Left-Wing Skirt

Hail Caesar!

2007-08-29T12:17:00.000-05:00

This is... Well, it's something. Let's see... Nice things to say about this guy.... Um, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Uuuuhhhh, I may not agree with what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it.

The American Security Foundation released a story by a guy named Philip Atkinson called "Conquering the Drawbacks of Democracy," which I would like to share with all of you. It is astonishing. Or, you can skip to the end, where I will summarize & rant.

Conquering the Drawbacks of Democracy
By Philip Atkinson

President George W. Bush is the 43rd President of the United States. He was sworn in for a second term on January 20, 2005 after being chosen by the majority of citizens in America to be president.

Yet in 2007 he is generally despised, with many citizens of Western civilization expressing contempt for his person and his policies, sentiments which now abound on the Internet. This rage at President Bush is an inevitable result of the system of government demanded by the people, which is Democracy.

The inadequacy of Democracy, rule by the majority, is undeniable – for it demands adopting ideas because they are popular, rather than because they are wise. This means that any man chosen to act as an agent of the people is placed in an invidious position: if he commits folly because it is popular, then he will be held responsible for the inevitable result. If he refuses to commit folly, then he will be detested by most citizens because he is frustrating their demands.

When faced with the possible threat that the Iraqis might be amassing terrible weapons that could be used to slay millions of citizens of Western Civilization, President Bush took the only action prudence demanded and the electorate allowed: he conquered Iraq with an army.

This dangerous and expensive act did destroy the Iraqi regime, but left an American army without any clear purpose in a hostile country and subject to attack. If the Army merely returns to its home, then the threat it ended would simply return.

The wisest course would have been for President Bush to use his nuclear weapons to slaughter Iraqis until they complied with his demands, or until they were all dead. Then there would be little risk or expense and no American army would be left exposed. But if he did this, his cowardly electorate would have instantly ended his term of office, if not his freedom or his life.

The simple truth that modern weapons now mean a nation must practice genocide or commit suicide. Israel provides the perfect example. If the Israelis do not raze Iran, the Iranians will fulfill their boast and wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Yet Israel is not popular, and so is denied permission to defend itself. In the same vein, President Bush cannot do what is necessary for the survival of Americans. He cannot use the nation's powerful weapons. All he can do is try and discover a result that will be popular with Americans.

As there appears to be no sensible result of the invasion of Iraq that will be popular with his countrymen other than retreat, President Bush is reviled; he has become another victim of Democracy.

By elevating popular fancy over truth, Democracy is clearly an enemy of not just truth, but duty and justice, which makes it the worst form of government. President Bush must overcome not just the situation in Iraq, but democratic government.

However, President Bush has a valuable historical example that he could choose to follow.

When the ancient Roman general Julius Caesar was struggling to conquer ancient Gaul, he not only had to defeat the Gauls, but he also had to defeat his political enemies in Rome who would destroy him the moment his tenure as consul (president) ended.

Caesar pacified Gaul by mass slaughter; he then used his successful army to crush all political opposition at home and establish himself as permanent ruler of ancient Rome. This brilliant action not only ended the personal threat to Caesar, but ended the civil chaos that was threatening anarchy in ancient Rome – thus marking the start of the ancient Roman Empire that gave peace and prosperity to the known world.

If President Bush copied Julius Caesar by ordering his army to empty Iraq of Arabs and repopulate the country with Americans, he would achieve immediate results: popularity with his military; enrichment of America by converting an Arabian Iraq into an American Iraq (therefore turning it from a liability to an asset); and boost American prestiege while terrifying American enemies.

He could then follow Caesar's example and use his newfound popularity with the military to wield military power to become the first permanent president of America, and end the civil chaos caused by the continually squabbling Congress and the out-of-control Supreme Court.

President Bush can fail in his duty to himself, his country, and his God, by becoming "ex-president" Bush or he can become "President-for-Life" Bush: the conqueror of Iraq, who brings sense to the Congress and sanity to the Supreme Court. Then who would be able to stop Bush from emulating Augustus Caesar and becoming ruler of the world? For only an America united under one ruler has the power to save humanity from the threat of a new Dark Age wrought by terrorists armed with nuclear weapons.

So, if you're just now joining us again (having opted for the shortcut), here's what you missed: This charming man, Atkinson, thinks Democracy is a horrible form of government subject to the whims of the masses, and that there is only one solution for how America can be made better. The solution - Bush should take the military, conquer as much of the Middle East as quickly, completely, and mercilessly as possible. Then, he should repopulate the area with Americans Then, he should turn the military forces on America itself, allowing him to become America's first "permanent president," and "end[ing] the civil chaos caused by the continually squabbling Congress and the out-of-control Supreme Court."

In Atkinson's opinion, these actions would " boost American prestiege while terrifying American enemies." He also thinks that most Americans are chicken shit because we don't want to bust out our nuclear arsenal and wipe our enemies off the planet in one fell swoop.

So, ways in which I agree with our little crazy boy - democracy does act to create a tyranny of the majority. And, it's not the government style the ofunding fathers wanted, they were republicans. Not republicans like Dubya, republicans like they wanted a republic, not a democracy. They recognized that some people are dumb & maybe shouldn't be put in charge of major decisions affecting the whole country. (What? Fine, I'm a little elitist. But, to you really want to mouth-breather with the mullet in Wal-Mart deciding financial policy?)

Now, ways in which I don't agree with boy-o. The nuking. The permanent presidency. The idea that Dubya should be that permanent president. Really, everything else he says.

And, just for fun, let's look at the banner used by the group that published his opinion piece...

Lookit the cute little Aryans! I think their picture of the American ideal is just adorable. However, looking at this, I wonder if they really like big cities, or if they're the types that put down the "East Coast Intellectual" types. Or, even better, the Rush Limbaugh types that have lots of money, live in big cities, and talk trash on city folk.

Either way, I laughed, I cried, I hurled.

Love for everyone!

Confuscious says:

2007-08-24T08:19:00.000-05:00

"The man who can laugh at himself will never stop smiling."

I don't know if Confuscious really said it, by I think they're great words to live by. And, in that spirit, I want to share with you a couple of liberal-bashing "Get Fuzzy"'s that have made it into my inbox recently. (I have a subscription & get them everyday, and these are my favorites of late.)

Here ya go!

2007-08-24T08:16:00.000-05:00

I keep not posting anything, and you fuckers keep clicking & looking at my blog, anyway. So, here's something new for you to look at!

Jesus, lots of shit has been going on on this end. (Mmmmmm, poorly written sentences...) I've been (slowly) moving my stuff into the new house. I worked a fabulously awesome (?) temp job for the Spamalot merch guy (ooooohhhh, the story I have for you!). I'm starting a job waiting tables at Pizzeria Uno (my dream, clearly). And... shit... there was something else & maybe I'll remember it soon.

First, and the main actual story I have for you is this:

So, I worked the Spamalot merch table for the past 5 days, Tuesday through Saturday, with matinees and evening shows Saturday & Sunday. Super fun. My boss? A complete idiot. Really retarded. With a system, which got more asinine & fucked up with every passing day. Systems are only good if you actually use them, people!

Anyway.

So, Thursday, the idiot says to me, while we're in the middle of the pre-show rush, "So, what kind of law do you practice?"

I reply, "Well, I've done prosecution & criminal defense so far, and I'll probably end up a criminal defense attorney."

To which he responds, "Really? Huh. Ok, I have something I want to ask you after the first act starts."

Sure, whatever. And, the first act starts. And, Bill, "The Man with the Plan... er, System," asks, "So, would you ever defend someone you knew was guilty?"

Normal question. I've just started out & already been asked this about 8 million times. "Sure," says I. "It doesn't really matter to me if someone's guilty. Everyone deserves a fair shot at the justice system, and it's my job to make sure they get that shot. Guilty or not."

Billy Boy gets this furious look on his face, "But, like, really guilty people? Child molesters and wife killers?"

"It doesn't matter," I tell him. "My job is to protect my client's interests, whatever those might be."

He gets even more pissed, gets right up in my fucking face, points his finger at me, and says, "That's terrible. You're a horrible immoral person for protecting someone like that. YOU are what's wrong with the justice system & why people don't like lawyers."

This is not quite the response I expected. The hair on the back of my neck bristles a little, and I can feel my cheeks flush. But, I try to stay calm, because I'm pretty sure he's just trying to get a rise out of me. So, as calmly as I can, I say, "Actually, I'm a relatively moral, good person. And, you're missing the major point here. My job isn't to like helping people who have committed some awful crime, it's just to help them. Shit, I've helped baby fuckers, wife killers, wife beaters, and just straight murderers. And, I go home and won't look at myself in the mirror for a few hours. I don't like it, but it's my job. So, by god, I'm going to be the best at it I can be & help them as best as I can."

Bill does not care. "But, doesn't it bother you? These are horrible people you're helping. You're horrible." (Swear to god. He called me horrible and all of those lovely things I put in the paragraph 2 up from this one.)

So, now, I am very mad. How does this ignorant fucker think he is? He can't even keep track of how many shirts he added to the fucking inventory, but he has decided he knows what's right & wrong in the justice system? The little cock.

Still trying to keep calm, but starting to lose my cool, "Listen, dude. I don't always like it, but this is what I do. Every last single person to be subjected to our judicial system has the right to a fair trial, and it is my fucking job to make sure he gets that chance. It really doesn't matter to me if he's guilty. I'm going to do everything I can to see that justice is done."

We go in this circle for quite a while - him attacking me because I don't agree with his stance, me trying to find different justifications for why I would do what I do. Until, finally, I hit on something that (apparently) strikes a cord. That, or he could tell that if he didn't back the fuck off, I might come across the table that's separating us, and rip his ugly little balding head off.

