You've got to give James Cameron credit. Only the man who brought forth "Titanic" would have the balls to use Left Wing Demagoguery as the foundation for an action/adventure movie, much less one that cost a half billion dollars to make.
In "Avatar", Cameron flogs his audience with every liberal Hollywood cliché ever discussed over a power lunch, and the entire movie flows like a condensation of talking points memos from the Sierra Club and MoveOn.org. The Pandoran natives - known as the Navi - are one with Nature; Gaia not only lives, but rules in this far-off world. It's Bad Cowboys vs. Virtuous Indians, and all of the Bad Cowboys are White Anglo-Saxon Protestant Males. All of the Good Guys are women, or men who get in touch with their feminine side.
Cameron liberally borrows from a dozen other movies for the bulk of these themes, but he rips off one in particular, and Paul Verhoeven must be pissed, because Cameron milks his masterpiece "Total Recall" like a dairy cow:
- Earth is a hellhole, full of violence and Evil. The distant planet, whether Pandora or Mars, is peopled by Real Folks.
- The military has joined with the Evil Corporations to exploit the innocent natives of the far off world.
- The aforementioned Evil Corporation mines a mineral called - and I'm not making this up - "Unobtainium". In Total Recall it was "Turbinium".
- Gigantic Mining machines play a major role in each movie, devouring the planet, and being used in both cases to threaten the lives of the main characters. In both movies, the Bad Guys operating the machines and using them to kill the Good Guys meet their deserved doom at the hands of the resourceful and woefully underequipped Good Guys.
- Each movie has Over-The-Top performances by two Bad Guys, one the Evil Corporate Chieftain and the other the Bloodthirsty Head Of Security. Total Recall by far did a much better job in portraying these characters, with Ronnie Cox as the unforgettable Vilos Cohaagen and Michael Ironsides as the gleefully murderous security chief known simply as Richter. Giovanni Ribisi and Stephen Lang can't hold a candle playing similar roles in Avatar.
- The Protagonist in both movies starts out as a Bad Guy who uses mind-altering Technology to create an Avatar that serves the needs of the Evil Corporation. This Avatar seduces the Natives and betrays them, causing the death of their Leader and pushing the Natives to the brink of extinction. In both movies, the Avatar falls in love with a Native Girl who teaches them the true Meaning Of Things.
- The Bad Guys revel in their Badness, giving monologue after monologue in tribute to greed, and twirling their mustaches, if only metaphorically. Had the setting been appropriate for trains, Cameron would have no doubt had at least one of them tie a Damsel to the tracks.
- In both movies, the Protagonist and his native girlfriend battle the Bloodthirsty Head Of Security in the Penultimate scene. The Protagonist in both movies is exposed to the lethal atmosphere of the alien planet, and in both, he is saved by the intervention of an Extraterrestrial Benefactor, the only essential difference being that in Total Recall it was a long-departed alien super-race, and in Avatar it was the Navi Hottie that he was tapping in his Avatar persona.
Still, for all that this movie hammers you over the head with its "Republicans and Capitalism are evil" ethic, I couldn't help but enjoy myself. Cameron has created a world so profoundly realistic, diverse and beautiful, that you can't help but get caught up in it, especially in 3D. The criticism of CGI (Computer Graphic Imagery) by movie purists is that technology cannot substitute for humanity. This movie proves them wrong, particularly as Cameron has finally produced characters capable of facial expressions.
For 2 and a half hours, I was not only among the ten foot tall blue natives of Pandora, I was one of them. But that is the essential difference between movies and the Democrat Party that James Cameron so desperately wishes me to join. In both, you get to live in a fantasy world, but but unlike the Democrat Party, movies end, with the satisfied patrons leaving the theatre and rejoining the real world.
Warning to Live Actors: your days may be numbered unless you clean up your act. It's only a matter of time before Russell Crowe, Robert Downey, Jr. and Christian Bale are going to be competing with completely lifelike recreations of Steve McQueen and John Wayne. The Virtual McQueen won't require an entourage, special privileges or even a salary. There will be no scheduling conflicts that Producers need to work around; the Virtual McQueen will not hold up production because he was thrown in jail; he will not require stunt doubles, he will never be a drug addict, and he will not die in the middle of filming.
He also won't throw tantrums or beat up the crew.
Final Note: This movie would have benefitted from the inclusion of one Evil Woman character, as Total Recall did with the character played by Sharon Stone. Because movie-goers loooove Evil Women.
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
The Great Appeasers
The Media have made much about the fact that Barack Obama scores highly in popularity polls with the rest of the world, and have spared no effort to portray that popularity as a repudiation of George W. Bush and his policies, and a validation of Obama and his. OffHisMeds is amused at the simple-minded notion that personal popularity equates to sound foreign policy, since from the end of WWII through to present day, foreigners of all stripes - and particularly our allies - have demonstrated their ability to dislike America for no better reason than, well, because we're America.
Democrats have capitalized on anti-Americanism by making it a staple of their foreign policy, flogging the electorate with a tired stereotype animated by Guilt. And where there is Guilt, there must be the Guilty.
Enter George W. Bush.
In the current Democrat narrative, George W. Bush represented the Old Order, unapologetic about America's right to exist, and unwilling to admit to being responsible for all of the World's ills. That is not totally true, of course, because even Bush, for all that he got right on foreign policy, tolerated and even promoted some truly anti-American organizations and ideas, among others the United Nations, Global Warming and the State Department.
It did him no good, and Democrats demonized him anyway, just as they had his even more moderate father, and Ronald Reagan before that.
Now, there's a number of reasons that the rest of the world might have occasion, reasonable or not, to dislike us. For one thing, at some point in time over the past 200 years, we have either waged war or supported allies in wars in much of Europe, the Middle East, Asia, Mexico, Canada, Central and South America and Africa.
It's not to say that all of those countries didn't have it coming, and ironically, virtually all of them were started by Democrats, but that's not the reason America is disliked. No, to understand animus towards the USA, OffHisMeds must take you in his Wayback Machine to 1997 and the infamous British Nanny who murdered an American baby in her care. Her name was Louise Woodward, and the accusations against her were that she abused the infant - including slamming his head onto a flat surface - because she was upset with restrictions placed on her social life by the child's parents. She was convicted of Manslaughter, served 279 days of her sentence, then deported back to England.
What is instructive about this was the reaction of the Public back in Great Britain to the story and the verdict. Before, during and after the trial, Louise Brown was and is singularly popular with the British people. Numerous polls show the kind of favorable ratings that Barack Obama and other poll-driven politicians can only dream about, but for the Hate America crowd within the Democrat Party, there's one major problem: during the trial, George W. Bush was not the President; Obama's soul-mate Bill Clinton was.
One could dwell on how demented it is for Brits or anybody else to cheer for people who kill Americans, but you'd go crazy trying to keep track of every country that enables the murder or debasement of Yanks. Citing yet another instance of British ignominy, recall that recently, Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi was released by the Brits to Libya where he returned to a hero's welcome. The Brits supposedly released him on "compassionate" grounds this past August, allegedly because he had only 3 months to live. Well, four months later, al-Megrahi is still alive and living it large, his health miraculously intact.
His longevity and the timing of his release calls into question the "compassionate grounds" argument put forth by the Brits. While much has been made of the fact that Great Britain was awarded a huge oil and gas exploration contract with Libya mere days before al-Megrahi's release, this was about more than simple greed. No, what really stinks about this singular act of betrayal by our British cousins is that al-Megrahi was released - in part - specifically because he blew an American airliner out of the air, murdering hundreds in the process.
As proof, OffHisMeds asks you to consider the likelihood of a foreign national being released in Britain if his crime had been, say, drug smuggling, money laundering or - god forbid - acts of terrorism against Great Britain and Her Majesty's subjects. Not surprisingly, there is no precedent for such a humanitarian gesture. In the case of terrorists acts against Britain, dozens of IRA terrorists languished in prison for decades, with ten of them even starving themselves to death in British prisons during the 80's to protest their incarceration. Britain's principled response? Let 'em die. And they did.
Too bad Ireland couldn't dangle the carrot of a thumping big multi-billion dollar oil contract to get their terrorists out of jail. Apparently, the criteria for British humanitarianism begins and ends with the convergence of profits and Jihadists who kill Americans.
Which brings us back to the question of why the much-beloved Barack Obama and his ass-kissing predecessors get so little traction with the world community. After all, Bill Clinton groveled every bit as enthusiastically to World Opinion as Barack Obama, and literally invented the practice of apologizing that Obama now uses with such abandon. And yet on Clinton's watch, terrorists bombed the USS Cole, bombed the Kobar Towers, bombed US embassies, and blew up - for the first time - The World Trade Center. You'll also recall that the Jihadists then spent literally the rest of Clinton's administration on the planning, training and infiltration necessary for the return engagement to the WTC in 2001, most of it on US soil. And of course, let us not forget that America's single greatest foreign policy humiliation occurred when our embassy in Iran was overrun and our diplomats taken hostage during the presidency of the previous "most popular man in the world", Jimmy Carter.
