Thanks again!

Had another great show last night, thanks again to all who tuned in. And thanks again to Danah Gaz and Chris Hazelton from joining me! If you missed it, you can find the record on the IMHO Radio page.

THANKS EVERYONE!

I want to thank everyone who tuned in last night, and helped make the premier such a success.  In case anyone missed it, there is a link to the audio file in the top-right page, "IMHO Radio."

So THANK YOU, and I hope to have some of you back next week!

Don't forget...

Rainbow.FM Program Schedule

Tuesday, May 5th

7:00 - 8:00 pm est -  The Paul And Matty Show

8:00 pm - 10:00 pm est - Cutmore 

10:00 pm - 11:00 pm est - In My Humble Opinion with Niceguy Eddie

with special guest, Danah Gaz

IMHO Radio

Rainbow.FM Program Schedule

Tuesday, May 5th

7:00 - 8:00 pm est -  The Paul And Matty Show

8:00 pm - 10:00 pm est - Cutmore 

10:00 pm - 11:00 pm est - In My Humble Opinion with Niceguy Eddie

with special guest, Danah Gaz

Gold Star Awards, June, 2012

Only four posts last month. That's what happens when work kicks up and you're travelling. (OK, fair enough: That's what happens when work kicks up and I'M travelling. Other people still manage to update their blogs on a regular basis!) And the first casualty of that, aside from spelling, grammar and the profundity of content, is the Monthly Gold Star Awards.  So here they are for June.  I'll have July's up... sometime in July. (Hopefully.)

1976, if you're still counting - 2 Golds and 2 Silvers...


The ROBIN ROBERTS Gold Star #52: Imagine2050

I came across this fairly recently. Great blog / news site, covering the stories that the so-called "liberal press" won't touch, with a focus on issues of race, immigration, cultural diversity and tolerance.

On their website, they describe themselves as: Activists, immigrants, artists and students who are invested in a future nation that embodies a multiracial democracy. By the year 2050, one out of five Americans will be foreign born. Latino and Asian communities will increase significantly. There will be no clear racial or ethnic majority.  We will become a nation of minorities. Today’s perceptions of foreignness will challenge how Americans identify themselves over the coming decades. In light of these challenges, Imagine 2050 is committed to igniting candid conversations around race, immigration, environment, and American identity.

Great and profound stuff.  Check them out!


The BOB LEMON Gold Star #53: Press Pass TV

Most of my regular readers are already of the opinion that the main stream media is useless and that journalism is a dying art.  Well, the work being done by this organization, teaching young people about the issues that go unreported on, and training them in the skills they'll need to present these issues, may just revive it. And that's a good thing. I'll let their own site speak for itself:

We work with Boston and Worcester area youth to produce short news segments that tackle underrepresented social justice issues and celebrates those organizations and individuals working to make their community a better place. Middle school, High school, and College age students engage in all aspects of production, from developing questions to editing video.

Our content is intended to promote civic awareness and action. We create curriculum around our segments to increase awareness, action and accountability. We also hold meetings to continue the discussion of issues raised in our work and support local campaigns for civic action by producing stories on their initiatives.

Recent psychological studies show that when people are exposed to others engaging in benevolent acts, they are more likely to do the same. At Press Pass TV, we operate on this principle and know that for real change to occur, people must regularly witness the amazing acts that others commit on a daily basis.


The Freddie Lindstrom Linoleum Star: Accuracy in Media

Just as Freddie Lindstrom does not belong in Baseball's Hall of Fame, the almost comically Orwellian named "Accuracy in Media" does not belong on anyone's list of honors. (Right-wing Jackasses notwithstanding.) But just as the Baseball Hall of Fame has the dubious distinction of honoring mediocre talents like Lindstrom, so do does this mediocre blog occasionally hand out a dubious honor to an outfit like AIM.  What can I say? A Liberal will prove you're wrong, while a Conservative will prove you're Liberal. 