It was something along the lines of, "You're missing the fucking point & you're pissing me off. When I'm admitted to the Missouri bar, I'll be taking an oath. That oath doesn't say I'll make sure that people stay out of jail, it's says I'll uphold the constitution of this state, and of the United States. And, that's my fucking job. And, the constitution says that someone who is on trial gets a whole bunch of specific rights. And, it is my job to make sure that the courts, the police, prosecutors, and judgmental jerks like you don't take those rights away from anyone - guilty or not. Because, if you take basic constitutional rights away from people who have confessed, who's next? People that are probably guilty? People who might be guilty, or who the media makes everyone think is guilty? Fuck that. Everyone deserves every last god damn right that's afforded him, whether you think they do, or not."

That's paraphrasing it down a little, but pretty close.

And, after that, Ol' Bill shut the fuck up.

And, started apologizing like crazy & trying to kiss my ass.

Which I was having none of. Shit, he'd just spent 20 minutes throwing ad hominem attacks at me in what he kept insisting was a "debate." He actually had the audacity to tell me that I was a "believer" and that was why I couldn't see what a terrible person I was, and how immoral and horrible me and my profession were.

We weren't exactly friends. I half-accepted his apologies, throwing little digs in here & there. (What? I was cranky. Some ignorant fuck had spent most of the first act telling me I was a bad, immoral person & that I was why people hated lawyers. I was not a happy Lizzard.)

But, that is all over now. I have made some money & I never have to see Bill again.

Seriously, though, people. Maybe I've helped defend some scumbags. Maybe I'll defend some more before I'm through. And, maybe I am a believer. But, shit in a hat, there are many fucked up things about this country, but there are good things, too.

One of those good things is that the founding fathers knew that, given the chance, mob mentality would throw people charged with deplorable crimes to the fucking lions with little more than a kangaroo hop through the court system. So, they set up all sorts of fancy protections and laws to make sure that the people didn't get fucked. That everyone had some sort of chance. And, this is good.

And, maybe a lot of people don't like that baby fuckers & wife killers & puppy beaters get these chances, but they do. And, if you're like Bill & have never needed to employ the protections afforded you by the constitution, et al., then it's easy to say fuck the people who do.

But, the founding fathers were smart guys. They knew what they were doing.

Anyway, hope you're all having fun, wherever you may be.

Oh, yeah! Ryan & I bought a grill & it is the shit!

Love for everyone!

The scariest thing in the world...

2007-08-16T08:29:00.000-05:00

... Is an idiot with a "system."

So, I'm broke as a bad joke, amazingly in debt, and living off of fake money. This drove me to CraigsList, to see if I could find a job, or - at least - a temp gig that would buy my groceries for a while.

Well, I was totally lucky, & found a week-long gig selling merchandise at the tour of SPAMalot that is in KC through Sunday. The money sounded good, I got a free t-shirt, and I got to see the show for free.

So, I have a shirt, and it's awesome. I got to see the show last night, at it was HI-larious. And, indeed, the money is solid.

But, the guy in charge. Lord.

His name is Bill. Bill has totally good intentions. Unfortunately, Bill has no social or people skills, is completely incapable of talking about anything other than the job, and - best of all - has a "system." Everything is set up & taken down according to the "system."

Systems aren't toally bad. Sometimes, they are totally helpful.

Bill's system is not. This system says we can't do any work until EVERYONE is there to do the work. So, instead of just setting up the damn merch stand, we're standing there for 15 minutes, listening to Bill bitch about how we can't set the stand up yet. And, then, once everyone's there & we get the stand set up, he bitches about how he wished we could've gotten the stand set up sooner.

Or, for breaking down the stand, we have to count everything at the same time, which is fine. But, then, for entering numbers, we have a system that goes like this: A enters the numbers onto the computer spreadsheet, and B looks over A's shoulder to make sure A is doing it right. C writes the numbers onto a printout of the spreadsheet, while D looks over C's shoulder to check for mistakes & to read out the products as we're gonig downt he list, to make sure we're all on the same page.

I know, it doesn't sound that bad. But, imagine it going super slow & super fast in all the wrong places. (IE - slow while entering numbers; Bill standing behind you shouting to hurry up while counting) And, now, imagine the system crumbling at every chance, and everything having to be done over again. That is my night.

My night with Bill and his system. The whole thing is just asinine.

Thankfully, the other girl that works behind the stand with me is a lovely young woman named Charlene. She is excellent for conspiring & commiserating with. Every so often, when things are completely retarded (like when Bill disappears for 40 minutes during the rush right before the show & then yells at us because we made a tiny mistake), we look at each other, smirk, and say, "System. It is all part of the system."

And, then, of course, there's Wes. Who has the most amazing case of short man's syndrome you've ever seen in your LIFE. And, I will leave him at that. He's everything you dream he could be.

********************
On a happier note, and completely unrelated, I was riving through Westport a couple days ago, and there was a guy standing on the sidewalk next to his car. Singing & dancing. It was the most ridiculous, flailing dance I've ever seen. Has anyone else ever seen this guy before? Because, it was really incredible.

Here, I drew a picture, because pictures are awesome.

Yes, I know that, somehow, I have managed to create a 2-door stationwagon. You should ignore that part. And, for reference,t he music was coming out of both the man and the car, whose door was open - but I'm not quite skilled enough to draw that.

***********************
And, finally, filed under thing s that make you throw your hands up & say, "Oh, Jesus Tapdancing Christ!". Some Jon Stewart, because I love him.

I just died from happiness

2007-08-13T11:56:00.002-05:00

So, this morning, I get up, lounge & watch the History channel for a little while, run to the store, my new baby almost gets nailed by some scab in a domestic SUV, and head to the house to do a load of laundry & exploit the free Internet connections from down the street.

Also, a nice maintenance man named Patrick who looked like Johnny Rotten's slightly less retarded younger brother fixed my toilet, so now it will stop running every 2 minutes.

Anyway, I hop online, and check the NYTimes.com headlines that get emailed out everyday. Nothing spectaular going on, so I lounge about a couple other websites, until I get to Salon.com. At which moment, my head exploded from sheer joy.

Awaiting me was:

How f-ing glorious is that, people?

That delightfully pudgy man who in responsible for 6 & 1/2 years of fear- & hate-mongering by our current administration has bowed out & resigned. I, unfortunately, have things I need ot get done, so I cannot rant right now, but I will supply this brief, but substantial, summary of Rove's legacy by Tim Grieve of Salon.com's War Room.

Remembering Karl Rove

We could spend days reminiscing about the role Karl Rove has played in our politics over the past decade or so -- the whisper campaigns against Ann Richards in Texas and John McCain in South Carolina, the fight over Florida in 2000, the demonization of John Kerry in 2004, the "thumpin'" Rove and his boss and their party took in 2006 -- and we'll be looking forward to what Rove himself has to say about all of it when he sits down to write his book after leaving the White House this month.

In the meantime, here are a few memories that spring right to mind:

The outing of Valerie Plame: Rove leaked the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame to Robert Novak and to Matthew Cooper in the summer of 2003. For as long as it could -- or as long as it needed to -- the White House adamantly denied that Rove was involved in Plame's outing. White House press secretary Scott McClellan said in September 2003 that "the president knows" that Rove wasn't involved and that it was "ridiculous" to suggest that he was. In October 2003, McClellan said he had spoken with Rove and Scooter Libby and that they had "assured" him that they were "not involved in this." Rove himself was cagey: "I didn't know her name. I didn't leak her name," he told ABC early on, a formulation he repeated for Larry King at the Republican National Convention in August 2004. Only after Bush was reelected in 2004 did we learn the truth: Rove had, in fact, been "involved." And while he may not have leaked Plame's "name," he confirmed for both Novak and Cooper that ambassador Joseph Wilson's wife worked for the CIA. Asked about the revelation that Rove had, in fact, been involved, Bush said in June 2006: "I trust Karl Rove."

Karl Rove and Patrick Fitzgerald: When Rove first sat down with FBI agents investigating Plame's outing, he somehow forgot to mention forgot to mention it a second time when he first testified before Patrick Fitzgerald's grand jury. Four visits to the grand jury room later, Rove somehow managed to avoid the perjury, false statement and obstruction of justice charges Scooter Libby ultimately faced. In his opening statement at Libby's trial, Libby defense attorney Ted Wells argued that the White House had tried to make Libby take the fall for outing Plame because Rove "had to be protected." After Libby was convicted, a puzzled juror asked, "What are we doing with this guy here? Where's Rove?" that he had revealed Plame's identity to Matthew Cooper. He somehow

Rove and the U.S. attorneys purge: We don't know the extent of Rove's role in the decision to fire a slew of U.S. attorneys last year, in part because the president has used claims of executive privilege to block those who do know -- including Rove -- from responding to congressional subpoenas, in part because the Republican National Committee hasn't turned over e-mail messages Rove sent via a private RNC account, and in part because Rove reportedly continued to delete Tony Snow said the notion of firing all 93 U.S. attorneys had been Harriet Miers' idea and "her idea only." Confronted on March 15, 2007, with an e-mail message suggesting that Rove had advocated the idea, Snow said that Rove had actually opposed the idea. One day later, Snow retreated completely: "It has been described as [Miers'] idea," he said, "but I don't want to try to vouch for origination. At this juncture, people have hazy memories." such e-mails even after he was told not to. Among the things we do know: White House press secretary

Rove and Jack Abramoff: Rove has claimed that convicted GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff was just a "casual acquaintance." The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform subsequently identified 82 contacts between Abramoff's team and Rove's office, including a series of communications in which Abramoff set Rove up with tickets to watch the NCAA basketball tournament from his skybox at what was then known as the MCI Center in Washington.