Kind of makes you wonder what all this much-sought-after popularity on the part of these Great Appeasers has gotten us, other than the back of everybody's hand. One recent story has spotlighted the fact that for decades Brazil has allowed dozens of American children to be kidnapped with impunity and held in Brazil; last month Iran arrested 3 American hikers and will try them for espionage; in June, North Korea convicted two Korean-American journalists reporting on human rights abuses of espionage and sentenced them to 12 years hard labor; China continues to hold Chinese-American citizens protesting human rights violations in prison, denying them access to American lawyers or diplomats; France has provided haven to Roman Polanski for decades, even though he drugged, raped and sodomized a 13 year old girl, American, of course.
Polanski raped the girl and then absconded under the watchful eyes of the Carter administration, by the way.
The list goes on, but how to reconcile these insults with Obama's, Clinton's and Carter's great esteem for the good opinion of the rest of the World? After all, Appeasement has never worked and rarely been practiced when Republicans were in power, the most famous result of which was the release of the American embassy hostages in Iran on the day that Ronald Reagan was sworn into office. Other examples abound: Reagan called the Soviet's bluff on nuclear proliferation, and they collapsed into the dustbin of history. Nixon mined the harbors of Haiphong and the North Vietnamese fell over themselves rushing to the negotiating table. George W. Bush called Saddam's bluff, invaded Iraq and established a functioning democracy - not to mention a huge American military presence - smack in the Jihadist's back yard.
So what do we learn from all this? What we learn is that Hating America is the second most popular leisure-time activity in the World, behind Soccer. We learn that the third most popular leisure-time activity in the World is jerking Democrat politicians' chains, leading them to believe that everlasting popularity - and dare we say it, a Nobel Prize - is within their reach with just a few more acts of contrition, a few more transfers of cash from the American Treasury, and the abandonment of just a few more of the principles that define America.
What we also learn, though, is the extent to which American Exceptionalism defines our relationship with the rest of the world. Most Americans really do believe that there is something unique about America, something "better" in the way we conduct our affairs - politically, economically and culturally - than any system that has come before her.
We are, and that pisses the rest of the world off.
THAT is the reason Brits not only defended Louise Brown, the Au Pair Nanny Murderer, but celebrated her; It's the reason Mexican soccer fans spit on visiting American soccer players and cheered when our Miss World competitor fell on her ass in Mexico City; it's the reason ze French actively worked to undermine NATO for fifty years, and it's the reason Spain (and much of Europe as well) has embraced a fad called "Universal Jurisdiction", the practice of prosecuting people of other countries for crimes, even if the acts were not committed on Spanish soil and did not involve Spaniards in any way. In it's current application, the primary purpose of Universal Jurisdiction is to accuse, extradite, incarcerate, try, convict and imprison American leaders for being, well, American, with our friends the Israelis running a close second for being, well, Israelis.
America and Israel by their examples are a threat to most of the rest of the world, and the established order. While we can laugh at the world-class inferiority complex afflicting Spain and most Spaniards - the Basques being an honorable exception - their surreal extra-jurisdictional maneuverings have real-world consequences. Any American involved in water-boarding, for example (with the possible exception of George W. Bush) could not safely travel to Spain or other countries of a similar bent, including, not surprisingly, Great Britain.
Which brings us back to Barack Obama's adulation mongering. Isn't it amazing that so few commentators make the distinction between affection and respect? If it's a given that people will love us as long as they can jerk our strings, it's instructive that America has rarely, if ever, been loved and respected at the same time. And the World most explicitly does not respect Barack Obama, as was illustrated most recently by his humiliation at the hands of the International Olympic Committee. You could see the rejection of his advocacy for the Olympics in Chicago coming a mile away. Rubbing salt in the wound, the IOC actually dumped Chicago in the first round, this despite the personal assurances by Obama that America would treat athletes well and not terrorize visitors. Only a Democrat could legitimize a world-view that could presume that America would do anything less, groveling before the Vengeful Clerks of the IOC, fruitlessly, as it turns out.
This kind of behavior on the part of the IOC is nothing new, which presents Democrats with a conundrum. How to explain the IOC rejection unless they admit that Obama is a clueless amateur in world affairs? How do you explain the provocations in the past year of Great Britain, Iran, Korea, China, Pakistan, Mexico, Russia and most of South America during the presidency of The Enlightened One?
The short answer would be that Obama is a world-class foreign policy screw-up, but that's not it. The simple fact of the matter is that Obama's Appeasement is part of a 4 decade history of pandering to America Haters by the Democrat Party, notwithstanding that he has taken it to a whole 'nother level. And the reason is that the Democrat Party has targeted American Exceptionalism for extinction. Desiring to control the American populace in the manner of Euro Socialists, Democrats must first undermine all the things that make America exceptional, including Capitalism, personal freedoms, and America's belief in such things. Obama is but the logical extension of the policies of Carter and Clinton.
There's a million English Nanny Murderers and crazed Jihadist airplane bombers lurking in our future, not despite the efforts of the Democrat Party, but because of them.
Democrats have capitalized on anti-Americanism by making it a staple of their foreign policy, flogging the electorate with a tired stereotype animated by Guilt. And where there is Guilt, there must be the Guilty.
Enter George W. Bush.
In the current Democrat narrative, George W. Bush represented the Old Order, unapologetic about America's right to exist, and unwilling to admit to being responsible for all of the World's ills. That is not totally true, of course, because even Bush, for all that he got right on foreign policy, tolerated and even promoted some truly anti-American organizations and ideas, among others the United Nations, Global Warming and the State Department.
It did him no good, and Democrats demonized him anyway, just as they had his even more moderate father, and Ronald Reagan before that.
Now, there's a number of reasons that the rest of the world might have occasion, reasonable or not, to dislike us. For one thing, at some point in time over the past 200 years, we have either waged war or supported allies in wars in much of Europe, the Middle East, Asia, Mexico, Canada, Central and South America and Africa.
It's not to say that all of those countries didn't have it coming, and ironically, virtually all of them were started by Democrats, but that's not the reason America is disliked. No, to understand animus towards the USA, OffHisMeds must take you in his Wayback Machine to 1997 and the infamous British Nanny who murdered an American baby in her care. Her name was Louise Woodward, and the accusations against her were that she abused the infant - including slamming his head onto a flat surface - because she was upset with restrictions placed on her social life by the child's parents. She was convicted of Manslaughter, served 279 days of her sentence, then deported back to England.
What is instructive about this was the reaction of the Public back in Great Britain to the story and the verdict. Before, during and after the trial, Louise Brown was and is singularly popular with the British people. Numerous polls show the kind of favorable ratings that Barack Obama and other poll-driven politicians can only dream about, but for the Hate America crowd within the Democrat Party, there's one major problem: during the trial, George W. Bush was not the President; Obama's soul-mate Bill Clinton was.
One could dwell on how demented it is for Brits or anybody else to cheer for people who kill Americans, but you'd go crazy trying to keep track of every country that enables the murder or debasement of Yanks. Citing yet another instance of British ignominy, recall that recently, Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi was released by the Brits to Libya where he returned to a hero's welcome. The Brits supposedly released him on "compassionate" grounds this past August, allegedly because he had only 3 months to live. Well, four months later, al-Megrahi is still alive and living it large, his health miraculously intact.
His longevity and the timing of his release calls into question the "compassionate grounds" argument put forth by the Brits. While much has been made of the fact that Great Britain was awarded a huge oil and gas exploration contract with Libya mere days before al-Megrahi's release, this was about more than simple greed. No, what really stinks about this singular act of betrayal by our British cousins is that al-Megrahi was released - in part - specifically because he blew an American airliner out of the air, murdering hundreds in the process.
As proof, OffHisMeds asks you to consider the likelihood of a foreign national being released in Britain if his crime had been, say, drug smuggling, money laundering or - god forbid - acts of terrorism against Great Britain and Her Majesty's subjects. Not surprisingly, there is no precedent for such a humanitarian gesture. In the case of terrorists acts against Britain, dozens of IRA terrorists languished in prison for decades, with ten of them even starving themselves to death in British prisons during the 80's to protest their incarceration. Britain's principled response? Let 'em die. And they did.
Too bad Ireland couldn't dangle the carrot of a thumping big multi-billion dollar oil contract to get their terrorists out of jail. Apparently, the criteria for British humanitarianism begins and ends with the convergence of profits and Jihadists who kill Americans.