(BTW... I wish I had though of reserving the Chick Hafey's and Lloyd Waner's and Highpocket's Kelly's of the world for the dogshit sites that I sometimes "highlight"back at the beginning. Unfortunately so good sites were linked to lousy players and some lousy sites were linked to good ones. Oh well.)


The Roger Connor Silver Star #50: Invisible Bread

This is a webcomic about every day humor.  Elegant in it's simplicity, it features just stick figures and smiley faces (like Political Symmetry, if it were in color) and yet still manages to convey emotion and depth and touch on all of the funny situation that we've had to deal with, or (thankfully) managed to avoid as well as soem truly abstract and absurdly off the wall stuff.  There a lot of college humor, about late night cram sessions, video games addiction and snack food, as well as awkward social and relationship material. Hey: It's funny. Read it! ;)

So much stupidity, so little time...

...Or at least I've spent very little time lately pointing it out and having some fun at the Right's expense.

I read an interesting piece the other day on "Accuracy In Media" - arguably the most Orwellian named web-site in existence, BTW -  about Media Matters. (Or does it?)  It was full of enough Right Wing talking points and Conspiracy Theories to fill a Bingo Card: George Soros, Democratic Run, Obama Campaign Coordinated... You name it. Of course... there was one thing that was conspicuously absent form this hatchet job: Even a single example of ANYTHING that Media matters has ever gotten wrong.  Not one! Not a single example! And of course, I defy ANYONE (William?) to find even a single piece on MediaMatters in which they call out something as inaccurate and have nothing more to say about it than "these people are Conservative" or "this is all coordinated by Ruppert Murdoch." And even when, in that case, the accusation would have the benefit of actually being TRUE. Because Liberals are smart enough to realize that this kind of ad hominen attack? IS COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT. Why would I even give a fuck if George Soros IS funding them, if what they are saying IS TRUE?!

It just goes back to what I always say:

A Liberal will prove that you're wrong and a Conservative will prove that you're Liberal.

(BTW... ANOTHER THING you will never find in MediaMatters is this kind of EXAMPLE FREE hack-level hatchet-job. Just sayin'.)

--------------------------------------------------

In related news, I heard earlier today that Rush Limbaugh now does not have so much as a single corporate advertiser left on his program.  I haven't been able to substantiate that claim as stated, but o March Eighth they were forced to broadcast over five minutes of DEAD AIR due to the corporate boycott that he's brought upon himself.  And that's great.  I say: Five down, One Hundred Seventy Five to go!  And while the dream of his broadcasting demise remains elusive, the fact of the matter is that TODAY, not a single ad was aired from a corporate sponsor. NOT ONE! And he's had the nerve to say that he "won't forgive them" and "doesn't want them back."   And that's funny... because the guy's been in radio for over 25 years now, so you'd think he have some fucking idea how that media actually FUNCTIONS.

That's fine though. In the meantime, I'm sure that the United Negro College Fund is enjoying all of the free advertising it's getting on his program. Because apparently IRONY is a terrible thing to waste.

Oh.. and did you hear? Today he claimed that Sandra Fluke's appearance before the Senate and the subsequent action but his sponsors to bankrupt his program are all part of a coordinated conspiracy by the Obama Administration to get rid of him.  I'm not sure where calling a woman's advocate a "slut" figured in to all that... the Batman Gambit , I guess.  But at what point will these morons stop trying to conjure up fantasy conspiracy theories and just face the fact that they might... JUST MIGHT... have actually been WRONG?!

Isn't that the simpler explanation?

Note to Rush: This isn't what an Obama orchestrated conspiracy looks like. Obama couldn't organize a barbecue, and neither can the Democrats.  This is what it looks like when you get your ass kicked by the FREE MARKET and the people's FREEDOM OF SPEECH after you piss of LITERALLY EVERYONE.

But by all means, keep digging. You've got all the money you need, so there's no point in turning back now. Keep showing everyone what the Republican Party, the Right Wing and the Conservative movement REALLY stand for. Keep exposing the Faustian Bargain they made with you back in 1992 (despite the fact that they LOST that year!) and see if you can't take down Hannity, Fox News, and the Republican Party with you while you're at it.