Rove and terrorism: In June 2005, Rove did publicly what he'd so often accomplished more privately: He painted Democrats as terrorist sympathizers. "Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war," Rove said in a speech in Manhattan. "Liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers." Rove -- whose boss, at this point, has sent 3,689 U.S. soldiers to their deaths in Iraq -- argued that comments Sen. Dick Durbin had just made about Guantánamo Bay were "putting our troops in greater danger," then added: "No more needs to be said about the motives of liberals."

Rove and the long view of history: Earlier this year, Rove told the Washington Post that the disaster called Iraq notwithstanding, the "Bush doctrine" of preemptive war will go down as the president's biggest legacy. "It has a logic of force and nature and reality that will cause people to examine it, adjust it, test it, resist it -- but ultimately embrace it."

Rove and his own legacy: "I'm a myth," Rove says as he prepares to step down. "There's the 'Mark of Rove.' I read about some of the things I'm supposed to have done, and I have to try not to laugh."

Shut up!!

2007-08-13T11:56:00.001-05:00

So, yesterday, I'm chillin' on my butt in my apt, when my friend Nick (an APO buddy from undergrad) calls. He's in town from NYC & had told me he would call while he was around, so I was excited to hear from him. But, his flight was changed at the last minute, so the friend that was supposed to pick him up from the airport is now busy, so could I come get him at 4:45?

I love helping so I say sure, he can buy me a beer & we'll call it even.

So, I hop in the shower &, when I get out, there are 3 missed calls & a voicemail from my mom. I'm wondering what the hell happened, so I call her back.

Mom: "You need to come out to the house. When can you make it out?"

Me: "I don't know.... Maybe Sunday?"

Mom: "No, it needs to be today or tomorow, and I know you're moving Ryan tomorrow, so you have to come out today."

Me: "I kind of have plans. I need to finish getting the house ready & I'm supposed to pick up a friend from the airport later on today."

Mom: "Well, then, I guess you're coming out right now, huh?"

Me: "Fine. Sure. Let me get ready & I'll be out soon."

So, I haul my happy ass out to Lee's Summit. And, what is awaiting me in Lee's Summit?

*Cue Price is Right's Rod Roddy* A fabulous new car!!!

Ok, not brand new, but a 2004 Honda Civic Sedan. It's all pretty & sparkly & champagne-y.

Isn't she beautimous? Her name is Marilyn, and I love her. She is my law school graduation present. She certainly made driving to the airport more enjoyable. And, she got to help move Ryan's stuff into the new house.

New house is adorable. There will be partying here soon enough, and I hope you can all make it out.

Once moving is done, I will resume blogs of slightly more consequence. But, for now, I'm tired & need to unpack stuff.

Love for everyone!

I blog therefor I am.... cranky

2007-08-13T11:55:00.000-05:00

First, some good stuff:
1. The bar is over & hopefully I passed it & will never have to take the damn thing again.
2. Colorado was wonderful. Denver was stupid fun, playing disc golf in the mountains was A-mazing, and there was incredible beer EVERYWHERE. More stories & some pictures later.

But, first, the reason I am blogging at 9:23am, when I don't even have Internet in my apartment.

I couldn't sleep last night. Didn't think much of it, just some insomnia. But, it made it so that, at 6:40, when I got up to go walking with Summer, I'd managed just over 4 hours of sleep. I was damn tired during the walking, but knew I could go back to my apt & sleep afterwards, so no worries. Summer & I had a lovely walk & we went by the house Ryan & I are renting & poked in the windows & looked at our super cute backyard. Yay. Whee.

I get back to my place a little before 8, and lay down on the couch to nap until about 9, whne I am planning on getting up, showering off my funk, and starting my day.

At 8:20, I'm finally drifting off, having stopped sweating from the mugginess I was waking in, and there's a knock on the door.

"Yes?" I call.

Nothing.

"Hello?" I say.

Still nada.

Ryan now says, no louder than I had, "Hello?"

Male voice says back, "Maintenance."

Clearly, me & the guy who wouldn't respond 'til a guy talked to him? We're best friends already.

I throw on some pants & open the door.

Me: "Morning."

Dude: "Morning. We're here to take your bathroom apart."

Me: "Excuse me?"

Dude: "Yeah. Your toilet is leaking into the apartment below, so we have to take your bathroom apart to fix some pipes and get the thing taken care of." Pause. "Didn't you get our note?"

Me: "Nope, I sure didn't. So, what are you doing again? I thought someone came in a couple weeks ago and fixed the leak into the apartment below."

Aside: Not only did they come in & "fix" it a couple weeks ago, they tore by bathroom apart, left random crap all across my hallway when they were done, and, since they"fixed" it, my toilet has developed the habit of running for about 20 seconds every 2-3 minutes. It's fun. Anyway...

Dude: "Yeah, well, apparently, it didn't take of the problem."

At this point, some other dude with a foul, pseudo-handlebar moustache & who is wearing sunglasses inside walks into the hallway carrying a wet-vac. Charming.

Dude2: "We're going to try and get this done as fast as possible, but it'll probably take 4-5 hours."

Me: "Oh. Well, alright, then."

Dude2: "It might take less, but that's my guess for it right now."

Me: "Fantastic. Well, you gotta do what you gotta do."

So, they come inside. And, within 10 minutes, my toilet has been detached from the floor and moved into the middle of the bathroom.

And, now, here I am. Sitting in Muddy's coffeeshop. I am tired and unshowered. I have not had a chance to poop yet today. I cannot use my bathroom until, at least, 12:30. Fabulous.

And, to shmear a little icing on the cake? I have a second interview at Houston's at 2:30. Yes, it's waiting tables. Yes, I hate waiting tables. But, I am too poor right now to put off finding a job, or to be too proud to take something that - while neither glamorous nor remotely related to any of my degrees - will make me some money and keep food in my pantry.

If you want, feel free to come see me.

But, yes, if the plumber who wears sunglasses inside takes longer than his estimate, I will not have time to shower before my interview, and I don't really want to go in smelling like gross sweat-funk.

I am a cranky, gross, tired girl who needs to poo & it does not make me happy.

Bastard fuckers who can't fix the f-ing toilet right the first time....

And, seriously? Note? What f-ing note? Now, I know I'm going to sound a little crazy & all conspiracy theory-y (oh, I said it), but maybe my crazy neighbor is being a dick again. I mean, someone in my building used to rip my FedEx delivery notices off the front door, rip them up, and throw them in the bushes. No, really. Lemme see if I can find a link to that old blog.... Ah. Here ya go.

Or, maybe my maintenance guys just suck & forgot to put the note on my door.

Either way, I am a cranky Lizzard. At least the coffee here is good.

Holy Guilty Pleasure, Batman!

2007-07-20T11:38:00.000-05:00

So, last night, I'm hanging out, taking a little study break, sad that I don't have Internet in my apartment. (Don't mock, I's a po' bitch.) In my sadness, I decided to check out network TV.

Now, typically, I don't get below The Weather Channel on the TV dial, but I check down last night, kids. All the way down to channel 3. And, from there, I channel surfed slowly upwards, hoping to find something fun to watch for a little while I ate my dinner. (Name brand Raisin Bran, bitches. I was splurgin'. What? Don't talk shit. I ate an entire, huge Chipotle at 2pm & wasn't much hungry around dinner time.)

Anyway! So, I get to NBC, aaaaaall the way up at channel 13, and I saw it. And, it was beautiful. What did I see?

Victoria Beckham: Coming to America

Oh, ya fuck right, kids. Victoria Beckham has her own reality TV show and I watched the series premiere. And, it. Was. GLORIOUS.

She was every bit the primping, preening, dumb-shit celebrity you think she is. She went to get her driver's license and, when the DMV guy asked for her signature on a form, she said, "Do you mean, like, made out to someone?" Looked down at the form again. "Oh! Right. Sorry."

Brilliant. Seriously brilliant.

But, at the same time, I have to lower my hatred of her from the seething disdain I reserve for most women who are famous for being seen and their boobs, down to the general disdain I reserve for most of the human species. Why? Because, In addition to the retarded crap she did, she also did a couple things that made me say, "I don't think I could put up with you long enough to have a beer with you, but I could probably tolerate you enough to say hello if we worked in the say building & walked by each other."

To wit (Fun with lawyer phrases!) – She saw a post on PerezHilton.com that made fun of her arrival in the US. And, instead of putting some pouty, whiney letter on her website about how hard her life is & why is everyone so mean to her, she did her hair & makeup, threw on some fabulous shoes, and went to the coffee shop that Perez works out of to say hello. Then, instead of going off & bitching him out, she sat down & shot the shit with him for a while. She made fun of herself, even.

And, later in the show, she mused on what the hell the younger socialites are thinking when they go out without their knickers on. Which I can always agree with.

Am I going to go out of my way to watch Victoria Beckham preen like a twit every Thursday night? Oh, hell no. But, if I have nothing else to do at 9pm central time, I know I can turn to NBC and I will probably be hugely entertained by an idiot who doesn't know what baseball is. I might even get a peek of her brutally hot hubby.

Jeebus. I feel like I should offset that brainless fun with something that requires a brain. But, then I remember that I use most of my waking hours studying for the Missouri Bar Exam – Which is this coming Tuesday & Wednesday. Go 2-day exams! – and I don't feel so bad about it.

If you feel like you need to offset, here are a couple links to enjoy:

The New York Times
CNN
American MENSA
Colbert Nation
The Pajama Pundit

And, of course, it's nice to hear that the FAA has unclenched its asshole a little bit and now allows lighters to be taken on airplanes.