Which brings us back to the question of why the much-beloved Barack Obama and his ass-kissing predecessors get so little traction with the world community. After all, Bill Clinton groveled every bit as enthusiastically to World Opinion as Barack Obama, and literally invented the practice of apologizing that Obama now uses with such abandon. And yet on Clinton's watch, terrorists bombed the USS Cole, bombed the Kobar Towers, bombed US embassies, and blew up - for the first time - The World Trade Center. You'll also recall that the Jihadists then spent literally the rest of Clinton's administration on the planning, training and infiltration necessary for the return engagement to the WTC in 2001, most of it on US soil. And of course, let us not forget that America's single greatest foreign policy humiliation occurred when our embassy in Iran was overrun and our diplomats taken hostage during the presidency of the previous "most popular man in the world", Jimmy Carter.
Kind of makes you wonder what all this much-sought-after popularity on the part of these Great Appeasers has gotten us, other than the back of everybody's hand. One recent story has spotlighted the fact that for decades Brazil has allowed dozens of American children to be kidnapped with impunity and held in Brazil; last month Iran arrested 3 American hikers and will try them for espionage; in June, North Korea convicted two Korean-American journalists reporting on human rights abuses of espionage and sentenced them to 12 years hard labor; China continues to hold Chinese-American citizens protesting human rights violations in prison, denying them access to American lawyers or diplomats; France has provided haven to Roman Polanski for decades, even though he drugged, raped and sodomized a 13 year old girl, American, of course.
Polanski raped the girl and then absconded under the watchful eyes of the Carter administration, by the way.
The list goes on, but how to reconcile these insults with Obama's, Clinton's and Carter's great esteem for the good opinion of the rest of the World? After all, Appeasement has never worked and rarely been practiced when Republicans were in power, the most famous result of which was the release of the American embassy hostages in Iran on the day that Ronald Reagan was sworn into office. Other examples abound: Reagan called the Soviet's bluff on nuclear proliferation, and they collapsed into the dustbin of history. Nixon mined the harbors of Haiphong and the North Vietnamese fell over themselves rushing to the negotiating table. George W. Bush called Saddam's bluff, invaded Iraq and established a functioning democracy - not to mention a huge American military presence - smack in the Jihadist's back yard.
So what do we learn from all this? What we learn is that Hating America is the second most popular leisure-time activity in the World, behind Soccer. We learn that the third most popular leisure-time activity in the World is jerking Democrat politicians' chains, leading them to believe that everlasting popularity - and dare we say it, a Nobel Prize - is within their reach with just a few more acts of contrition, a few more transfers of cash from the American Treasury, and the abandonment of just a few more of the principles that define America.
What we also learn, though, is the extent to which American Exceptionalism defines our relationship with the rest of the world. Most Americans really do believe that there is something unique about America, something "better" in the way we conduct our affairs - politically, economically and culturally - than any system that has come before her.
We are, and that pisses the rest of the world off.
THAT is the reason Brits not only defended Louise Brown, the Au Pair Nanny Murderer, but celebrated her; It's the reason Mexican soccer fans spit on visiting American soccer players and cheered when our Miss World competitor fell on her ass in Mexico City; it's the reason ze French actively worked to undermine NATO for fifty years, and it's the reason Spain (and much of Europe as well) has embraced a fad called "Universal Jurisdiction", the practice of prosecuting people of other countries for crimes, even if the acts were not committed on Spanish soil and did not involve Spaniards in any way. In it's current application, the primary purpose of Universal Jurisdiction is to accuse, extradite, incarcerate, try, convict and imprison American leaders for being, well, American, with our friends the Israelis running a close second for being, well, Israelis.
America and Israel by their examples are a threat to most of the rest of the world, and the established order. While we can laugh at the world-class inferiority complex afflicting Spain and most Spaniards - the Basques being an honorable exception - their surreal extra-jurisdictional maneuverings have real-world consequences. Any American involved in water-boarding, for example (with the possible exception of George W. Bush) could not safely travel to Spain or other countries of a similar bent, including, not surprisingly, Great Britain.
Which brings us back to Barack Obama's adulation mongering. Isn't it amazing that so few commentators make the distinction between affection and respect? If it's a given that people will love us as long as they can jerk our strings, it's instructive that America has rarely, if ever, been loved and respected at the same time. And the World most explicitly does not respect Barack Obama, as was illustrated most recently by his humiliation at the hands of the International Olympic Committee. You could see the rejection of his advocacy for the Olympics in Chicago coming a mile away. Rubbing salt in the wound, the IOC actually dumped Chicago in the first round, this despite the personal assurances by Obama that America would treat athletes well and not terrorize visitors. Only a Democrat could legitimize a world-view that could presume that America would do anything less, groveling before the Vengeful Clerks of the IOC, fruitlessly, as it turns out.
This kind of behavior on the part of the IOC is nothing new, which presents Democrats with a conundrum. How to explain the IOC rejection unless they admit that Obama is a clueless amateur in world affairs? How do you explain the provocations in the past year of Great Britain, Iran, Korea, China, Pakistan, Mexico, Russia and most of South America during the presidency of The Enlightened One?
The short answer would be that Obama is a world-class foreign policy screw-up, but that's not it. The simple fact of the matter is that Obama's Appeasement is part of a 4 decade history of pandering to America Haters by the Democrat Party, notwithstanding that he has taken it to a whole 'nother level. And the reason is that the Democrat Party has targeted American Exceptionalism for extinction. Desiring to control the American populace in the manner of Euro Socialists, Democrats must first undermine all the things that make America exceptional, including Capitalism, personal freedoms, and America's belief in such things. Obama is but the logical extension of the policies of Carter and Clinton.
There's a million English Nanny Murderers and crazed Jihadist airplane bombers lurking in our future, not despite the efforts of the Democrat Party, but because of them.
Nigeria Responds
In the wake of the attempted bombing of a Delta airliner over Detroit, Nigerian government officials hastened to distance themselves from the actions of the Bomber, Nigerian native Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. At a hastily arranged press conference in Washington, DC, Ambassador Machmoud Abdulmutallab (no relation to the Suspect) asked "that Americans see this incident for what it is - that of a depraved individual who just happens to be from Nigeria".
Standing next to U.S. Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke, Nigerian Trade Minister Abdul Abdullah Abdulmutallab (no relation to the Suspect) added that he "had every confidence that robust trade relations with the United States would continue, including major Nigerian exports such as Medicare Fraud, the Pigeon Drop, Three Card Monte, Copyright Infringement, Pirated Software, Internet Scams, Multi-level Marketing and Driveway Sealant. Abdulmutallab expressed optimism that "Nigeria could leverage its expertise in these business segments to capture a substantial portion of the growing markets for Identity Theft and Stimulus Packages". He was also "bullish on the latest innovation from Nigeria, providing character witnesses and alibis to refute paternity against and/or corroborate the whereabouts of certain Democrat Senators at the time said paternity was allegedly established".
Secretary Locke spoke briefly, reiterating the benefits of "open and robust trade between our two nations".
Visiting the White House on Monday, Nigerian President-For-Life Anwar al Jihadi Abdulmutallab (no relation to the Suspect), expressed his concern that the "alleged terrorist attack would poison the perception of Americans towards Nigerians. We are just average people", he said, "and we love America and all Americans. We stand ready to cooperate with the American government in any way possible to bring the perpetrators of terrorism to justice, up to and including strongly worded statements condemning these activities".
After the press conference, President Abdulmutallab and his retinue were briefly detained when several reporters, White House travel office executives and President Obama's Personal Liaison To The Council On American-Arab Relations reported that they were missing wallets, watches, jewelry, laptops and in the case of at least one member of the Secret Service, an M-10 automatic machine pistol.
The missing items were all returned and President Abdulmutallab finished his tour of the White House by having tea and Nigerian delicacies with President and Mrs. Obama, including Edikang-Ikong Soup, Ofe Onugbu and Chin Chin. Mrs. Obama attended wearing a Burka until President Abdulmutallab explained that......
Standing next to U.S. Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke, Nigerian Trade Minister Abdul Abdullah Abdulmutallab (no relation to the Suspect) added that he "had every confidence that robust trade relations with the United States would continue, including major Nigerian exports such as Medicare Fraud, the Pigeon Drop, Three Card Monte, Copyright Infringement, Pirated Software, Internet Scams, Multi-level Marketing and Driveway Sealant. Abdulmutallab expressed optimism that "Nigeria could leverage its expertise in these business segments to capture a substantial portion of the growing markets for Identity Theft and Stimulus Packages". He was also "bullish on the latest innovation from Nigeria, providing character witnesses and alibis to refute paternity against and/or corroborate the whereabouts of certain Democrat Senators at the time said paternity was allegedly established".
