The red corner carried their fighter back to their corner, balanced his lifeless body on his stool, and also began jumping up and down. “Wow, what a fight! You took ’em to the cleaners, champ! You really flayed ’em!”
Erm, what? Meanwhile the monkeys are flying in from the East chanting, “Oh wee oh! Oh wee oh!”
Such is the way of politics these days. Is my example a little extreme? Perhaps, but sadly not by much.
Continue reading →
2012: Logo Obama vs Logo Romney
It’s winner take all in this battle of the presidential wannabe logos:
Obama wins by a landslide!
I’m being unbiased and open-minded as hell when I declare Obama as the winner in this battle of the logos! I mean, come on, Mitt! What the fuck is that thing?
Tom’s Law #42
A logo similar to one I could make myself is a failure.
I was racking my brain. Where in the name of Zeus’ butthole have I seen that logo before?
Oh yeah! That’s where. It doesn’t feel very “presidential” to have a logo that’s reminiscent of toothpaste, but maybe that’s just me. Mitt is minty fresh! “Minty Romney.” Yeah, I like the sound of that.
Dubya, Barry and Minty. Sounds like a freak presidential version of the Pep Boys.
But wait. There is still some other nagging feeling about that logo. What could it be?
Oh yeah. That’s it.
“Okay, Mitt. Here’s the deal. We came up with a bunch of logos for you to choose from. Remember, this is critical. Which one do you like?”
“I’m rather partial to the one that looks like a blurry, pathetically fat ‘R’. R is for Romney. Get it?”
If the logo is any indication of Romney’s decision making skills, I can guarantee we do not want him to be president. Ever.
Other Wannabe Logos
Note: I visited the websites of some people who have campaigns and attempted to locate their “logos.” The images I found (shown below) may or may not officially be “logos.” It’s not like they offer them up on a silver platter as an easy download for my convenience. I apologize in advance for any logo misrepresentation. I did my best!
Sarah Palin – As a candidate who hasn’t announced yet, she’s still a no show in this department. When it finally does pop on the scene, I’m sure it will have eagles and mountains, amber waves of grain, and be fruited all across the plains. It may also have a book, crosshairs, helicopter and/or a bus.
Meh. Not much to see here. Yes, it does have an eagle, but the colors are off and I could have made something even better. Take one letter of your name and substitute it with something that looks like that letter. That is so Google.
Another eagle. The colors are better, and it has a more official look. Meh. Use a fancy thing known as a “font” and flourish up a single letter. Now that is what I call design.
The graphic designer costs must also be too damn high! This is actually my favorite. Go, Jimmy, go!
This one feels so deco. And just a hint of American flag. That is subtle and works on levels. Also, he boldly explores the seldom used red, white and blue color scheme. That is daring and shows outside-the-box thinking. Personally, though, if I was running for president I’d go with green and blue.
This logo was actually designed to Newt’s exacting standards. “I want red, white and blue.” (Of course.) “Also, put a wavy red thing and a star somewhere.” Also noteworthy: No last name. Newt thinks he is on par with Cher, Madonna and Sting. Ego much?
I’ve actually seen signs for city council that far surpassed this one. The only interesting thing here is that the “H” is trying to flash us. Another example of single-letter-flourish “design.” No eagle, either. Is she anti-American? Perhaps she could add a turkey to set herself apart. That was Benjamin Franklin’s choice for our national bird, after all.
You’ve got blockage
A year ago today I blogged about Google pulling out of China. Google had redirected google.cn to google.com.hk. I just verified that still holds true as of this morning.
Also being reported is that China has closed 130,000 internet cafes during the last six years in an attempt to control information available to its people.
China, prominently showcased as the site of the 2008 Olympics, initially stated that Internet access would not be censored at the Olympic Village press center. However, journalists that arrived at the press center found that sites containing politically sensitive matter were inaccessible and learned that the IOC had quietly agreed to “some of the limitations.”
According to Wikipedia, China’s internet censorship does not extend to Hong Kong:
The controls come about a year after Google removed its Chinese language Internet search engine from China and relocated it to Hong Kong, where Beijing has few controls.
Now Google and China are at it again. Yesterday Google accused China of “disrupting” Gmail service saying it was due to a “government blockage.”
Beijing has long had some of the world’s strictest Internet controls. But after pro-democracy demonstrations broke out in the Middle East in January, the Chinese government seems to have intensified effort to censor Web content and disrupt Web searches related to calls for similar protests in China.
China currently blocks other social media sites so prominently featured in pro-democracy demonstrations in other countries recently like YouTube, Twitter and Facebook.
Both quotes are from The New York Times.
Meanwhile, China has intensified condemnation of Libyan air strikes and Libya’s top oil official in Tripoli said that oil contracts could be offered directly to China. Along with Russia, China abstained from a U.N. resolution calling for a ceasefire in Libya. India has also criticized the attacks on Libya.