Do some GOOD for a change with your short-ass, miserable existence.

Beautiful Song

So, there I was, at the gym, right in the middle of my second set of biangle presses when this... absolutely, amazingly beautiful and moving song comes across on Pandora.  Have you ever been brought to tears by a song while you're in the middle of lifting weights?  The irony of that juxtaposition of imagery is not lost on me, believe me. LOL.  But this song is just... incredible.  I'm not one of those who often  romanticizes the whole "greatest generation" thing - and I've had more than enough of the "baby boomers" to last ten lifetimes - but this was one of the most poignant tribute to the men and women who served in WWII that I've ever heard.  Here it is, The War was in Color, by Carbon Leaf:



I just find that so incredibly moving.

BTW...Speaking of WWII, here's Cracked.com doing revisionist history the CORRECT way, as opposed to the Glenn Beck way: Five widely believed facts about WWII that are bullshit. Three cheers for the American, jingoistic education system, huh? In all fairness, I'm not saying that we should now blindly treat all of these as facts. But they certainly are interpretations that warrant some serious thought and consideration. (As opposed to the revisionist crap that Glenn Beck vomits out, which is only food for thinking how mindnumblingly stupid and/or completely bat-shit insane Glenn beck is.)  Anyway, the article certainly gave me a lot to think about.  Very interesting.

Anyway, I declare April 20 to be National "Punch a Conservative who thinks Liberals don't honor the Troops" Day! Who's with me? LOL.

One last thing, going back to the music. A few songs later Great Big Sea's rendition (they sofa king rock!) of "Dunken Sailor" came on. You know:

What do you do with a drunken sailor?
What do you do with a drunken sailor?
What do you do with a drunken sailor?
Earl-lie in the morning?

And the verses are along the lines of:

Shave his belly with a rusty razor!
Shave his belly with a rusty razor!
Shave his belly with a rusty razor!
Earl-lie in the morning!

And years ago a friend of mine who's also a huge fan of Irish music gave me an absolutely inspired LAST VERSE for the song. Whenever I sing it (car, shower) I always end with:

Put him at the helm of the Exxon Valdez!
Put him at the helm of the Exxon Valdez!
Put him at the helm of the Exxon Valdez!
Earl-lie in the morning!

Cheers!

Misogyny.

(Please take the vulgar bits humorously, as they are intended, and bear with me for the overall point.)


Now that gays are allowed to serve openly in the military, it was not going to take long before the question of women serving in combat comes up. Well… it’s already come up informally, but I mean as a legislative measure. And I’m sure everyone who was around the last time the Republicans promsied us "something different" remembers Newt Gingrich's wonderfully awkward explanation of why women shouldn’t be allowed in combat:

If combat means living in a ditch, females have biological problems staying in a ditch for thirty days because they get infections and they don't have upper body strength. I mean, some do, but they're relatively rare. On the other hand, men are basically little piglets, you drop them in the ditch, they roll around in it, doesn't matter, you know. These things are very real. On the other hand, if combat means being on an Aegis-class cruiser managing the computer controls for twelve ships and their rockets, a female may be again dramatically better than a male who gets very, very frustrated sitting in a chair all the time because males are biologically driven to go out and hunt giraffes.

Now, just for fun, and to drive home the point later, I'm going to address the… *ahem* questionable points, in the order that they appear.

“living in a ditch”

OK. I realize that our men in green DO spend some time in “ditches,” but LIVING IN THEM? I’ve heard of “always fighting the last war” but THIS GUY seemed stuck fighting World War ONE!  Newt: We don’t have too many men “living in ditches” anymore.

“biological problems” and/or “infections”

I didn’t SEE him say this myself, but I seriously wonder if he was blushing. Newt? WHAT THE FUCK WERE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Is he seriously suggesting that the simple act of “living in a ditch” is somehow more likely to give a woman an “infection” than a man? Somehow I doubt he’s talking about the risk of stepping on a rusty nail on your trench-climbing ladder, but I also strongly suspect that he has no idea WHAT he’s fucking talking about, and that 99% of his audience will be too embarrassed to ask. (The other 1% were women, but the women in HIS audience apparently know better, or at least did way back in 1995, than to question the men.)