Secretary Locke spoke briefly, reiterating the benefits of "open and robust trade between our two nations".
Visiting the White House on Monday, Nigerian President-For-Life Anwar al Jihadi Abdulmutallab (no relation to the Suspect), expressed his concern that the "alleged terrorist attack would poison the perception of Americans towards Nigerians. We are just average people", he said, "and we love America and all Americans. We stand ready to cooperate with the American government in any way possible to bring the perpetrators of terrorism to justice, up to and including strongly worded statements condemning these activities".
After the press conference, President Abdulmutallab and his retinue were briefly detained when several reporters, White House travel office executives and President Obama's Personal Liaison To The Council On American-Arab Relations reported that they were missing wallets, watches, jewelry, laptops and in the case of at least one member of the Secret Service, an M-10 automatic machine pistol.
The missing items were all returned and President Abdulmutallab finished his tour of the White House by having tea and Nigerian delicacies with President and Mrs. Obama, including Edikang-Ikong Soup, Ofe Onugbu and Chin Chin. Mrs. Obama attended wearing a Burka until President Abdulmutallab explained that......
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Obama's Agenda Explained
And this was before Health Care passed the Senate.....
http://sendables.jibjab.com/view/54r0FDM2OqUaspWm
http://sendables.jibjab.com/view/54r0FDM2OqUaspWm
Monday, December 14, 2009
Elin Woods vs. Tiger Woods, Day 11
Attorney 1: ".........that the Party Of The First Part, Elin Woods (hereafter referred to as the POTFP), has agreed to the introduction of the "Statement Of Abject Apology" being entered into the record of these proceedings by the Party Of The Second Part, Tiger Woods (hereafter referred to as the POTSP), notwithstanding that inclusion of said statement shall have no bearing on the current division of properties, or the ongoing renegotiation of the division of said properties."
Attorney 2: "The POTSP asserts that all such statements should in fact and law have a bearing on the proceedings since both individually and collectively they constitute a Material Benefit for the POTFP in that all such statements have portrayed the POTFP in a positive light and have at a minimum contained some admission of guilt from the POTSP, either explicit or implied. Further, all such statements have in fact benefited the POTFP not only in presenting her in a positive light but in protecting her from criminal prosecution, these Statements including but not limited to the 'Initial Vague Statement', the 'Clarifying Statement', the 'Initial Rebuttal', the 'Plea For Privacy', the 'Refutation Of Law Enforcement And Other Persons Concerning Motive', the 'Demand For Privacy', and the 'Rebuttal of Certain Claims By Law Enforcement Officials To Material Evidence To Prove Assertions Of Criminality'."
Further, the POTSP is prepared to release additional such Statements that will benefit the POTFP, including the 'Rejection Of Certain Allegations' that the POTFP - after discovering certain text messages to the POTSP from a Person Not His Wife (hereafter referred to as "Mistress") inviting the POTSP to "wear her out" - had on the night in question acted upon her desire to beat both the POTSP and his vehicle with a seven iron, as well as expressed her intent to render the POTSP incapable of physically acting upon such further invitations by inserting the aforementioned seven iron into his rectum until he "tasted leather".
The POTSP will further concede that all such Statements benefitting the POTFP to date are neither comprehensive nor exhaustive, assuming that the POTFP will reciprocate by making such similar public Statements of affection for, solidarity with and affirmation of the Good Character of the POTSP, in return fo which the POTFP will participate in 15% of any and all future Endorsement Contracts that result from such Good Faith efforts by the POTFP, not to include current agreements in force between the POTSP, Nike and Buick."
Attorney 1: "The Proposal in general is acceptable to the POTFP, pending final negotiation of the percentage participation of the POTFP in the aforementioned future Endorsement Contracts as well as some limited participation in any and all existing Endorsement Contracts, with payments to commence upon some Date Certain no less than 60 nor more than 90 days from the date of the aforementioned Text Message.
We further demand that the Senior Arbitrator excise from the record prejudicial comments inserted into the record by the Stenographer comparing the Parties of the First and Second Part to certain Acts of Personal Hygiene and/or the residual of such Acts of Hygiene, as well as her suggestion that the Attorneys in attendance might consume said residual. I recommend we take a recess so as to secure the services of another Stenographer and make the necessary corrections to the record before we resume. Lunch anyone?"
Attorney 2: "The POTSP asserts that all such statements should in fact and law have a bearing on the proceedings since both individually and collectively they constitute a Material Benefit for the POTFP in that all such statements have portrayed the POTFP in a positive light and have at a minimum contained some admission of guilt from the POTSP, either explicit or implied. Further, all such statements have in fact benefited the POTFP not only in presenting her in a positive light but in protecting her from criminal prosecution, these Statements including but not limited to the 'Initial Vague Statement', the 'Clarifying Statement', the 'Initial Rebuttal', the 'Plea For Privacy', the 'Refutation Of Law Enforcement And Other Persons Concerning Motive', the 'Demand For Privacy', and the 'Rebuttal of Certain Claims By Law Enforcement Officials To Material Evidence To Prove Assertions Of Criminality'."
Further, the POTSP is prepared to release additional such Statements that will benefit the POTFP, including the 'Rejection Of Certain Allegations' that the POTFP - after discovering certain text messages to the POTSP from a Person Not His Wife (hereafter referred to as "Mistress") inviting the POTSP to "wear her out" - had on the night in question acted upon her desire to beat both the POTSP and his vehicle with a seven iron, as well as expressed her intent to render the POTSP incapable of physically acting upon such further invitations by inserting the aforementioned seven iron into his rectum until he "tasted leather".
The POTSP will further concede that all such Statements benefitting the POTFP to date are neither comprehensive nor exhaustive, assuming that the POTFP will reciprocate by making such similar public Statements of affection for, solidarity with and affirmation of the Good Character of the POTSP, in return fo which the POTFP will participate in 15% of any and all future Endorsement Contracts that result from such Good Faith efforts by the POTFP, not to include current agreements in force between the POTSP, Nike and Buick."
Attorney 1: "The Proposal in general is acceptable to the POTFP, pending final negotiation of the percentage participation of the POTFP in the aforementioned future Endorsement Contracts as well as some limited participation in any and all existing Endorsement Contracts, with payments to commence upon some Date Certain no less than 60 nor more than 90 days from the date of the aforementioned Text Message.
We further demand that the Senior Arbitrator excise from the record prejudicial comments inserted into the record by the Stenographer comparing the Parties of the First and Second Part to certain Acts of Personal Hygiene and/or the residual of such Acts of Hygiene, as well as her suggestion that the Attorneys in attendance might consume said residual. I recommend we take a recess so as to secure the services of another Stenographer and make the necessary corrections to the record before we resume. Lunch anyone?"
Friday, December 11, 2009
Death By Regulation
"You ask, what is our policy? I say it is to wage war by land, sea, and air. War with all our might and with all the strength God has given us, and to wage war for a monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark and lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy."
- Winston Churchill
It's disconcerting to hear such appalling words coming out of the mouth of one of the Giants of the 20th Century, isn't it? You're asking yourself, "that's not what Churchill said, right?"
And you would be correct. What he actually said was ".....to wage war against a monstrous tyranny.....", not for it. But in so briefly abusing Churchill's inspirational words, OffHisMeds is making the point that - with the slightest of modifications - laws regulating the Land, Air and Sea can be transformed by a bunch of power hungry clerks with low esteem from resources that normal citizens are allowed to walk upon, cultivate, drink and breathe, into things that are used to destroy society and reduce us all to serfdom.
I am speaking, of course, of the Democrat Party.
In a span of days, the rights of normal citizens to use land, sea and air have come under assault by the Usual Suspects as never before, offering OffHisMeds the opportunity to write a Blog of such pure symmetry. See, Obama and the Democrats have been largely frustrated - despite their absolute congressional majorities and tens of millions of government employees comprised 75% of Democrats - from accomplishing anywhere near the power grab they believe is their birthright.
Their Global Warming initiatives are stalled, Health Care is going nowhere, Cap and Trade is on the ropes; why, even the Stimulus bill has come under attack, and all over such quibbles as the Obama Administration creating 400 non-existent congressional districts to justify giving $787 Billion of your tax dollars to themselves and their cronies. Would somebody please explain the kind of world we live in when a Democrat can't plunder the treasury with impunity, the spotlight safely fixed on more deserving subjects such as Governor Mark Sanford?
OHM has little sympathy for their predicament, mind you. But he does have an almost infinite regard for their adaptability. Unable to achieve their objectives for world domination through the legislative process, Democrats have decided to do it by the simple expedient of declaring that existing law lets them do whatever the hell they want to, transferring policy-making from politicians to Government Lifers.