Love for everyone…. Except those bastards that think I need to take a fucking 12 ½ hour, 2-day exam in… wait for it… a hotel conference room in Jeff City.

Speaking of! Who's up for drinking next Wednesday night? Maybe DB's for karaoke? I'm gonna need to drink a lot and think as little as possible.

My Hero of the Week

2007-07-12T14:28:00.001-05:00

So, you may recall that a couple weeks ago, I blogged on a woman in Nebraska who was allegedly raped, and who was barred from using words such a "rape" and "sexual assault" during her trial.

By the way, I'm still not sure how you run an entire trial where the actual charge is "rape," without once using the word "rape." Confusing, dumb shit there, kids.

Aaaaanyway.

Well, Monday, Bowen (the victim) and her attorney informed the judge that she would not sign an agreement to refrain from using words such as rape.

Said Bowen, "I'm pausing three seconds because I don't know if it's a word that will lead to a mistrial or me being jailed or held in contempt. It's frightening. That's not something a victim should go through."

Here, here. She's already been raped. (Okay, allegedly.) Are you really going to put her in jail for contempt because she used the word "rape" while describing what happened to her? Gross.

So, power to Bowen, who has clearly been throguh enough already, and probably just wants to get all of this behind her so she can get on with a normal life.

Here's the opinion of a nice woman named Melissa on the matter. It's not a bad read.

Back to studying. Love for everyone!

Hate to say I told you so, alright!

2007-07-10T20:48:00.000-05:00

would hate (HATE!) to accuse the current administration of fudging the facts for the sake of their personal politics. Really. It would kill me. I might even cry a little.

Riiiiight.

So, earlier today (NYTimes.com link), Bush's former Surgeon General sat in front of a congressional committee and told them that *gasp! shock! horror!* "top officials in the Bush administration repeatedly tried to weaken or suppress important public health reports because of political considerations."

Say it ain't so, Joe! Just say it ain't so!

Dr. Carmona went on to say that he was not allowed to speak on such topics as stem cells, emergency contraception, sex education, or prison, mental and global health issues. And, he had to "water down" findings on the effects of secondhand smoke. Lest Dubya's cronies get sad.

Carmona told Congress that Bush officials told him they didn't want him reporting on certain topics because "we've already decided which way we want to go."

And - this is brilliant - he was "discouraged him from attending the Special Olympics because, he said, of that charitable organization's longtime ties to the Kennedy family."

Seriously. He couldn't go to the Special Olympics - as the US Surgeon General - b/c the SO could play well with others & Bush couldn't.

A-mazing.

And, to make it even better? "'I was specifically told by a senior person, "Why would you want to help those people?"' Dr. Carmona said."

Because, I mean.... They're just retards & people with horrific debilitating diseases. Fuck them, right?

Apparently, the Doc was telling Congress these things because, in 2 days, Congress will be checking out his replacement, Dr. James W. Holsinger, Jr. According to the Times, Dr. Holsinger - back in 1991 - put out a report, the findings of which "concluded that homosexual sex is unnatural and unhealthy." Clearly this is the guy to head the health & welfare of the nation. A guy who thinks homosexual sex is bad & will probably be more than happy to keep pushing the party line that condoms are evil.

Next, Carmon told Congress that he once (and only once) attended a meeting of top officials on the topic of global warming, where it was decided that "global warming was a liberal cause and dismissed." He tried to explain & discuss the science with them, and was never invited back.

And, finally, the good Doc says that sex ed should always be comprehensive if it is to be effective. But, was forced to preach abstinence-only sex ed b/c that was the policy the White House had already decided on & they wouldn't let him say otherwise.

I feel so bad for this guy. I'm sure he's a normal, level-headed guy who got fucked by his circumstances.

Also, I hate the bar. I want to grow balls so the bar exam can crawl right down by my ass & lick 'em. Lick 'em good!

But, love for everyone else!

Quickies

2007-07-10T20:47:00.002-05:00

Here's somethin' quick to entertain you, in case you need it.

Carrie Underwood & Kevin Eubanks (from The Tonight Show) were just voted the world's sexiest vegetarians. No word if they are bacovegetarians - like me - but, I'm guessing probably not. Other hot veggies include:

Alyssa Milano
Chelsea Clinton
Chrissie Hynde
Grace Slick
Natalie Portman
Rachael Leigh Cook
Shannon Elizabeth
Elle Macpherson
Jackie O
Shalom Harlow
Stella McCartney
Andre 3000
Bob Barker
Eric Stoltz
GZA
RZA
Joaquin Phoenix
Prince
Rob Zombie
Tobey Maguire
Billy Idol
John Cleese
Paul McCartney
Thom Yorke

*******************************

Murder is still the top cause of death for pregnant women, accounting for just under 20% of all deaths. Charming. Feel free to assume I'm shrieking & pissed right now. I mean, do I ever really need to comment on how fucked up this is? Go ahead & be pissed off for me, because I can't barely even speak.

*******************************

And, finally, who's my favorite? Ann Coulter is my favorite!!! ....Person to rip on for being a heinous, hateful bitch. So, Bitch was on Hardball tonight. I missed it, but am very excited to watch the replays online. And, here are a couple clips I have heard about.

Coulter was attacking John Edwards. Again. Saying she wouldn't call him a "faggot" anymore, next time she'd just say she "wish he got killed in a terrorist assassination plot," instead. Then, she mocked the fact that his son was killed in a car accident. And, while she's making fun of his dead son, ELIZABETH EDWARDS CALLS IN! And, what does Lizzy, that bastion of awesomeness and class do? She said, "I'm the mother of that boy who died." Then, she told Coulter that she was calling "to ask her to politely stop the personal attacks."

And, from what I hear, Coulter basically threw up all over herself & accused Edwards of trying to stifle her free speech, or right to write books, or some such ridiculous shit.

Ok, apparently, I'm just lazy, because here is the link to watch Coulter look like a complete piece of shit. Sorry, they didn't have an embed option, so you'll have to go to the website & watch it. Shit, even I ALMOST feel uncomfortable & bad for how akward Coulter seems here. But, then she responds to Edwards asking her to stop making personal attacks by saying Edwards should, basically, shut up because she & her husband have made money being plaintiff's lawyers in medical malpractice and accusing Edwards of cutting off her free speech. It's really appaling to watch, how disgusting Coulter is in this clip. Even the people behind her look uncomfortable.

It's really worse than I can describe to you. She's just replusive. REALLY disgusting and vile and worthless as human being.

I don't get how people can say she's trying to be a comedienne. What she says aren't jokes, they're not even clever or intelligent as satire. They're low-blow personal attacks that have nothing to do with anything. To be satire, aren't you supposed to be commenting on something? Making a point about something? Doing more than saying, "John Edwards & Bill Clinton are faggots"?

That's not satire. That's what 7th grade boys do. It is dumb. It is not intelligent. And, it is only funny to other stupid 7th grade boys. Who are stupid & whose humor consists of dick & fart jokes & calling each other "fags."

But, somehow, when Coulter does the same thing, people say, "Oh! No! She's being a brilliant satirist & comedienne! Don't talk shit!" She's not funny. She yells at & mocks a woman who has called in to ask her not to use personal attacks and to please stop making fun of her son, who has died. And, Coulter responds with, "Oh, my god. That was, like, 3 years ago." And, we're supposed to think she's a satirist?

Fuck that. She is a waste of peopel. A waste of space. Really. Honestly. Just a waste. I hope she hates herself every night when she goes to bed.

But, enough of my bitching. Watch the clip and laugh at her clearly being so uncomfortable that she really does almost throw up all over herself.

Which I would TOTALLY pay to see.

I hate that bitch. I will do a happy dance the day I wake up & hear someone shot her in the head.

Una mezcla! Bueno!

2007-07-10T20:47:00.001-05:00

The Senate Judiciary Committee has decided to subpoena a number of the Bush Administration's documents that relate to warrantless wiretapping. So, now the SJC gets to fight with the White House for the next 18 million years trying to explain to Dubya that he is not the king and that piece of paper they keep calling the Constitution is for something other than wiping his ass.

Second, AWESOME news.

Some crazy Japanese dudes came up with a machine..... *Spooky sci-fi/mystery voice* THAT LETS YOU MOVE OBJECTS WITH YOUR MIND!! Hitachi invented a "brain-machine interface" tha translates blood flow in the brain into electric signals. So far, the B-MI has been used to control a train in 2 settings: GO & STOP. Think, and the train goes forward. Stop thinking, and the train stops. But, hey! Everything needs a first step! Soon, I won't have to type, or even speak, my blogs. I'll just think, and my brain vomit will be here for you to enjoy.

And, third, some shit to make you say "What the fuck?!"

So, we all know that - here in the Midwest - we're a little crazy. Wetend to do some weird shit, and the law is no exception. Well, recently, a judge in Nebraska decided that - during a rape trial - the prosecution and their witnesses - were not allowed to use the words and phrases (wait for it...): rape, sexual assault, victim, assailant, or sexual assault kit in their case.

Let's look at that again. In a jury trial. Where the defendant has been charged with rape and sexual assault. The prosecution. And, the prosecution's witnesses. Including the rape victim. Are not allowed to utter the word rape. Or, the phrase sexual assault.

What words are they supposed to use? They are allowed to refer to what happened as "sex" or "intercourse."

Why? Because "Using words like 'rape' creates unfair prejudices for defendants and invades the (duties) of the jury."

So, when the victim... Sorry! Complainant. For those not "in the know" it is very common these days for defense attorneys to request and judgess to grant motions saying that the victim cannot be referred to as a victim, because that draws a legal conclusion and could prejudice the jury. The allegedly victimized party can only be referred to as the "complainant."