“they don't have upper body strength. I mean, some do, but they're relatively rare”

Nobody said the numbers should be 50/50, Newt. The INTEREST isn't even 50/50!  The question is why those “relatively rare” (not “rare” mind you, “relatively rare”) specimens of brute femininity are barred from combat operations. Unless you use your dick to load a rifle, I think you just shot your entire argument in the foot. (And I hence award it the Purple Heart, and you the Purple Brain.)

“men are basically little piglets”

The more I here assholes like Newt Gingrich speak, the more I tend to agree with this point, but don’t try to drag the rest of us down to your level, Newt.

“These things are very real.”

The last refuge of every bullshitter: Assuring you that he’s NOT bullshitting you! (And I PROMISE YOU: That’s a FACT!)

“a female may be again dramatically better than a male who gets very, very frustrated sitting in a chair all the time”

Did you ever notice how the only time a man like this asshole ever acknowledges that a woman might be even remotely competent at anything, it’s usually in a job that he figures most men wouldn’t want anyway? (And while it’s beside the point I’m trying to make, I think he’s severely underestimated the popularity of video gaming amongst our young male population, seeing as how the job in question was “managing the computer controls for twelve ships and their rockets.”)

“because males are biologically driven to go out and hunt giraffes”

Who the fuck hunts giraffes? Seriously.

OK, THAT was fun. But what’s the POINT? (Apart from making Newt Gingrich look like a crusty old bafoon, which is about as difficult as poutting on a hat.)  Well… In thinking about this line of reasoning, something dawned on me. And I might be late to the party here, but I don’t care.  Maybe you'll all read this and say, "DUH!" But I thought it was rather profound, so please humor me. The chauvinists ALWAYS try to make this kind of an argument: That the sexes are equal, but not the same, and that they’re just good at different things. And USUALLY, at least to me, it seems that the things women are “good at” are generally things men don’t want to do. (Unless the job pays more.) (Which it certainly will, once more men start doing it!)

But it’s not about what women can or can’t do, or even can or can’t do better than men. That really isn’t part of the true reasoning at all. It’s completely irrelevant to them. And that’s evident even in Newt’s own rant: He acknowledges that some, “relatively rare” women, may in fact possess the necessary “upper body strength.” (IOW: Could probably DO this currently men-only job.) But he offers no reason why they should then just be written off. (Unless, as I said, a fifth appendage is somehow necessary to load a rifle and shoot someone.)

Now… give this same man a few drinks (i.e.: loosen him up) and ask him in all seriousness, if there’s REALLY anything a man can do passably well that women can’t.  See… I’ve (mis)spent a lot of my youth drinking with chauvinists and you’d be surprised how often (almost every time) I got the following answer: Pee standing up.


[tongue-in-cheek]

Now, putting aside the profound societal implications that upright urination otherwise enables, I’m sure these same men, in all their infinite wisdom, would be as surprised as many of you no doubt might be, to find out that woman CAN, in fact, pee standing up. With all the socially critical upright posture and politically important accuracy and stream velocity. In fact, with the slightest amount of practice, most women would find that they could “write their name in the snow” every bit as neatly and completely as most men can! (And that’s a critical, combat-related skill after all! I mean: What if your unit got lost in the arctic and you needed to leave a message to help your rescuers locate you?)

[/tongue-in-cheek]


OK, yes, I’m being a bit absurd. And more than a bit vulgar here. But in all seriousness, I am telling NO LIE in my evaluation of the human female’s potential aptitude for artistic expression in that particular media. And what do you supposed would be the answer received from these very same men, given evidence of that revelation?