Sea - Not So Fast With That Duck Pond, Brother
The EPA now wants to regulate all water. I kid you not. As the article attached states: "As confirmed in several recent U.S. Supreme Court cases, federal regulatory authority currently extends only to waters that are navigable or perhaps directly connected to navigable waters. The Senate bill would remove the word "navigable." The significance of the dropped word is that tens of thousands of bodies of water currently managed by the 50 sovereign states would be surrendered to the dictates of bureaucrats at the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/10/leave-our-fish-ponds-alone/
Think it can't happen? Under current EPA regulations, the federal government has for decades abused private property rights by declaring thousands of small pools of standing water on private property to be "wetlands", preventing owners from building or changing their property in any way, and rendering it virtually unsellable. The problem being, of course, that if it is unsellable, it has no worth. And if it has no worth, for all intents and purposes, the Federal Government just stole your property.
Federal, state and municipal governments have also been systematically depriving citizens of the right to use water wells for decades, again, allegedly for the greater good, but that's a crock. Across the country, those same politicians that took away your well and put you on city water - allegedly to protect ground water aquifers - have gleefully allowed utilities and other industries to plunder trillions of gallons of ground water per year. So there you have it: drinking and bathing is harmful to the environment; cooling off a reactor and then dumping the effluent into our rivers is not.
For one final example, the Army Corp of Engineers are the geniuses who straightened the Mississippi and re-engineered the wetlands surrounding New Orleans, resulting in not only contributing to the Hurricane Katrina debacle, but the irreversible erosion of the wetlands which protect the Louisiana coastline.
Air - We're Now Charging You To Breathe
Democrats were getting nowhere linking CO2 emissions and Global Warming, particularly in light of a decade of revelations that the Global Warming lobby had cooked the books on the science, most recently and amusingly when some of their most prominent scientists were outed by their own e-mails on the best ways to game the data and suppress dissenting opinions from other scientists.
What is a motivated bureaucrat to do?
Answer, have the EPA declare CO2 - which all animals exhale with every breath - a pollutant. This would allow the EPA to regulate every aspect of it under existing federal law, thus neatly circumventing the need to propose and pass legislation regarding "global warming". Read all about it:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/18/science/earth/18endanger.html
If you're not worried about the ability of a handful of unelected Government Lifers to circumvent the House, the Senate, the 50 Sovereign States, Voters and the very concept of representative government by mere regulatory fiat, then you deserve the Dictatorship that will result. OHM's only beef is that he'll have to live under it too.
OffHisMeds has written extensively about the intent of the climate legislation and Global Warming initiatives of Democrats for some time now: to mandate the payment of Trillions to foreigners, virtually all of them Bad Actors. This was the essence of the Kyoto Protocols, voted down by the Senate 99-0 during the early Clinton years. The Obama Administration will make it a reality if this initiative is allowed to succeed, turning the rhetoric of his serial ass kissing foreign tours into a reality financed by the few remaining dollars in your savings account.
Land - The Brave and The Free Need Not Apply
The Rich and Politically Well Connected, though, are invited to queue up to the back door, checkbook in hand.
In the 2005 Supreme Court decision Kelo vs. the City of New London, homeowners had their homes confiscated and turned over to a private developer to build a strip mall, office building and other for-profit developments. This was yet the latest obscenity in a decades-long effort by Democrats to expand the concepts of "Eminent Domain", "Condemnation", and the "Taking" of private property, all of which historically had been limited to Public purposes such as roads and utilities.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/6636747.html
Democrats have usurped the whole concept of "Public Use" as the justification for "Takings" to include "economic development". "Public Use" has become nothing more than a code word for rewarding their political patrons with your private property. What makes it more nefarious is that they have also systematically codified such "Takings" to be done at artificially low prices, again to benefit the greedy developer and themselves.
Now comes the word 4 year's later that much of the property confiscated under "Kelo" will not be developed after all, because it can't be done "profitably", per pharmaceutical giant Pfizer, the beneficiary of the Land Grab. And there you have it: with this single act, Pfizer ripped apart the "Public Use" Straw Man that Democrats had constructed to justify treating ordinary citizens the way Railroad Barons treated Farmers.
Think it's an isolated instance? You would be wrong. This morning comes word of another story involving none other than the highly-regarded Mayor Bill White of Houston. Read 'em both:
http://blogs.chron.com/houstonpolitics/2009/01/remainders_and_rejoinders_on_e_1.html
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/6764301.html
Seems the halo of the saintly White has been tarnished just a tad with the revelation that he condemned land owned by two elderly twins as a favor to one of his largest campaign contributors who needed a nice little park to compliment his development. This one has it all: greedy landlords, gross undervaluation by White's cronies, corrupt politicians - and unfortunately for White - feisty property owners willing to go to the mat with the aforementioned landlords and politicians.
The reason this little story is important is that Bill White is almost universally regarded by his constituents as one of the Good Guys: a populist Mayor above corruption, conscientious with the public purse and devoted to the people. The only problem with this narrative is that, during his six years as Mayor, he's proved to be no different from any of his corrupt predecessors, with the exception of being able to maneuver out of the spotlight.
Bottom line, Democrat politicians, bureaucrats and judicial appointees are systematically depriving you of what is arguably the single thing that distinguishes the United States from the Soviet Union: the right to own property.
The common thread of all three of these assaults on our Freedom is that Private Property Rights and Individual Rights are apparently whatever Democrats say they are, Constitution be damned. And while not all of these Commie-Lite policies were initiated during the Obama Administration, most of them were, and the remainder have been kicked into Hyperdrive by him and his Toadies, confirming once again what OffHisMeds has long maintained: Obama is nothing more than a self-interested thief, and the current face of "a monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark and lamentable catalogue of human crime".
Which is to say, the Democrat Party.
- Winston Churchill
It's disconcerting to hear such appalling words coming out of the mouth of one of the Giants of the 20th Century, isn't it? You're asking yourself, "that's not what Churchill said, right?"
And you would be correct. What he actually said was ".....to wage war against a monstrous tyranny.....", not for it. But in so briefly abusing Churchill's inspirational words, OffHisMeds is making the point that - with the slightest of modifications - laws regulating the Land, Air and Sea can be transformed by a bunch of power hungry clerks with low esteem from resources that normal citizens are allowed to walk upon, cultivate, drink and breathe, into things that are used to destroy society and reduce us all to serfdom.
I am speaking, of course, of the Democrat Party.
In a span of days, the rights of normal citizens to use land, sea and air have come under assault by the Usual Suspects as never before, offering OffHisMeds the opportunity to write a Blog of such pure symmetry. See, Obama and the Democrats have been largely frustrated - despite their absolute congressional majorities and tens of millions of government employees comprised 75% of Democrats - from accomplishing anywhere near the power grab they believe is their birthright.
Their Global Warming initiatives are stalled, Health Care is going nowhere, Cap and Trade is on the ropes; why, even the Stimulus bill has come under attack, and all over such quibbles as the Obama Administration creating 400 non-existent congressional districts to justify giving $787 Billion of your tax dollars to themselves and their cronies. Would somebody please explain the kind of world we live in when a Democrat can't plunder the treasury with impunity, the spotlight safely fixed on more deserving subjects such as Governor Mark Sanford?
OHM has little sympathy for their predicament, mind you. But he does have an almost infinite regard for their adaptability. Unable to achieve their objectives for world domination through the legislative process, Democrats have decided to do it by the simple expedient of declaring that existing law lets them do whatever the hell they want to, transferring policy-making from politicians to Government Lifers.
Sea - Not So Fast With That Duck Pond, Brother
The EPA now wants to regulate all water. I kid you not. As the article attached states: "As confirmed in several recent U.S. Supreme Court cases, federal regulatory authority currently extends only to waters that are navigable or perhaps directly connected to navigable waters. The Senate bill would remove the word "navigable." The significance of the dropped word is that tens of thousands of bodies of water currently managed by the 50 sovereign states would be surrendered to the dictates of bureaucrats at the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/10/leave-our-fish-ponds-alone/
Think it can't happen? Under current EPA regulations, the federal government has for decades abused private property rights by declaring thousands of small pools of standing water on private property to be "wetlands", preventing owners from building or changing their property in any way, and rendering it virtually unsellable. The problem being, of course, that if it is unsellable, it has no worth. And if it has no worth, for all intents and purposes, the Federal Government just stole your property.
Federal, state and municipal governments have also been systematically depriving citizens of the right to use water wells for decades, again, allegedly for the greater good, but that's a crock. Across the country, those same politicians that took away your well and put you on city water - allegedly to protect ground water aquifers - have gleefully allowed utilities and other industries to plunder trillions of gallons of ground water per year. So there you have it: drinking and bathing is harmful to the environment; cooling off a reactor and then dumping the effluent into our rivers is not.