As if that wasn’t enough, China recently was targeted in the crosshairs of none other than Sarah Palin:
I personally have huge military concerns about what is going on in China. What’s with the buildup? You don’t see a tangible outside threat . . . to that country. Is that just for a defensive posture? How can that be? Stockpiling ballistic missiles, submarines, new-age ultramodern fighter aircrafts. It certainly means America needs to be vigilant looking at what China is doing.
–Sarah Palin, speaking in India, March 19, 2011 (Source.)
The destinies of the United States and China seem to be converging in a variety of ways. The question is, how will that all play out? Will we ever so pro-democracy demonstrations in China like we’ve seen in Egypt and other countries? It sure seems unlikely but 2011 has been a strange year so far. Who knows?
Sarah Palin stripped down
First things first, if you clicked on this post because of a certain something teased by the title: shame, shame, shame!
I am not a pundit or an especially keen observer of things political. I’m an entertainer. Even so, I still have my political feelings and leanings, and I can’t help, from time to time, to inject a bit of that into my blog offerings. At the end of the day, I’m only human.
In fact, politically speaking, I find myself on the short end of the stick the vast majority of the time. Apparently I like to be different from those around me. That decidedly makes me a poor choice for armchair editorializing.
Even so, I’ve been thinking a lot about the latest brouhaha about the reaction to the shooting in Arizona and Sarah Palin. It’s one of those things that I just can’t shake and I find it back on my mind again and again.
I admit, my first response to the shooting was reflexively visceral. I remembered Palin’s tweet about “reload” and how it directly referenced a Facebook post with bullseye symbols denoting candidates for office in the United States.
Never have I suspected a causal relationship between these facts, but I did think it was highly unfortunate that a person Palin had labeled with a bulleye icon had been shot. I remember thinking, “I sure wouldn’t want to be in Palin’s shoes.”
If it was me, being in that sort of circumstance would have left me feeling bad.
This is when I had an idea and decided to take another approach. Maybe it’s the part of me that takes a bit of pride in being unbiased and considers itself to be, at least on some level, a scientist. What if, I surmised, we chucked politics and identities out the window? I decided to strip things down, to deconstruct the situation and try to examine some basic facts.
What we have in this case is a person’s comments and symbols directed at another human being who ended up being shot. I submit that most people in that situation would feel bad about something like that. I know I would.
But how did Palin respond? With an eight-minute video that initially attempted to portray understanding and compassion but clearly switched gears to make the point that opinions about her were a “blood libel.”
Again, forget about the content of the “blood libel” thing. There are those who will take great umbrage to that on the content-level. That’s not pertinent to my point here.
I don’t think it should work like this. Understanding and compassion are fine, but how can you include the “blood libel” response in the same message? That effectively makes the whole video a me-oriented thing. It’s like including the word “but” in a compliment, statement, or apology.
“I’m sorry about what I did but …”
“I like your cooking but …”
“I feel for your loss but …”
“I love you but …”
What could possibly come next in these examples that won’t impact and minimize the tone of the initial statement? I read something about this recently, but alas I can’t remember the specifics or where I saw it. Basically it was about the falseness of statements that begin with an overt message and then subtly change tone in the middle. This results in the overall message not matching what was initially said.
In other words, at least with the persona she projects to the public, she doesn’t feel that bad. In fact, she takes a line in the sand approach and makes it about her. In that light, the portions of the video that pertain to understanding and compassion ring hollow.
This is a trend with Palin. Her approach is part “in your face” and part “never back down.” She takes pride in doing what others perceive as being “politically incorrect.” Then, if there happens to be any fallout, she ups the ante by taking a position that is basically the kindergarten equivalent of, “you push me, I’ll push you back.” That projects a certain image and makes it easier to forget who really pushed first.
Forget the specifics of what she actually said and try to look at her behaviors and overall patterns. To me this is what scares me about the possibility of Palin in the White House.
Space donut says, “Hey, hole! Did ya miss me?”
When I find myself in times of trouble, space donut comes to me…
When you see the Space Donut then you know it is time for political and religious debate ravings. Think of it as a themed “open thread” but please try to remain reverent to the spirit of the donut. Also, please keep your arms and legs within the post at all times, and remember, no flash photography.
Elric66, this one is for you.
Cry “Havoc!” and let slip the dogs of war! I know I shut you down in that other post so here you can be belligerent, off-topic and non-responsive to your heart’s content. This is your payback time.
Ready to test your mettle? The time has come to run my gauntlet and show us all what you are made of. Something tells me it’s not “sugar and spice and all things nice.” 🙂
- Calling Obama a moron? Check!
- Calling Obama “al-Thuggy?” Check!
- Calling Obama voters “drones?” Check!
- Faulty logic? Check!
- Whining about criticisms of Palin while you rip Obama a new asshole? Check!
- Linking a YouTube video with Islamo-fascists doing interesting things? Check!
- Insulting anyone with a different opinion than you? Check!
All systems are go. Launch the space donut!!!