Archive for the 'Uncategorized' Category

numbers jumping up and down

Tuesday, January 5th, 2016

I hate to say this, because it doesn’t really affect policy, attitudes toward the vast entity, or what the where is going on, but this statistic… currently being cited in news releases about the big stand-off of a bunch of Bundys and canned food enthusiasts out near Burns, Oregon, confusing the locals

The number of anti-government militia groups nationwide grew 37% last year, up from 202 in 2014 to 276, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks such groups.

I have no freaking clue what that statistic means.  202 to 276.  Near as they explain

Well, you know, Amy, the number of militia groups, the number of extremist antigovernment groups, has really skyrocketed since Barack Obama took office in 2009. There was a bit of waning between 2011 and 2013, but in the last couple of years we’ve seen a big increase, particularly in the number of militia groups—as you said, from about 200 to about 275. And this, I think it can be traced directly to what happened at the Cliven Bundy ranch, that you mentioned, in April of 2014.

Yeah, and during that dry-spell, 2011 to 2013, the SPLC talked about heightened concerns because the fall-off spelled more militancy in the remnants.  What’s a batch of 74 throughout the middle West about to do that it wouldn’t have  with 74 fewer…

Meanwhile, they stand-offees are blasting “hope this ain’t another Waco”.  Sure.  They can only hope to be that “important”…

How the Indianapolis Colts can make the playoffs.

Saturday, January 2nd, 2016

As per my annual habit, I take a look at the late, last week or maybe second to last week play-off scenarios for the NFL, and take some merry amusement at whatever line of absurdism springs forth.

This year.  The AFC South title, and with it the 4-seed in the AFC playoffs, remains undecided.  Kind of.  Going into the final week of the season, there’s a two team race between

8-7 Houston Texans
7-8 Indianapolis Colts

The Texans are “in control of their own destiny”, and indeed failing a win would need half of the week 17 schedule to go against them to fail to make the play-offs.

The Colts need half the schedule to go their way to make the playoffs.  There are three paths to the playoffs, all predicated on this slate of games going their way.

(1) Colts beat Titans
(2) Jaguars beat Texans
(3) Ravens beat Bengals
(4) Dolphins beat Patriots
(5) Bills beat Jets
(6) Broncos beat Chargers
(7) Falcons beat Saints

After all that, their best chance to make the play-offs is with

(8) Steelers beat Browns
(9) Raiders beat Chiefs

Then they’re in!  But… and this is where things get amusing…

IF the Browns beat the Steelers  OR… the Chiefs beat the Raiders…

The Colts would make the playoffs if they overtake the current gap in conference rank for points scored and points allowed, which currently sits at a 83 point gap, meaning… oh… the Colts would need to beat the Titans and the Jaguars beat the Texans by an average of 42 points each game.

One more thing: the Colts’s starting, back-up, and 3rd string quarterbacks (for the season) are all out with injuries.

down to a dozen

Saturday, January 2nd, 2016

And then there were… 12.

Former New York Gov. George Pataki dropped out of the 2016 Republican presidential race Tuesday evening, continuing the winnowing of the huge GOP field and eliminating another long shot hopeful from the party’s centrist establishment wing.

He made the announcement on NBC affiliates in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina at 9 p.m. EST, using the last of the free airtime he had received from the network to settle an “equal time” dispute over front-runner Donald Trump having hosted “Saturday Night Live.”

Which is maybe the only interesting tidbit, footnotey that it is, about the 2016 presidential campaign of George Pataki.  Equal time dealings when one of the candidates does the big comedy show hosting.

Although he had a credible resume as the successful governor for more than a decade of one of the nation’s largest states,

Leaving aside the bias in this here Washington Times… he just couldn’t past that draw-back of being successful at a political job for an extended period of time.

The question that Pataki’s dropping out beggers.

New Hampshire State Sen. Nancy Stiles, a steering committee member for Mr. Pataki’s political action committee, would tell The Washington Times only that she received a phone call from the former governor Tuesday and that he wished her a happy new year.

Who will heavy-weight Republican king-maker Nancy Stiles now throw her considerable support in backing?

 

 

irritating regurgitating regurgitation irritation

Monday, December 28th, 2015

I glance at a handful of minutes of CNN’s morning show.  Sound is off.  The panel of political pundit figures are discussing, as suggested by the bottom line, what Donald Trump will say at his Republican Convention speech.  You know, to bring together the factions of the Republican Party, and alleviate the concerns of those Republicans not fully on board Donald Trump as their nominee.

The next topic of discussion, as suggested by the line at the bottom, is whether Hillary Clinton can and excite the floor at the Democratic Convention.

None of this is relevant to any real understanding of our politics, whether that be the superficial horse-race or something more substantial in analysis.  But these (political) cable news channels have lots of time to kill, so here’s what you get on a Sunday morning in the dead of winter.  It is a bit like watching ESPN, except when they’re flipping from one topic to another in rapid fashion on, say, the end of the NFL season and into the playoffs, the premises of how the teams hold up have some basis with the game on the field.

creepy comic strips where you least expect them

Monday, December 28th, 2015

roseisrosecreepygingerbread  So it’s Christmas Eve, you turn to the newspaper comics page, and what do comic strip duo Don Wimmer and Pat Brady give you for your daily saccharine “aw” that is the emotional attempt for the “Rose Is Rose” comic strip?