For one final example, the Army Corp of Engineers are the geniuses who straightened the Mississippi and re-engineered the wetlands surrounding New Orleans, resulting in not only contributing to the Hurricane Katrina debacle, but the irreversible erosion of the wetlands which protect the Louisiana coastline.
Air - We're Now Charging You To Breathe
Democrats were getting nowhere linking CO2 emissions and Global Warming, particularly in light of a decade of revelations that the Global Warming lobby had cooked the books on the science, most recently and amusingly when some of their most prominent scientists were outed by their own e-mails on the best ways to game the data and suppress dissenting opinions from other scientists.
What is a motivated bureaucrat to do?
Answer, have the EPA declare CO2 - which all animals exhale with every breath - a pollutant. This would allow the EPA to regulate every aspect of it under existing federal law, thus neatly circumventing the need to propose and pass legislation regarding "global warming". Read all about it:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/18/science/earth/18endanger.html
If you're not worried about the ability of a handful of unelected Government Lifers to circumvent the House, the Senate, the 50 Sovereign States, Voters and the very concept of representative government by mere regulatory fiat, then you deserve the Dictatorship that will result. OHM's only beef is that he'll have to live under it too.
OffHisMeds has written extensively about the intent of the climate legislation and Global Warming initiatives of Democrats for some time now: to mandate the payment of Trillions to foreigners, virtually all of them Bad Actors. This was the essence of the Kyoto Protocols, voted down by the Senate 99-0 during the early Clinton years. The Obama Administration will make it a reality if this initiative is allowed to succeed, turning the rhetoric of his serial ass kissing foreign tours into a reality financed by the few remaining dollars in your savings account.
Land - The Brave and The Free Need Not Apply
The Rich and Politically Well Connected, though, are invited to queue up to the back door, checkbook in hand.
In the 2005 Supreme Court decision Kelo vs. the City of New London, homeowners had their homes confiscated and turned over to a private developer to build a strip mall, office building and other for-profit developments. This was yet the latest obscenity in a decades-long effort by Democrats to expand the concepts of "Eminent Domain", "Condemnation", and the "Taking" of private property, all of which historically had been limited to Public purposes such as roads and utilities.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/6636747.html
Democrats have usurped the whole concept of "Public Use" as the justification for "Takings" to include "economic development". "Public Use" has become nothing more than a code word for rewarding their political patrons with your private property. What makes it more nefarious is that they have also systematically codified such "Takings" to be done at artificially low prices, again to benefit the greedy developer and themselves.
Now comes the word 4 year's later that much of the property confiscated under "Kelo" will not be developed after all, because it can't be done "profitably", per pharmaceutical giant Pfizer, the beneficiary of the Land Grab. And there you have it: with this single act, Pfizer ripped apart the "Public Use" Straw Man that Democrats had constructed to justify treating ordinary citizens the way Railroad Barons treated Farmers.
Think it's an isolated instance? You would be wrong. This morning comes word of another story involving none other than the highly-regarded Mayor Bill White of Houston. Read 'em both:
http://blogs.chron.com/houstonpolitics/2009/01/remainders_and_rejoinders_on_e_1.html
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/6764301.html
Seems the halo of the saintly White has been tarnished just a tad with the revelation that he condemned land owned by two elderly twins as a favor to one of his largest campaign contributors who needed a nice little park to compliment his development. This one has it all: greedy landlords, gross undervaluation by White's cronies, corrupt politicians - and unfortunately for White - feisty property owners willing to go to the mat with the aforementioned landlords and politicians.
The reason this little story is important is that Bill White is almost universally regarded by his constituents as one of the Good Guys: a populist Mayor above corruption, conscientious with the public purse and devoted to the people. The only problem with this narrative is that, during his six years as Mayor, he's proved to be no different from any of his corrupt predecessors, with the exception of being able to maneuver out of the spotlight.
Bottom line, Democrat politicians, bureaucrats and judicial appointees are systematically depriving you of what is arguably the single thing that distinguishes the United States from the Soviet Union: the right to own property.
The common thread of all three of these assaults on our Freedom is that Private Property Rights and Individual Rights are apparently whatever Democrats say they are, Constitution be damned. And while not all of these Commie-Lite policies were initiated during the Obama Administration, most of them were, and the remainder have been kicked into Hyperdrive by him and his Toadies, confirming once again what OffHisMeds has long maintained: Obama is nothing more than a self-interested thief, and the current face of "a monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark and lamentable catalogue of human crime".
Which is to say, the Democrat Party.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Tiger Shanks It
Among many other famous athletes of yore, Muhammad Ali supposedly abstained from sex for weeks before a fight so as to maintain his edge. With the revelation that the number of women claiming to have had an affair with Tiger Woods is now up to an even dozen - and virtually none of them credibly refuted - let us once and for all use Tiger's example to put to rest the myth that sex before a big athletic event will sap your strength, will or mojo.
At least if you're a golfer.
Not unexpectedly, the Media and the Public are having a field day with Tiger Woods' issues with fidelity. All the Usual Suspects are wrapping themselves in knots groveling in every lurid detail while simultaneously attempting to explain away Tiger Woods' apparently low moral character, or to rationalize it with the argument that we should admire him solely on the basis of his exploits on the golf course. That said, OffHisMeds can't help but note that Tiger's very marketable public persona - and the source of much of his income outside of his winnings - was built on the premise that he was a good guy.
More about his Marketing prospects later. Now that it's clear that he is not such a good guy, would I be a killjoy to point out that further evidence of his lack of virtue can be found in that, long before he cheated on his wife, Tiger willingly signed on to an arrangement that ensured his life would be a vast and meaningless - albeit gold-plated - exercise in superficiality, devoid of love and arguably an environment not suitable in which to raise children? I am referring of course to his prenuptial agreement.
Let's set aside for the moment that for the past year or more Tiger had placed portions of his anatomy bound by matrimony in or upon the persons of between three and twelve other women not his wife. And if not simultaneously, at least consecutively and alternately. Juggling so much "Strange" along with his marital duties to the neglected wife, his shenanigans resembled nothing so much as an adult version of Leapfrog, except that the Male Frog (Tiger) didn't so much jump over the Female Frogs as he did Jump onto them, struggling to keep their names straight in the process, a challenge that would task even Tiger's legendary capacity to focus his energies in the face of distraction.
It's ironic to think that those distractions would be as varied as the inevitable and tiresome shriek from the Gallery to "GET IN THE HOLE" when he would make a putt during a tournament, to a similar cry from the Mistress Du Jour when he was putting on her Green, to his wife asking in a voice achieving easily the decibel equivalent of a noisy Gallery: "WHAT DID YOU JUST CALL ME"? It might make you feel sorry for the Schlub, until you realize that Tiger's in the entertainment business, and had arranged his affairs anticipating this very situation.
Let's also contemplate for a moment the fact that Elin most certainly knew of his infidelity long before the "accident" made it all public. How can you read the words "revelations of his infidelity have forced Woods to renegotiate his Prenup with his wife", and not think less of both of them? They willingly turned their relationship into just another business deal, sucking all the joy out of marriage with two strokes of the pen, and ceasing to become real people in the process. With the Prenup, his serial infidelities and the very calculated steps taken since then, Woods and his wife Elin betrayed themselves as the shallow, superficial "Personalities" that they are, fit for the pages of Newsweek, Sports lllustrated and Playboy, but not fit to be allowed in your living room. "They gone Hollywood", as the saying goes, their carefully crafted public image of wholesomeness notwithstanding.
This whole sordid event marks Tiger as one of the crappier Husbands in the history of, well, Husbandry. Granted, he's nowhere near as bad as Teddy Kennedy or say, Latrell Sprewell, but he's still pretty damn bad. All on his own, Tiger inflicted a seriously stingy Prenup on his wife, knocked her up and then went out and cheated on her with not one, but several Bimbos, all of whom, it seems, starting saving text messages, voice mail messages, photos, videos and semen-stained articles of clothing - not to mention hiring an agent to negotiate a Reality TV deal - the day after he did the nasty with them. Between stonewalling the cops, his hypocritical claims of privacy, his weaselly denials that turned out to be lies and panicky phone calls to at least one girl friend to help him fool his wife, Tiger has done a pretty good job rounding out the picture of a fairly execrable excuse for a man. We're talking Bill Clinton territory here people.
You'll recall that Slick Willy dodged being tagged as a low-down Cheat and dog for years with the help of the celebrity-loving Media and a decade of truly heroic lies until some pundit asked on the Internet "yes, but would you let him babysit your teenage daughter"? Within days that simple question went viral, and with it Bill Clinton's reputation.