So, when the complainant is sitting on the stand, describing what happened, she can't say, "When I woke up at the defendant's house the next morning, he was raping me." She now has to say, "When I woke up at the defendant's house the next morning, he has having sex with me."

Not quite the same effect, huh?

Yes, it has an emotional impact to use these words. But, that's because these are words society has attached emotional weight to.

What's next? Murder is an emotioanly charged word. Are we going to say a "complainant's" family can't use the word murder in a trial? Or, that a robbery victim can't say "robbery" on the stand?

I mean, for fuck sakes, people. The man is charged with sexual assault. What the hell fucking sense does it make to say you can't say the phrase "sexual assault" during the trial?!? What do you do during the jury instruction part of the trial? What do the jury instructions say?!?!?

"Instruction 4: Intercourse that occurred between Complainant and Defendant that may or may not have been consentual, and which we the jury are here to determine the legality of, the decision of which has not been influnced in any way by the use of even remotely emotionally charged language."

I feel bad, too, for the victim. (Fuck "complainant." If this woman was raped, she is a victim.) She's said, "I never once would describe [what happened] as sex. He's making me commit perjury."

Do defendants deserve a fair shot? Of course. That's the beauty of our judicial system. Do we sometimes ignore the victim in the process? Yup. I want to protect the guys who get fucked over by the system. But, I also want to make sure that victims are not treated as a collateral part of the process. Victims are more than a witness and something to be overcome by the defense.

Yes, I know. It is better to see ten guilty men go free than to keep one innocent man in jail. Yes, despite all of my ranting, I truly believe that a defendant deserves a fair, just trial and all the protections afforded him by our Contitution and judiciary. But, really. Let's be reasonable.

It is poo.

I know. Sorry. This has become quite lengthy. Yes, I'm a crazy left-winger victim's rights advocate. I'm ok with it. We'll see how that works out with my likely career path of criminal defense attorney....

And, no, Ryan. This still has nothing to do with the Patriot Act.

Love and justice for everyone!

Righteous!

2007-07-10T20:42:00.000-05:00

I could totally be best friends with thes guys & make them make me french toast & bacon everyday.

And, just to shout out to my people - the baco-vegetarians. (What? Don't hate. I'm not a "save the animals" vegetarian. I'm a "meat is not yummy to me" vegetarian. Fuck, kill the animals (though, humanely would be nice), and you eat them and I can turn them into lovely new shoes!) And, really? Seriously? A Morning Star Spicy Black Bean Burger with some bacon & cheese? Maybe a splash of ranch dressing and lettuce & tomato on top? Fucking heaven, people.

Mmmmmmm, stuff.

2007-06-24T14:25:00.000-05:00

First, good news.

The Senate Judiciary Committee has decided to subpoena a number of the Bush Administration's documents that relate to warrantless wiretapping. So, now the SJC gets to fight with the White House for the next 18 million years trying to explain to Dubya that he is not the king and that piece of paper they keep calling the Constitution is for something other than wiping his ass.

Second, AWESOME news.

Some crazy Japanese dudes came up with a machine..... *Spooky sci-fi/mystery voice* THAT LETS YOU MOVE OBJECTS WITH YOUR MIND!! Hitachi invented a "brain-machine interface" that translates blood flow in the brain into electric signals. So far, the B-MI has been used to control a train in 2 settings: GO & STOP. Think, and the train goes forward. Stop thinking, and the train stops. But, hey! Everything needs a first step! Soon, I won't have to type, or even speak, my blogs. I'll just think, and my brain vomit will be here for you to enjoy.

And, third, some shit to make you say "What the fuck?!"

So, we all know that - here in the Midwest - we're a little crazy. वी tend to do some weird shit, and the law is no exception. Well, recently, a judge in Nebraska decided that - during a rape trial - the prosecution and their witnesses - were not allowed to use the words and phrases (wait for it...): rape, sexual assault, victim, assailant, or sexual assault kit in their case.

Let's look at that again. In a jury trial. Where the defendant has been charged with rape and sexual assault. The prosecution. And, the prosecution's witnesses. Including the rape victim. Are not allowed to utter the word rape. Or, the phrase sexual assault.

What words are they supposed to use? They are allowed to refer to what happened as "sex" or "intercourse."

Why? Because "Using words like 'rape' creates unfair prejudices for defendants and invades the (duties) of the jury."

So, when the victim... Sorry! Complainant. For those not "in the know" it is very common these days for defense attorneys to request and judgess to grant motions saying that the victim cannot be referred to as a victim, because that draws a legal conclusion and could prejudice the jury. The allegedly victimized party can only be referred to as the "complainant."

So, when the complainant is sitting on the stand, describing what happened, she can't say, "When I woke up at the defendant's house the next morning, he was raping me." She now has to say, "When I woke up at the defendant's house the next morning, he has having sex with me."

Not quite the same effect, huh?

Yes, it has an emotional impact to use these words. But, that's because these are words society has attached emotional weight to.

What's next? Murder is an emotionally charged word. Are we going to say a "complainant's" family can't use the word murder in a trial? Or, that a robbery victim can't say "robbery" on the stand?

I mean, for fuck sakes, people. The man is charged with sexual assault. What the hell fucking sense does it make to say you can't say the phrase "sexual assault" during the trial?!? What do you do during the jury instruction part of the trial? What do the jury instructions say?!?!?

"Instruction 4: Intercourse that occurred between Complainant and Defendant that may or may not have been consensual, and which we the jury are here to determine the legality of, the decision of which has not been influenced in any way by the use of even remotely emotionally charged language."

I feel bad, too, for the victim. (Fuck "complainant." If this woman was raped, she is a victim.) She's said, "I never once would describe [what happened] as sex. He's making me commit perjury."

Do defendants deserve a fair shot? Of course. That's the beauty of our judicial system. Do we sometimes ignore the victim in the process? Yup. I want to protect the guys who get fucked over by the system. But, I also want to make sure that victims are not treated as a collateral part of the process. Victims are more than a witness and something to be overcome by the defense.

Yes, I know. It is better to see ten guilty men go free than to keep one innocent man in jail. Yes, despite all of my ranting, I truly believe that a defendant deserves a fair, just trial and all the protections afforded him by our Contitution and judiciary. But, really. Let's be reasonable.

It is poo.

I know. Sorry. This has become quite lengthy. Yes, I'm a crazy left-winger victim's rights advocate. I'm ok with it. We'll see how that works out with my likely career path of criminal defense attorney....

And, no, Ryan. This still has nothing to do with the Patriot Act.

Love and justice for everyone!

Oh, now, really.

2007-06-16T16:31:00.000-05:00

Ok, people. I know my grammar isn't perfect & lord knows I can't type for shit, but really. I just finished a MySpace quiz - "How country/city are you?" - and there are a couple country questions that make me want to cry a little.

[You] have went swimming in a river. Now, I know the present perfect is tricky. But, seriously? "Have went"? Is "have gone" too hard to type? Went is past tense. I get what they're shooting for - "I have gone swimming in a river [sometime n the past]." But, that's implied, kids. You just assume.

But, better. OH, so much better....

[You] have riddin' a horse to somewhere in town/or tractor. Lord have mercy on my tired little mind. Clearly, dude here means "ridden." But, I spent a couple solidminutes trying to figure out what this sentence - taken literally - would mean. Now, "riddin'" seems to be the southern-drop the "g" style of ridding. Which would come from the root "rid." Rid = to relieve/remove from. Word. Now, the backslash. Typically, only combines the words/phrases it touches (see how that works there?). Here, that would be the town and..... tractor? Hey, you wrote it, guy. So, you're relieving or removing a horse from place #1 to somewhere either in town or in the tractor. If you say so, dude. Good luck with that.

Sorry for that. I feel better.

Love for everyone. And, a grammar book for the kid that wrote this.

I enjoy writing snarky letters to right-wing politicians - Part Deux

2006-06-13T14:56:00.000-05:00

So, if you slide back a couple posts, you'll see the letter I sent to Missouri's Senators (Talent & Bond) about their votes on the FMA. Today, I got a letter back from Talent:

"Dear Ms. A****:

"Thank you for contacting me regarding your opposition tothe Federal Marriage Amendment. I appreciate the time you havetaken to share your views with me, and I welcome the opportunityto respond.

"This issue is upon us because the Massachusetts SupremeCourt decided, with no input from the citizens of Massachusetts,that same sex marriages should be permitted. Because of the wayour federal system works, it is likely that other courts will forcepeople in other states to recognize same-sex marriages contractedin Massachusetts, and the federal courts may force it upon thepeople in a national case.

"Marriage is our oldest social institution. It is older than ourformal religions and our systems of property and justice, and itcertainly predates the Constitution and the existence of the UnitedStates. And marriage may be the most important of all theseinstitutions because it represents the accumulated wisdom ofliterally hundreds of generations over thousands of years abouthow best to lay the foundation of a home in which we can raise andsocialize our children. This does not mean that every child is orcan be raised as the product of a traditional marriage. It just meansthat, for reasons which we cannot fully explain but which havebeen overwhelmingly validated by social science, the idea ofmarriage is tremendously important to the fabric of civil society.

"In other words, marriage is what it is because our societyhas collectively judged over centuries that marriage as so definedis the best way to perpetuate and perfect the mores of goodindividual and social life. And according to the traditionaldefinition, everyone has the right to get married but not to anybodyhe or she may choose; you can't marry a sibling, for example, or aperson who is already married-and this is true regardless of theperceived justice or injustice of such restrictions in particularcases. The same has always held true for same-sex marriage, andwe don't have anywhere near enough experience with same-sexcouples to say that we should discard this restriction. To the extentwe have experience with same sex marriage, the results have beendisquieting. In the Scandinavian countries which have permittedsame sex marriage, marriage of all kinds has systematicallydeclined. The more malleable the definition of marriage becomes,the less respect people have for it, and the less important it is aspart of family life.