Well… They’d probably say that it was disgusting. (As I’m sure many of you have also though once or twice by now, hopefully with a unwanted smile, at least on the inside.) But when THEY say “it’s disgusting” that a lot different from YOU saying it, and here’s why:

With you? It’s likely just because you don't appreca vulgarity as much as I hope you do. But with a "little piglet" like Gingrich? It’s because, just like with combat, it’s not about what women can or can’t do, but about what men like Newt Gingrich think they SHOULD be doing. Any woman who comes up against a piece of shit like [Gingrich] in their life, job, relationship, family, etc… will find a constantly moving set of goal posts. At first the man says, “No,” because, “you are not ABLE to do [whatever.]” Then, when a woman shows she CAN do [whatever], the objection becomes. “Men do it better” or (more PC) “men are biologically advantaged towards certain types of activities.” Then when a woman beats out every single man in the world in said activity? She still fails to gain appreciation or acceptance, this time for no reason other than “this is not something [they] think a woman SHOULD be doing.”

The woman’s aptitude for the task in irrelevant, because men like Newt Gingrich don’t really CARE about the task. What they CARE about is the POWER to determine WHO should be doing WHAT. The POWER to decide what tasks should be done by men, (i.e.: the relatively fun, uber-glorified, high paying ones) and what tasks men don’t want to do women are *ahem* better at. What women really can or can’t do, or what (or even IOF) they are REALLY better at, is secondary to these men maintaining their accumulated power over them.

It’s not about a woman taking a man's “job,” whatever that job might have been. It’s about a woman taking away a man’s power to decide where they belong, what a "man's job" actually IS, as opposed to their own ability and actual, objective evidence of their aptitude deciding. Like almost everything else with the Right, REALITY takes a back seat to the perpetuation of beliefs that are beneficial to maintaining their POWER.

Keep this in mind the next time you hear Rush Limbaugh, or any of these fools, talk about equal employment, equal pay, or other “women’s issues.”

(Which, despite what Newt Gingrich might tell you, don't generally have anything to do with “infections!”)

Political Schools of thought...

*sigh*

I got an email the other day from a conservative (who else) that made me (1) roll my eyes and (2) got me thinking about our modern political discourse.

WAKE UP   (ed.note: No good ever comes form an email that starts out this way!)

John Smith started the day early having set his alarm clock
(MADE IN JAPAN )
for 6 am. While his coffeepot
(MADE IN CHINA)
was perking, he shaved with his electric razor
(MADE IN HONG KONG)
He put on a dress shirt
(MADE IN SRI LANKA),
designer jeans
(MADE IN SINGAPORE)
and tennis shoes
(MADE IN KOREA)
After cooking his breakfast in his new electric skillet
(MADE IN INDIA)
he sat down with his calculator
(MADE IN MEXICO)
to see how much he could spend today. After setting his watch
(MADE IN TAIWAN )
to the radio
(MADE IN INDIA )
he got in his car
(MADE IN GERMANY )
filled it with GAS
(from Saudi Arabia )
and continued his search for a good paying AMERICAN JOB.

At the end of yet another discouraging and fruitless day checking his Computer
(made in MALAYSIA ),
John decided to relax for a while. He put on his sandals
(MADE IN BRAZIL),
poured himself a glass of wine
(MADE IN FRANCE)
and turned on his TV
(MADE IN INDONESIA),
and then wondered why he can't find a good paying job in AMERICA

AND NOW HE'S HOPING HE CAN GET HELP FROM A PRESIDENT
(MADE IN KENYA.)

You gotta keep this one circulating!

Yeah… you DO have to keep this one circulating. Just take off the lame joke about Obama being “made in Kenya,” and add something instead reminding people which Political Party (the Republicans) and which political philosophy (Conservatives) it was that made “protectionism” to come to be perceived as such a bad thing. I’m not saying it’s a always a GOOD thing - merely that, as this email unintentionally points out - it’s not entirely BAD and the free trade policies advocated for by the Right are have hardly been entirely GOOD. The fact is that this could have been a LIBERLAL’S email, were it not for the stupid Kenyan joke tagged on at the end. Cut it off at “wondered why he can't find a good paying job in AMERICA,” and you've got a pretty great anti-Republican, anti-Conservative, anti-Free Trade email on your hands to send to all your friends in the TRADE UNIONS.

....If you subscribe to that kind of thing.