Unless he comes clean, Tiger Woods may be similarly infected, and along with him his endorsement contracts.
Time will tell.
At least if you're a golfer.
Not unexpectedly, the Media and the Public are having a field day with Tiger Woods' issues with fidelity. All the Usual Suspects are wrapping themselves in knots groveling in every lurid detail while simultaneously attempting to explain away Tiger Woods' apparently low moral character, or to rationalize it with the argument that we should admire him solely on the basis of his exploits on the golf course. That said, OffHisMeds can't help but note that Tiger's very marketable public persona - and the source of much of his income outside of his winnings - was built on the premise that he was a good guy.
More about his Marketing prospects later. Now that it's clear that he is not such a good guy, would I be a killjoy to point out that further evidence of his lack of virtue can be found in that, long before he cheated on his wife, Tiger willingly signed on to an arrangement that ensured his life would be a vast and meaningless - albeit gold-plated - exercise in superficiality, devoid of love and arguably an environment not suitable in which to raise children? I am referring of course to his prenuptial agreement.
Let's set aside for the moment that for the past year or more Tiger had placed portions of his anatomy bound by matrimony in or upon the persons of between three and twelve other women not his wife. And if not simultaneously, at least consecutively and alternately. Juggling so much "Strange" along with his marital duties to the neglected wife, his shenanigans resembled nothing so much as an adult version of Leapfrog, except that the Male Frog (Tiger) didn't so much jump over the Female Frogs as he did Jump onto them, struggling to keep their names straight in the process, a challenge that would task even Tiger's legendary capacity to focus his energies in the face of distraction.
It's ironic to think that those distractions would be as varied as the inevitable and tiresome shriek from the Gallery to "GET IN THE HOLE" when he would make a putt during a tournament, to a similar cry from the Mistress Du Jour when he was putting on her Green, to his wife asking in a voice achieving easily the decibel equivalent of a noisy Gallery: "WHAT DID YOU JUST CALL ME"? It might make you feel sorry for the Schlub, until you realize that Tiger's in the entertainment business, and had arranged his affairs anticipating this very situation.
Let's also contemplate for a moment the fact that Elin most certainly knew of his infidelity long before the "accident" made it all public. How can you read the words "revelations of his infidelity have forced Woods to renegotiate his Prenup with his wife", and not think less of both of them? They willingly turned their relationship into just another business deal, sucking all the joy out of marriage with two strokes of the pen, and ceasing to become real people in the process. With the Prenup, his serial infidelities and the very calculated steps taken since then, Woods and his wife Elin betrayed themselves as the shallow, superficial "Personalities" that they are, fit for the pages of Newsweek, Sports lllustrated and Playboy, but not fit to be allowed in your living room. "They gone Hollywood", as the saying goes, their carefully crafted public image of wholesomeness notwithstanding.
This whole sordid event marks Tiger as one of the crappier Husbands in the history of, well, Husbandry. Granted, he's nowhere near as bad as Teddy Kennedy or say, Latrell Sprewell, but he's still pretty damn bad. All on his own, Tiger inflicted a seriously stingy Prenup on his wife, knocked her up and then went out and cheated on her with not one, but several Bimbos, all of whom, it seems, starting saving text messages, voice mail messages, photos, videos and semen-stained articles of clothing - not to mention hiring an agent to negotiate a Reality TV deal - the day after he did the nasty with them. Between stonewalling the cops, his hypocritical claims of privacy, his weaselly denials that turned out to be lies and panicky phone calls to at least one girl friend to help him fool his wife, Tiger has done a pretty good job rounding out the picture of a fairly execrable excuse for a man. We're talking Bill Clinton territory here people.
You'll recall that Slick Willy dodged being tagged as a low-down Cheat and dog for years with the help of the celebrity-loving Media and a decade of truly heroic lies until some pundit asked on the Internet "yes, but would you let him babysit your teenage daughter"? Within days that simple question went viral, and with it Bill Clinton's reputation.
Unless he comes clean, Tiger Woods may be similarly infected, and along with him his endorsement contracts.
Time will tell.
Monday, December 7, 2009
Elin Woods vs. Tiger Woods, Day 4
So far, OffHisMed's only regret about the whole sordid affair involving Tiger Woods, his mistresses and his wife has been its timing.
How much more timely had this all come out, say, a week before Halloween. How many women would be pairing up with their black male friends to imitate Elin and Tiger Woods, complete with seven iron, bandages, splints and body cast? As it is, this event has done more for race relations in America than Obama's election ever did.
But, since Tiger didn't drive into a tree before Halloween, OHM will settle for being a fly on the wall when the new Prenuptial Agreement is negotiated, assuming both the Party Of The First Part (Elin) and the Party Of The Second Part (Tiger) would be in attendance for all or a portion of the proceedings, along with attorneys representing both sides and a stenographer and video camera operator, as is customary in such dealings:
Day Four:
Attorney 1: "..........such schedule as outlined herein will establish the visitation rights between Tiger Woods (hereafter referred to as the Party Of The Second Part) and all third parties with intimate knowledge of the POTSP (hereafter referred to as Mistresses), as well as the frequency and type of electronic communications between them, not to include any and all improvements in said technology not anticipated by this agreement. In return, the POTSP agrees to increase the lump sum payments to Erin Woods (hereafter referred to as the Party Of The First Part) in Years 10, 15 and 25 from the previous sums of $10 million, $15 million and $25 million to the sums of $20 million, $30 million and $50 million dollars".
Attorney 2: "This is agreeable to The Party Of The Second Part with the proviso that terms such as 'filthy whoremonger' and 'rat bastard son of a bitch' which appear in the draft agreement are stricken from the final agreement, along with any and all Swedish expressions, including 'Hora Jaga Scumbag', and if agreement can be reached on certain other provisions as shall be discussed, including sexual privileges."
Attorney 1: "The Party Of The First Part will insist on a moratorium from sex between both Parties for a period of one (1) year beginning January 1st, 2010. Further, during said period it is agreed that The Party Of The First Part shall exercise her right to engage in sexual relations for a period of one (1) year with a quantity of Professional Golfers and Other Celebrities of her choosing, in a number not less than three (3) but not to exceed six (6), from the list of names attached. It is understood that this list is not exhaustive, and may be added to at any time based on the revelation of any further past indiscretions by the POTSP. The POTSP shall have the right to strike no more than one (1) consecutive Candidate from the list for each occurrence. It is further understood that beginning January 1st, 2011, the POTFP is free to engage in sexual relations with persons other than the POTSP once per fiscal quarter until the payment of the Year 25 Lump Sum, to be exercised or not at her sole discretion."
Attorney 2: "The POTSP objects to the inclusion of John Daly, Charlie Sheen and Kanye West to this list."
Attorney 1: "In so doing the POTSP will surrender the right to strike additional candidates until October 1st, 2010."
Attorney 2: "This is acceptable, assuming we are in agreement on the claim of ownership by the POTSP of the POTFP's breasts implants, and the concomitant right to custody of the POTFP's breasts implied therein."
Attorney 1: "The POTFP rejects the contention by the POTSP that her breast implants are property as that term is defined in law or that they are material in the renegotiation of the Prenuptial Agreement solely on the basis of the fact that the POTSP paid for the aforementioned implants. Further, because the implants were gifted before the execution of the original Prenuptial Agreement, they clearly fall outside of the conditions that govern said document."
Attorney 2: "The POTSP disagrees, since by purchasing the aforementioned breast implants, the POTSP improved the POTFP's appearance which contributed materially to the subsequent proposal of marriage and the creation of the Prenuptial Agreement and Other Documents (hereafter collectively referred to as "The Agreement") that govern the contractual obligations of both Parties under said Agreement. The POTSP also asserts a custodial and familial relationship with the POTFP's breasts under Chapter 11, Subsection F, Paragraph 3b of the Agreement titled 'Pets'.
The POTSP will prove that he had accorded the aforementioned breasts the attention and affection characteristic of the relationship between a Person and a Pet, including caressing them, speaking to them in the first person, praising them in a loud voice, and encouraging them to perform tricks in exchange for certain non-monetary rewards.
Furthermore, as the POTSP had also named the aforementioned breasts "Nike" and "Buick" respectively and referred to them as such on numerous occasions not only and exclusively to the POTFP but also in the company and presence of numerous witnesses including but not limited to Family Members, Friends, Agents, Chaffeurs, Doorman, Publicists, Mistresses, Reporters and Galleries, the POTSP had established a personal and custodial relationship with said breasts and asserts his claim to all the rights and privileges inherent therein. A selection of affidavits from the aforementioned Family Members, Friends, etc. attesting to the Personalization of said breasts by the POTSP is attached.