"But apart from all this is the question of whether courtsshould be deciding these issues. The first and most basic politicalright is the right to self government. This means, among otherthings, that courts have no authority to issue and enforce decreesupon the people of this country unless they act on the basis ofsome law which was enacted with popular consent. Of course, acourt decision actually based upon the Constitution would have abasis in the consent of the people. But on what intellectuallyhonest basis can it be said that the constitution of Massachusettsrequires the people of that state to change their marriage law insuch a radical way?

"The only way to justify such a decision is on the theory thatthe people intended to vest in judges the right to govern bydecree-to rule as they see fit, regardless of what the Constitutionand statutes actually say, were intended to say, or have alwaysbeen understood as saying. The question is not whether judgesshould be strict or liberal constructionists, but whether the judicialfunction is still one of construction at all, or whether judges shouldbe allowed to make the law up as they go along. This can not beadmitted without discarding the first principles of representativegovernment.

"I voted for the Federal Marriage Amendment because aConstitutional amendment is the only sure means now remainingfor trying to preserve the traditional definition of marriage. If thecourts complete the process of imposing their views on the people,their decisions will be irreversible through any process other thanConstitutional amendment.

"Again, thank you for contacting me. If I can be of furtherassistance, please don't hesitate to call or write.

"If you would like to contact me via e-mail, please visit
http://talent.senate.gov/Contact/default.cfm

"Sincerely,

"Senator Jim Talent"

To which I replied:

"I appreciate hearing an explanation of your views. You're still an asshole.

"Liz A****"

Yes, I really sent that to my Senator. And, yes, I'm comfortable with that.

Power to the people, bitches! Hooray for the First Amendment! (And, now I'll be done with my radical hooblahblah.)

And, look! Senator Talent was kind enough to give us an easy way to send him our thoughts. Feel free to write rude things to him, as well.

Love for everyone! (Except willfully ignorant, closed-minded assholes/politicians.)

It's nice to see Subway doing their part

2006-06-07T23:16:00.000-05:00

...in employing the mentally challenged.

That was mean. Maybe the situation is more a comment on life in different econimic strata.

So, for lunch today, I went to Subway. Yum, sammich!

I had a delightful Veggie Delight on Honey Oat. Nummy. And, as quick background for those who don't know me, I'm vegetarian.

Anyway, I went to the Subway down the street to get my sandwich. There's a little bit of line, no biggie, I hop in & tell the bread-cutting man I want a veggie with all the cheeses. (out of pepperjack today. bummer.)

He passes my sammy to the veggie lady. Who barely touches the paper it's sitting on. She stares blankly at my sandwich for a SOLID 90 seconds beforeshe turns to her manager at the register and whispers, "Where's the meat?"

The manager glances at the sandwich, looks at me, and says, "Veggie, right?" I reply, "Yes." The veggie girl looks at me like her life would end if she had to eat such an abomination.

She then spends 3 minutes putting on my veggies. Not because I want anything hard, but because one of her gloves didn't fit, so she took it off, decided it was too hard to put on a new one, & is now trying to do everything one-handed.

So, I take back what I said. It wasn't mean, this girl is feeble. If it turns out she really is mentally handicapped, I might offer a weak apology & recommend she try a less mentally taxing job like....... um....... Wal-Mart greeter?

But, it's also an interesting comment on society. I'm used to living in the city with a bunch of yuppies. If the fact that you're vegetarian comes up in a group of 10 people, it's not unusual for someone else to say they are, too, for another 3 to say they were at one point, and for the entire group to agree that they love a good meatless entree from time to time. "Hooray, veggie entrees!" you all cry together. Or, something like that.

I work, however, in Independence. For those of you not from the KC metro area, you'll recognize Indep., MO as the birthplace & hometown of President Harry S. Truman (whose childhood home I work about 3 blocks from. lovely house.). Or, if you're a reader of Rolling Stone, you might remember when, a few years back, the magazine dubbed the city Meth Capital of the World. Seriously, you could have a law firm, do nothing but meth cases, & like comfortably. So, it's a slightly different social demographic than the one I sleep in. And, apparently one that cries when they don't get beef with their meal.

But, whatever. My sammy is delicious. I wish I'd bought a cookie, though.

I enjoy writing snarky letters to right-wing politicians

2006-06-07T23:15:00.000-05:00

The Federal Marriage Amendment got shot down today. Yea!

Both of my Senators (Kit Bond & Jim Talent) voted in favor of it, though. So, I sent them love notes.

"I am disgusted by your vote of "Yea" on the consideration of the Federal Marriage Amendment. Your actions embarrass me as a Missouri resident and display incredible, willful ignorance and unfounded hatred on your part. I can't wait to see you voted out of office in the next election for which you are eligible."

I've sent a few before. I posted my love note to some scary Christian group a few weeks ago.

My favorite love note I ever sent, though, was to Sen. Rick Santorum, shortly after Savage Love's readers gave his name it it's new & delicious meaning, and right after it got an award from the american Dialect Society. I should warn you, though, I was kind of drunk & possibly high when I wrote this...

"I could hardly stop myself from sending this note sooner. I wanted to wish Sen. Santorum the best and congratulate him [on] being the inspiration behind the American Dialect Society's Most Outrageous Word of the Year! You must be so proud to be filled with such hatred and prejudice as to be the motivation of such a foul, vile and all-around awful and disgusting term. Congratulations again, you deserve every bit of it!"

I would like to have sex, please.

2006-05-16T23:19:00.000-05:00

The title is not to imply that I'm not getting any. I have a lovely young man with a delicious sexual appetite. Nor is it meant to come across as whiney. I'm simply stating the fact that, at this point in the evening, I would like some ass.

Also, I came across a couple old articles & thought I'd comment. Why the hell not? What else am I gonna do? Read for class? (Actually, my reading is ready to go & waiting for me to finish this.)

So, anyway...

The first article I'm referencing is from GQ, "The Elephant in the Bedroom," about why Republicans are better in the sack. I keep wanting to believe that the writer is trying to be funny & laugh at Repubs throughout the whole thing, but I'm not sure. In one section, the author says, "Republicans, because they've never done a damn thing for you, have no such delusions." (Ooooo, burn!)

But, all she really seems to do in her writing is make Repubs look like huge douches (which they can handle on their own just fine). And, in this regard, she does a delightful job.

The reply article is here. The categories are the same (except on the first 2, delete the word "No.")

You're smart kids. You'll figure out what point of view is being taken by each side. Or, if you can't handle that, read the articles. It's good for you.

1. No conscience! - Because they have no conscience, Repubs will have no problem cheating on their "girlfriend/wife/whatever" (no, really!) and just drilling the shit out of you. So, I suppose they also won't have any problem giving you whatever funk they have on their junk without an apology or warning, or rolling over once they're done, while you lie there, staring dumbly at your unstaisfied (yet, strangely itchy) groin.

2. No tears! - Repub are better b/c they never ever, ever, ever, ever, ever cry. In all honesty, I'm torn on my commentary here. I do not like criers. At all. Ask people who knew me early in undergrad about the beautiful, viking-like man I dumped, in large part, because he cried. (Although, in my defense, he cried over stupid shit. I dated & did not dump another man who cried over the death of a family member, this is healthy. Crying because you don't like your nickname is gross.)

3. A sense of perspective - Repubs won't get bumbed & lose their wood b/c Tucker Carlson wore a regular tie tonight. Unlike Dems, who apparently can't keep it up if Jon Stewart is having an off night. ON the contrary, I've had amazing sex BECAUSE Jon Stewart was having an off night & we needed something to do before Colbert came on. Also, there's something about getting pissed off about stuff & taking your aggression out on your partner and Repubs apparently don't have this sort of aggressive sex, because they don't get worked up over things. And, a liberal man will not only fuck your brains out, if something goes wrong that night, he'll go with you to get your Plan B (which he helped protect your access to) the next morning. On a similar line, political action is hot. I've had sex BECAUSE it was a voting day & the voting needed to be celebrated.

4. A sense of humor - No, Republicans are dumb. They laugh at rude, hateful things (other than themselves). And, you can say as much as you like about Repubs being able to laugh at Stewart, but where's the (intentionally) funny guy on Fox News? That's right. There isn't one.

5. Foreplay - She gives no evidence. I think she's lying. I'd like to refer back to #1 - no conscience = no interest in your orgasm = weak-ass foreplay = somebody bring me a hippy!

6. Size - Apparently, Repubs have giant dicks. And, here, I just thought they WERE giant dicks who were compensating for the cocktail weenies in their tighty-whities. (And, you know they wear TWs... or, worse! bikinis!)

7. Efficiency - Repubs like to whip it out in public. I am not a fan of PDA, so this does nothing for me. Although, she does promise sex in strange places with Repubs. Well, the only person I've hooked up with in any way & known to be a Repub was (a) a shit kisser, (b) completely still and silent the entire time, and (c) totally unwilling to reciprocate. He was very efficient, in making sure I never returned his phone calls.