Creepy anthropomorphized ginger bread cookies come to life who want nothing less and live for nothing more than for the sleepy boy protagonist of the strip to eat them.  (Absent the boy, would the cookies be eating one another?)

What’s more the commenters circulating about the syndicate website for the strip are all stuck back on the “aw” effect, not fully understanding the implications of the strip.

definitions, definitions, definitions

Wednesday, December 23rd, 2015

Yes.  Donald Trump is a serious candidate for high office.

Donald Trump took to Twitter Tuesday to defend using the word “schlonged” to describe Hillary Clinton’s primary loss in 2008, saying the word is “not vulgar.”

“Once again, #MSM is dishonest. ‘Schlonged’ is not vulgar. When I said Hillary got ‘schlonged’ that meant beaten badly,” he said in one tweet.

Because when you hear the word “schlong”, and you think “penis”, that shows more onto you and where your head is at than it does the speaker Trump?

Moving on…

But Trump cited Tuesday what he said was a 1984 NPR report in which “schlonged” was used similarly to how he used it Monday.

“NPR’s @NealConan said ‘schlonged’ to WaPo re: 1984 Mondale/Ferraro campaign: ‘That ticket went on to get schlonged at the polls.’ #Hypocrisy”

The one news source they found to reverberate amongst the conservative media.  I do like this bit of conspiracy in the comments section.

It appears that you submitted this 6 hours ago. An hour later NPR released this article, which is entitled “Trump: Clinton was ‘Schlonged in 2008 Nomination Race’ “. It looks like they hastily appended the Neal Conan revelation so they wouldn’t get accused of covering it up.

Always align a shady motive; never allow the possibility of an innocuous one.

Is there some cultural insensitivity toward Yiddish origins and what they do of (Jewish filled) New York?

Trump also retweeted political analyst Jeff Greenfield’s defense of the term, in which Greenfield declared that the term is “a commonplace NY way of saying: ‘I lost big time.'”

To be perfectly clear, the expression is by no means “commonplace” — in New York or elsewhere. It has never appeared in the New York Times (prior to this week) and does not appear to have been used in any New York paper early in the 20th century. It doesn’t appear in Irving Lewis Allen’s 1993 book, “The City in Slang,” which documents any number of lesser-known expressions that trickled out of New York City. And, as a point of personal privilege, it’s not something that I’m familiar with, having grown up upstate and lived in the city for most of the past decade.

But it has popped up a few times, as The Post’s Justin Moyer reported on Tuesday, including one usage in the exact same context — and in an interview with The Fix’s very own Chris Cillizza.

Next an appearance in 1974, and the observation that this will be spoken and not put into print.

And so the worm turns.  I suppose if he were preparing for a hypothetical Barack Obama match-up, in an alternate universe where Obama had been schlonged in 2008, he might still use the word.  The problem is, yes, of course we know Trump’s “plausible deniable” definition and how well it would be thrown out in casual definition.  And we know the penis definition.  And we can infer how interconnected the two definitions are.  And we know Trump said something about the menstrual cycle for Megyn Kelly.  And we can only imagine the gender gap of a Hillary Clinton — Donald Trump presidential match-up.

In other things of some informal Jewish / New York antecedent… Rand Paul taps Seinfeld for a Festivus routine.

And in other news of offensiveness politico fallout — Washington Post printed a stupid cartoon, and I suppose Ted Cruz is doing what any politico worth his salt will do (see too Hillary Clinton) and making the best political hay he can out of the faux pas.

gone from the undercard

Tuesday, December 22nd, 2015

After supposedly winning the “undercard” debate (by dent of getting a few media – savvy one liner quips into the limited media notation coverage on the “undercard” debate) Lindsey Graham quits the Presidential Race, and “GOP Wonders Who’s Next“.

Will it be Jim Gilmore?  Rick Santorum?  Mike Huckabee?  George Pataki?  Who, who, who?

“This is an election for the heart and soul of the Republican Party,” Graham said on CNN. “This is no longer about 2016. This is about who we are as a party, where do we want to go, where do we take the country.”

And it is does not belong to Lindsey Graham.

But the questions this wages isn’t so much… who’s next?… it is…

… Will this provide a space for Jim Gilmore to make this next “undercard” debate, and if not… can we have an “undercard” debate with, oh, 2 candidates on the stage?

And, I guess, who wins the much vaulted “Lindsey Graham” support?  Jeb Bush gets the official campaign apparatus, for whatever that’s worth

entertain us

Friday, December 18th, 2015

A strange comment from Michael F Bishop, of the National Review, in reviewing a Karl Rove book about his favorite president, William McKinley.

Indeed, as Rove observes, “politics during McKinley’s lifetime was practiced with an intensity difficult to comprehend today.”  Readers may be surprised that issues as seemingly abstruse as the tariff and the currency could inflame the passions of millions of Americans.  But in an era before the Super Bowl or stadium concerts, politics furnished not just an arena of ideological combat but entertainment as well.

Cue Frank Zappa commentary about politics just being the entertainment branch of industry.  And look ashunder at the current rise of Donald Trump, who, you know, has a bit of the political legacy Zephod Beeblebox about it — the politics of celebrity.

Debate as it may how much of it is just a show.

In regards to the article as a whole longing for McKinley and rhyme scheme with the past (noted the “past is a foreign country: they do things differently there” warning in the article)… after failing to get George W Bush into the McKinley role… You get the feeling it falls to Hillary Clinton to be the small c conservative candidate as against the Bryan hailstorm of Cruz or Trump.