Personally I don’t think humorous emails are the best forum to discuss serious political issues, but I’m just a liberal so what do I know? Well… ONE thing I've come to realize is that a lot of the people who send these out have NO IDEA what ideology is really behind them, and that just as many of the exact same emails said “Bush,” just a few years ago and “Clinton” before that. (And if you ever receive one that says “George Carlin,” both the late Mister Carlin and myself can assure you that there is rarely more than about 10% or so of ACTUAL Carlin material in them!) So it’s mostly just revealing your ignorance for all to see (a more technologically advance form of Bumper-Sticker Politics) by just blaming whoever’s in office (Beagle Politics.)

I'll call it IN-BOX POLITICS.  Which combines the following two schools:

BUMPER STICKER POLITICS: Forget the 30-second sound bite.  What we've REALLY got to do is boil every issue simultaneously down to a message that (1) Fits on a 4" x 12" sticker, that (2) Can be easily read from 30 feet away, while (3) Driving though traffic at 55 mph.  Because, you know, that's a really effective way to have a political conversation!

And I don't use the word "conversation" lightly - because it's hardly a monologue!  Consider the "Darwin Fish" in answer to the "Jesus Fish." And then they came out with the "Truth" fish.  And then we came out with the Darwin Fish EATING the Truth Fish.  (And now they've done it the other way.)

Or, more simply: (1) My kid's an honor student. (2) My kid beat up your honor student.  And now... (3) My honor student sued your bully!

 - - AND - -

BEAGLE POLITICS: I won't claim this as my own, nor try to explain it as well as The Grey Path does, but this is basically blaming WHOMEVER IS IN OFFICE for all the world's problems.  These are the people who blamed Bush'41 for the '92 recession that got Clinton elected, and who blame Obama for the current economic mess... which started under Bush'43... who ALSO wasn't really responsible for it... (bet you didn't expect me to say THAT!)... because the biggest single cause was the repeal of the Glass-Steagal act, which happened under Clinton... who also is not to blame, because it was legislation written by Republicans and based on the failed Libertarian Philosophy that the Right is still pushing to this day!

See how stupid this is?  See how stupid ALL of this is?!

Now, really... the two serious schools of thought we hear the most about are Neo-Conservatism and Neo-Liberalism or Progressivism.  Now... I'm going to be honest here... I don't have the slightest idea what the difference between "Progressivism" and "Liberalism" is, or the difference between "Neo-Liberalism" and "Classic Liberalism" or "Neo-" and "Classic Conservatism," for that matter.  I don't know... AND I DON'T CARE! (So don't bother trying to spell it out for me.)
 
Since I don't let an ideology do my thinking for me, I don't really care what positions fall under which label.  I really, just DON'T CARE.  I'm not trying to Liberal here, I'm just trying to be RIGHT.  (As in "correct," not "wing.")  And the way I see our modern discourse going, there are really only two groups that matter:
 
One is very strictly and narrowly defined, and I've written about them here, here, here and here.  And to be in this crowd, you must accept EVERY bit of Dogma, even the ones that contradict other ones; you must swallow every lie, accepting every bit of obviously questionable evidence, and utterly reject ANY evidence or argument to the contrary of ANY point.  What's more you must accuse your opponents of committing all of the sins that you do, and you must HATE them, because they are "out to destroy this country."  You must believe in your own perfection and the perfection of your positions and that you have a mandate from God that justifies this belief.  At worst, the weakest in this camp merely keep quiet, fail to criticise the big-talkers, and silently tell themselves that it will all, somehow be OK, since at least the OTHER GUY'S not winning.
 
Then there are the people who simply can't abide this kind of insanity.  And almost regardless of what positions they actually hold, the people in the first camp call them "Liberals" and demonize them.
 
So, from my POV, there are really only two school's of thought: Radical, Right-Wing Reactionary Authoritarianism...
 
...and those who reject it.
 
They have robbed the words "conservative" and "liberal" of any real meaning.  Not that I care... I don't really buy into labels...
 
...which apparently makes me a Liberal.