8. Largesse - Repubs will take control (you have my attention), by telling me where to go to dinner (excellent. The last time that happened, we were a block from the steakhouse he had chosen to before he even bothered to ask if I had any food issues - and found out I was vegetarian), and ordering the wine he thinks is best (close to good again, but I bet the asshole is a Chardonnay drinker). And, under this heading, she points out that Repubs will never dissect & split a bill with you. Which is fine, but the person I know who is the most anal about splitting bills is a closet Republican. (Fun story about him [DOUCHE]. It was his then girlfriend, now fiancee's, birthday & at the dinner [which he declined to take part in planning], he asked for his bill & her's to be put together... And, then asked everyone else at the table for a dollar & some change to cover it. Hot. Oh! And! this wasn't even his finest b-day performance! At her 21st, her friends asked HER to come play pool, but not him, so he pulled her away from the game to bitch about how HE wasn't having any fun & she should LEAVE her b-day party b/c her friends weren't being nice to him & he wanted to leave. TOTALLY a keeper. This is the sort of man I want having an influence on my children. Dooooooouche.) Also, I'd rather have a $5 sammich I picked out for myself from the Mediterranean place that some $25 entree that I'm only choking down because you're paying & I feel like I should. Although, I'll concede that a man who can order me a decent glass of wine gets bonus points.

Sorry, I digress. Back to the task at hand!

9. Wooing techniques - Repubs send dirty e-mails. I could share things Dems have written to me (& I've written back) that would make Cheney blush, but I won't because I don't have their consent &, really, it's none of your damn business what my extracurricular activities consist of.

10. Nightstand Reading - Repubs won't read in bed, just fuck you. I'm pretty sure this has nothing to do with their "manliness," but simply the fact that the white-T bastards can't read.

There's a 10.5, but's just condeding that no one really wants to fuck a Repub (can you imagine Santorum in your bedroom... wait... that came out wrong... i mean... ass... oh, shit... no! that's not what i mean! I mean no one wants to bang a Rick Santorum when they could get on Clinton, instead.) (If you don't understand why everyone else is giggling retardedly right now, go here.)

Ok. That's all. I hope you all have really great sex very, very soon.

Good mail day!

2006-05-10T17:33:00.000-05:00

So, my cable & Internet have been down since Friday morning (when I was trying to finish on-line fact checking for my term paper. Awesome timing.).

Anyway, while I get everything straightened out & check a few days' worth of e-mails, I wanted to share this with you. It showed up in my mail yesterday.

Here's what was inside...

The underlined part says, "I strongly feel our nation is facing unprecedented, nearly unimaginable danger because of our trivialization of the God-given institution of marriage."

The packet then goes on to ask me to sign a petition in support of the Defense of Marriage Act. (Right.) Scary.

I did not sign their petition (obviously), but I did send their return envelope back. Here's what I enclosed...

I feel like my day is complete.

Love for everyone!!!

Follow Up

2006-04-24T23:38:00.000-05:00

I got the Prosecutor job!

I'm so gunnin' for your asses this fall.

Actually, To Hell With YOU, Bitch

2006-04-24T23:36:00.000-05:00

So, in the spirit of knowing thy enemy, & all that, I've put myself in the line of fire and picked up a second hand copy of Caitlin Flanagan's "To Hell With All That." It is as infuriating as you would expect. I'd like to share a few of my favorite bits & maybe comentate on them a bit. As infuriating as the entire tome is proving to be, and considering the fact that I couldn't even get through the preface without having to fight to urge to hurl the wretched piece of literature across my bedroom, I'm just going to point out my favorite bits, and follow them with my comments.

Ok, I'm not quite done yet, & it's pretty long, so I think this will be an on-going series.

Preface
"Affluent working mother stubbornly insist that no one question their commtment to their children, while at-home mothers demand that the world confer on them the social cachet that comes with working outside the home. But [sic] these are mutually exclusive demands." However, let's all thank God & Bog that there's someone like Mrs. Flanagan who has the skill and wherewithall to rise above either of these categories. She, great exemplar of womanhood that is is, has managed to be both a housewife AND an affluent career woman. It's nice to know that the categories are not truly mutually exclusive, I just wish I were as AWESOME as Caitlin so that I could do the same.

Oh, my god. This is my favorite. The following statements are what Flanagan believes are the tenants fo the modern feminist movement.
1. "Girls do not have a natural interest in homemaking." Well, I don't know if it's NATURAL, per se, but I can certainly share the joy I had in getting new flatware and serving pieces for my birthday. They make me want to have a dinner party!
2. "A young woman should not spend any of her energies finding a suitable husband and preparing for her life as a wife and mother." Now, I tell ya, my interest in the institution of marriage is very low, outside of recognizing its fiscal responsibility for a long term relationship. That said, I certainly want to expend SOME energy, so that I don't end up with the morbidly obese manager of the local McDonald's.
3. "A woman doesn't need a man, and a child doesn't need a father." Yes, a child is more likely to grow up healthy, or whatever, in a stable 2-parent household. Does this household need to have a man and a woman? No. Does a woman NEED a man in her life? If she does, she has some personal dependency issues she needs to work out before she'll ever find herself in a truly healthy relationship, anyway.
4. "Caring for the emotional and physical needs of a husband constitutes subservience." When done in the way you imply, which is to say that his emotional and physical needs come before hers, true. A relationship should be fair, equal, and both partners should spend equal energies caring for the emotional and physical needs of their partner.
5. "Paid professional work outside the home is the most valuable way for a woman to assert her intelligence and native gifts onto the world." While I HATE to disagree with you, Catie, baby, I fail to see how my natural gifts are asserted by making sure the floor is vaccuumed, the TV is dusted everyday, and dinner is on the table by 6:30 every night. Go bake me a pie, bitch.
6. "There is no connection between the number of hours a woman spends with her child and the nature of her relationship with that child." Well, obviously, relationships change depending on your interaction with that person. That said, I've never had whiney-ass separation anxiety that was brought on because my mother *gasp* had a job and wasn't home every fucking minute. Yes, Catie, I was a latch-key kid. I have most of a J.D. and healthy relationships with my parents. You have emotional issues and kids who wish you would leave them alone for 10 minutes so they can develop their own personalities.

She finishes by looking at the format of her book. It's a collection of essays she's written during her career. (Nothing like a good self-loathing feminist to make us all feel god about ourselves.) Apparently, it's going to start out with her opinions on sex and weddings. I've read some of it, so I have to bite my tongue & not ruin it, but let's just say that I have a hard time listening to someone preach "'Til death do us part," from someone who starts her essay talking about her second marriage.
Also, and this is running off the assumption that you watched her interview from The Colbert Report, I don't believe she has any interest in sex. Have you ever seen a more frigid bitch in need of a good humping? For the love of God & Bog, someone go hump that woman!

Back to studying for finals.

Freaking. The. Fuck. Out.

2006-04-05T17:51:00.000-05:00

So, I got an interview spot with the Prosecutor's office today. I interview at 10:20 Friday morning.

And, I am freaking the fuck out.

There are 7 of us interviewing for 6 spots & there aren't any people on the interview list that I would consider a shoe-in or a total loss. We all have pretty solid shots to make this, but one of us isn't.

And, I really don't want the "loser" to be me. I really, really, really, really, really want this internship. I want to be a litigator & this internship lets you actually get into the courtroom & try trials while you're still in law school.

It's HUGE.

It would be THE gold star on my resume. (And, would look so nice next to my time on The Urban Lawyer [law journal] & exec postions in my legal fraternity.)

The experience to be gained here is ridiculous. I'd still be in law school. And be trying cases.

In the year I would be doing this, I would try more jury trials than most trial attorneys do in 5+ years.

I might pee. Must stay hyped. Must sell self. Must sell self. Must sell self. Must look at self objectively as a product the Prosecutors need & must sell self in interview on Friday.

Freaking. The. Fuck. Out.

Shit, I want this.

Holy shit, I just peed a little...

2006-03-30T23:31:00.000-06:00

This may be the coolest thing EVER...

"Also, it turns out that mifepristone (RU-486) can do more than help induce medical abortion. Doctors in Scotland have developed a pill containing trace amounts of mifepristone that appears to work as a contraceptive -- and appears to help prevent heart disease, endometriosis and breast cancer. (Yes, it also does windows.) Unlike the standard "the Pill" pill, this drug contains no estrogen or progesterone, which are both associated with breast cancer. But that doesn't just mean it's safer than the old pill; doctors suggest that the new pill -- which works by preventing ovulation -- could actually make a woman's chances of developing cancer lower than if she'd taken no pill at all. According to the Australian Broadcasting Corp.,the new pill also affects the uterine lining, which could mean that women taking it will stop menstruating. This, my gut says, is one of those freaky things you have to be careful about wishing for. But, as one of the new pill's lead researchers, professor Richard Anderson of the University of Edinburgh, pointed out: 'Having regular periods is very much a modern thing. If you go back 100 years or so before the advent of contraception, or widespread use of contraception, women didn't really have very many periods because they went from one pregnancy to breastfeeding and then very rapidly onto the next pregnancy.'

Anderson also suggests -- speaking of wishful thinking -- that perhaps the antiabortion folks will not get all up in the new pill's grill, considering that it contains only a teeny amount of mifepristone. But he also acknowledges that opposition to abortion 'is a major problem with this class of drugs and it's been a handicap to their commercial development.'" (emphasis added -- from Salon)

A pill.
That makes you not have periods.
And LOWERS you chances of getting cancer.

Mama wants one.
Of course, the Right is probably already starting their anti-new pill campaign. Because it's way better to force unintended pregnancies & make women more likely to get cancer.
I so want one.

And, I want to have lots & lots & lots of premarital sex.
And, scream the names of Republicans when I cum.

Somebody fuck me.

Abridged

2006-03-30T01:36:00.000-06:00

I wrote.
O! how I wrote.
There was humor, there was drama, there was Republican-bashing. There was a fluke in the script and it all disappeared.

I talked about the Republicans push to keep the HPV vaccine from being ok'd by the FDA. Because it might encourage kids to have sex & doing that is WAY more important that saving the lives of the 4,000 American women - 300,000 worldwide - who die of cervical cancer every year. HPV being the only known cause. HPV being the most common STI in America, infecting between 70 & 80% of sexually active adults.

This led into a discussion about the new drug cocktail that might prevent a person from contracting HIV/AIDS. I think this is amazing! A disease we've only been able to control (and, that only with an incredibly expensive, complicated cocktail), we can now prevent. With just 2 drugs. Two! I shouldn't even call it a cocktail. It's not like some fruity, douchey, girly-ass thing with 7 ingredients & a tropical name. This thing is like a jack & coke, a gin & tonic, a screwdriver. This is like the greatest shot in the world.

And, of course, the Right wants to keep it down. Because it might encourage people to have premarital sex. Which is SO much more important than preventing an incurable disease. But, at the same time, I can understand where they're coming from (i don't agree with them [!!!], but i CAN see it from their perspective). I mean, what demographics are most affected by HIV? Gay men and poor black men & women. Not exactly demo's the Right likes to cuddle & care for.

Then, I finished up talking about a presentation/discussion from a class yesterday on why Intelligent Design should be taught in public classrooms. I'll share my favorite bits, briefly. 1) The idea of a "creator" or "intelligent designer" isn't inherently religious, b/c there could be a secular creator to our universe... (wait for it...) like aliens. 2) Religion & evolution are completely mutually exclusive. You either believe the creation story from Genesis, or you're a God-less heathen. 3) The First Amendment shouldn't apply to state governments, only the federal gov't.

So, what have we learned today?
- I hate Republicans & really want to punch one in the head.
- One day, my little sister might get cervical cancer & die b/c the Right doesn't want her to get the vaccine, on the off chance it'll make her do what she's probably going to do anyway.
- George W. Bush does not care about black people. Or gays. Or women. Or you, or me, or anyone who's dick he hasn't sucked to get where he is now.
- I'm a godless heathen who came from aliens & can be oppressed by Missouri with no legal repercussions.

Additionally,
- I like head scratches. Someone come scratch me!
- I got the Robot Chicken DVD today. If you don't know what RC is, imagine stop-motion animation made primarily with action figures & written by really intelligent 13 y/o boys with ADHD who refuse to take their Ritalin.
- After this was eaten, I decided I was WAY too lazy to put all the links back. May I recommend Google?

Now, with pictures!

2006-03-23T23:35:00.000-06:00

So, I like studies. I find numbers very reassuring. (1. I blame my awesome geekdom & science-heavy background. & 2. Yes, I know numbers can be manipulated to mean whatever you want.)

Anyway, I can across some super neat numbers today & I want to share them with you.

Let's start cheerful. The first studies are about dying.
Drugs are bad, m'kay.
This study is put out by a group who are advocating the legalization, so consider that. It does, however, come in an easy to digest table form. And, it compares the number of deaths that're directly attributable to pot to those that are attributable to several other drugs including Vioxx, Adderall, and... Viagra.
(On a side note & from a personal agenda, 7 women have died from use of RU-486 [the abortion pill/Mifepristone], you can check it out on CNN; they did a story on it within the last week or so. This study attributes over 2000 deaths to the use of Viagra, & I've heard estimates that place the number above 5000. So, where are the CNN stories to get that outlawed?)

The second look at the most common anti-abortion measures that are sought. Again, this bit has an agenda. It examines the claim that abortion is murder & says... well, she says it pretty succinctly...
"[T]he leaders of the abortion criminalization movement have consistently put their political weight behind policies which make little or no sense if they genuinely think that abortion is identical to child murder. And those same leaders routinely endorse policies that make a lot of sense if their goal is to penalize women who have sex."
Read the whole (short) story here.

Or, you can just cheat & check out the fun table/graphic.

And, finally, on a happy note, Cecelia Fire Thunder, first female president of the Oglala Sioux tribe of South Dakota, has said she is bringing an abortion-providing Planned Parenthood to her reservation.
She said, "I will personally establish a Planned Parenthood clinic on my own land which is within the boundaries of the Pine Ridge Reservation where the State of South Dakota has absolutely no jurisdiction."
The Salon story I pulled this from here.

I was wrong

2006-03-21T17:41:00.000-06:00

There are so many thing I want to blather on & on about today.

SCOTUS handed down a decision saying accusers MUST appear in court if hearsay evidence, like a 911 tape, is to be admitted. Which means that abused women, who are still living in fear of their abusers, or may have some misplaced emotion for them, have to sit on the stand and be intimidated by him & his lawyers. (Check it out here)

I read a really neat article saying that, though religion (any of them) is nothing more than a social construct, it is a necessary one to keep society functioning, to some degree. (accessible here)

I read a piece at Salon.com that I felt I should write about. You can read it here. It's about a group of young women, all about 20 years old, who've started an organization aimed at educating children & teens, boys & girls, about abusive relationships. Signs of abuse, what to do, where to get help, that sort of thing. I wish I'd had it at that age.

My senior year of high school, I was in an abusive relationship.

He never hit me, but he came close.

He was covertly abusive, you could call it. Our friends (because, by the end, I wasn't really allowed to have any that weren't his, too) thought he was great.

He never said anything bad in front of them. In front of them, he never made me feel like he was the best I could ever do & I should pray to God & thank him every day that Matt (his name, obviously) was in my life.

In front of them, he was peaches & cream, love & kisses.

But, alone, I never felt good enough.

I was a cute, quick-witted honor student who felt like she needed to work her ass off to keep a clingy, controlling, manipulative guy, who barely graduated, happy.

And, I loved him.

Because I didn't know any better. He paid attention to me. I was a geek. What 17 year-old wants a geek with thick glasses who wears baggy jeans & t-shirts everyday?

But, I was wrong.

Once, he raised his hand to slap me.

He brought it half way back down.

I can remember exactly how his face looked.

The fury in his eyes.

The blame he made me take as mine.

Then, he called me a name and told me I was wrong for talking to platonic guy friends between classes. He yelled at me for not doing what he told me to. For going against his wishes, his orders.

I walked out of his house.

The next day I asked him to forgive me. Our friends asked me why he was so upset; what had I done.

Two weeks later, I let him take my virginity. I thought it would make things better. That's what he wanted; if I gave him what he wanted, everything would be fine.

Later that week, as he was grabbing my arm and dragging me down the hall, through the school (so I wouldn't talk to anyone he didn't approve of), I realized that something was wrong.

I thought about how he said he loved me, and almost hit me in the same afternoon. I thought about how much my arm hurt as he was leading me around the school; I wondered if he was leaving bruises.

I thought about how sleeping with him hadn't made anything better, and how he was more and more controlling, even just in the last 3 days.

So, I left him.

On Valentine's Day.

And, my friends (sorry, our friends) gave me shit for weeks, and couldn't understand why I had done what I'd done.

I didn't have the courage to tell they why I'd really left him. I was afraid they all thought too highly of him and wouldn't believe me and would take his side, anyway. I wasn't sure I could put into words the bad feeling in my stomach that told me this was the right thing to do. (I still haven't told most people I knew in high school.)

But, I knew I'd done the right thing.

I'm glad I did it.

He took my virginity, he took my trust in boys for a long time, and he made me feel like I wasn't good as anything but a lust object, a trophy, a THING that could stoke his ego (and him) when he needed it.

To this day, I regard giving up my virginity in a useless relationship with an abusive boy one of the biggest mistakes of my life, and leaving him 7 days later one of my greatest triumphs.

In 14 months, I will graduate law school.

It's been a long time since I've had a day without an honest smile.

Today, I am happy.

And, I was right.

I totally own a gun

2006-03-20T20:25:00.000-06:00

There were so many choices for what to talk about here... Unwed fathers' parental rights, Mansfield's new book "Manliness," I really great op/ed piece by Jon Carroll, calling right-wingers "thoughtless, gossip-mongering abominations." (Actually, I think I may very well have to come back to this later on.) But, time is limited & I have a term paper looming over my shoulder.

So, instead, I'm just going to comment briefly on an ABC News, "Women Get Trigger Happy: More Women are Buying and Using Guns." ("Available here") The article talks about the NRA's "Women on Target" program, which is trying to encourage women to own & use guns. (They're worried about the little ladies' safety.) I don't much care for the NRA, myself. I see no reason to argue that Joe Suburban has the right to own an AK-47 or armor-piercing bullets.

But, I do own a gun. A Remington 12-gauge shotgun. She lives in my closet. When I was in my senior year of high school, I was the captain my high school's girl trapshooting squad. And, I took 4th place in the state high school trapshooting competition. (It was way fun. A neat little day trip. I beat out a couple dozen FFA girls & came in 4th, while my friend, Maggie, took 2nd place, after a shoot-out for 1st place.)

And, I support gun ownership, as long as gun owners have some reasonable understanding of gun safety.

So, I will support the NRA this one time (the pain!) and say, way to teach women how to responsibly use guns. Train them & teach them safety. Give them practice so that, when they do use their guns, they don't shoot wildly into a crowd.

On a side note, I also found a sleeve of Tag-Alongs in my cupboard & I'm so awesomely happy about it.

In the beginning...

2006-03-20T03:01:00.000-06:00

I feel an overwhelming urge to rant recently. I don't want to post on, say, MySpace, because, although people seem to have a decent reaction to what I spit out, I don't feel like it's the right forum to really write & rant & try to make arguments. So, here I am & here I'll try to do this.

But, it's after 3, and an AM time with more than 1 digit seems like a better time to try and put real effort into this.