Based on that claim and other material factors, the POTSP will assert a claim of joint custody of and a Special Relationship with the POTFP's breasts, and shall have such reasonable visitation and other rights (including possession) as are accorded under The Agreement. Attached is a copy of the list of acceptable activities already defined in The Agreement beforehand. The POTSP will assert a continuing claim to all of those activites."
Attorney 1: "The POTFP agrees, with the proviso that said activities will under no circumstances lead to overtly sexual activities for the calendar year 2010. Further, the POTFP wishes to amend the Master Agreement to include a prohibition from the POTSP simulating a drum solo on the buttocks of the POTFP to the song 'In a Gada Da Vida' or any other songs of a similar nature, or verbalizing either during foreplay or afterwards a desire to 'wear her out'."
Attorney 2: "The POTSP agrees, with the condition that he will be allowed to continue to express such sentiments via text, e-mail, Twitter and other forms of electronic communication."
Attorney 1: "Agreed. On a related matter, the POTFP rejects any claims to custody of her vagina based on the videotape evidence provided by the POTFP of himself and the POTFP playing 'Good Kitty, Bad Kitty' and 'Mr. Microphone', as said evidence does not establish any familial or custodial relationship............
I've been advised that we need to take a one hour recess so as to allow the Stenographer treatment for symptoms of Carpal Tunnel syndrome and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and to allow the videographer time to purchase more recording disks. Shall we resume at 4:00 p.m.?"
How much more timely had this all come out, say, a week before Halloween. How many women would be pairing up with their black male friends to imitate Elin and Tiger Woods, complete with seven iron, bandages, splints and body cast? As it is, this event has done more for race relations in America than Obama's election ever did.
But, since Tiger didn't drive into a tree before Halloween, OHM will settle for being a fly on the wall when the new Prenuptial Agreement is negotiated, assuming both the Party Of The First Part (Elin) and the Party Of The Second Part (Tiger) would be in attendance for all or a portion of the proceedings, along with attorneys representing both sides and a stenographer and video camera operator, as is customary in such dealings:
Day Four:
Attorney 1: "..........such schedule as outlined herein will establish the visitation rights between Tiger Woods (hereafter referred to as the Party Of The Second Part) and all third parties with intimate knowledge of the POTSP (hereafter referred to as Mistresses), as well as the frequency and type of electronic communications between them, not to include any and all improvements in said technology not anticipated by this agreement. In return, the POTSP agrees to increase the lump sum payments to Erin Woods (hereafter referred to as the Party Of The First Part) in Years 10, 15 and 25 from the previous sums of $10 million, $15 million and $25 million to the sums of $20 million, $30 million and $50 million dollars".
Attorney 2: "This is agreeable to The Party Of The Second Part with the proviso that terms such as 'filthy whoremonger' and 'rat bastard son of a bitch' which appear in the draft agreement are stricken from the final agreement, along with any and all Swedish expressions, including 'Hora Jaga Scumbag', and if agreement can be reached on certain other provisions as shall be discussed, including sexual privileges."
Attorney 1: "The Party Of The First Part will insist on a moratorium from sex between both Parties for a period of one (1) year beginning January 1st, 2010. Further, during said period it is agreed that The Party Of The First Part shall exercise her right to engage in sexual relations for a period of one (1) year with a quantity of Professional Golfers and Other Celebrities of her choosing, in a number not less than three (3) but not to exceed six (6), from the list of names attached. It is understood that this list is not exhaustive, and may be added to at any time based on the revelation of any further past indiscretions by the POTSP. The POTSP shall have the right to strike no more than one (1) consecutive Candidate from the list for each occurrence. It is further understood that beginning January 1st, 2011, the POTFP is free to engage in sexual relations with persons other than the POTSP once per fiscal quarter until the payment of the Year 25 Lump Sum, to be exercised or not at her sole discretion."
Attorney 2: "The POTSP objects to the inclusion of John Daly, Charlie Sheen and Kanye West to this list."
Attorney 1: "In so doing the POTSP will surrender the right to strike additional candidates until October 1st, 2010."
Attorney 2: "This is acceptable, assuming we are in agreement on the claim of ownership by the POTSP of the POTFP's breasts implants, and the concomitant right to custody of the POTFP's breasts implied therein."
Attorney 1: "The POTFP rejects the contention by the POTSP that her breast implants are property as that term is defined in law or that they are material in the renegotiation of the Prenuptial Agreement solely on the basis of the fact that the POTSP paid for the aforementioned implants. Further, because the implants were gifted before the execution of the original Prenuptial Agreement, they clearly fall outside of the conditions that govern said document."
Attorney 2: "The POTSP disagrees, since by purchasing the aforementioned breast implants, the POTSP improved the POTFP's appearance which contributed materially to the subsequent proposal of marriage and the creation of the Prenuptial Agreement and Other Documents (hereafter collectively referred to as "The Agreement") that govern the contractual obligations of both Parties under said Agreement. The POTSP also asserts a custodial and familial relationship with the POTFP's breasts under Chapter 11, Subsection F, Paragraph 3b of the Agreement titled 'Pets'.
The POTSP will prove that he had accorded the aforementioned breasts the attention and affection characteristic of the relationship between a Person and a Pet, including caressing them, speaking to them in the first person, praising them in a loud voice, and encouraging them to perform tricks in exchange for certain non-monetary rewards.
Furthermore, as the POTSP had also named the aforementioned breasts "Nike" and "Buick" respectively and referred to them as such on numerous occasions not only and exclusively to the POTFP but also in the company and presence of numerous witnesses including but not limited to Family Members, Friends, Agents, Chaffeurs, Doorman, Publicists, Mistresses, Reporters and Galleries, the POTSP had established a personal and custodial relationship with said breasts and asserts his claim to all the rights and privileges inherent therein. A selection of affidavits from the aforementioned Family Members, Friends, etc. attesting to the Personalization of said breasts by the POTSP is attached.
Based on that claim and other material factors, the POTSP will assert a claim of joint custody of and a Special Relationship with the POTFP's breasts, and shall have such reasonable visitation and other rights (including possession) as are accorded under The Agreement. Attached is a copy of the list of acceptable activities already defined in The Agreement beforehand. The POTSP will assert a continuing claim to all of those activites."
Attorney 1: "The POTFP agrees, with the proviso that said activities will under no circumstances lead to overtly sexual activities for the calendar year 2010. Further, the POTFP wishes to amend the Master Agreement to include a prohibition from the POTSP simulating a drum solo on the buttocks of the POTFP to the song 'In a Gada Da Vida' or any other songs of a similar nature, or verbalizing either during foreplay or afterwards a desire to 'wear her out'."
Attorney 2: "The POTSP agrees, with the condition that he will be allowed to continue to express such sentiments via text, e-mail, Twitter and other forms of electronic communication."
Attorney 1: "Agreed. On a related matter, the POTFP rejects any claims to custody of her vagina based on the videotape evidence provided by the POTFP of himself and the POTFP playing 'Good Kitty, Bad Kitty' and 'Mr. Microphone', as said evidence does not establish any familial or custodial relationship............
I've been advised that we need to take a one hour recess so as to allow the Stenographer treatment for symptoms of Carpal Tunnel syndrome and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and to allow the videographer time to purchase more recording disks. Shall we resume at 4:00 p.m.?"
Friday, December 4, 2009
LTE: Missing the boat
Chronicle editors put forth a thoughtful analysis but missed the boat on a couple of key points.
Pete Smith, Cypress
http://www.chron.com/default/article/Letters-Who-pays-for-health-care-1721208.php
First, while you deserve kudos for not lapsing into use of the politically correct term “undocumented workers,” any sensible person should take exception to the notion that just because they got here, America must take care of them. That's not only wrong, it's the very thing that has fueled and continues to fuel the orgy of illegal immigration America has experienced for the past thirty years, and retarded political reform in Mexico and various other countries in Central and South America.
Second, the contention that illegal immigrants deserve to be counted in the Census and thus have congressional representation is offensive not only to the rule of law, but common sense. If you provide representation, are you not disenfranchising legitimate citizens? As much as providing free health care, education, welfare and various other subsidies, is this not yet further incentive for continued illegal immigration?
Finally, it is not just the states with low immigrant populations that lose political clout, but states like Texas and California as well. Since illegal immigrants are counted in determining the number of congressional seats allocated to a state, those additional seats do not promote democracy, and they do not benefit the legal citizens and taxpayers of those states, but the minority special interest groups such as La Raza that purport to represent the illegal immigrants. California is the textbook case of how massive illegal immigration coupled with gerrymandered districts ensures maximum political representation for lawbreakers and the continuing disenfranchisement of the citizenry. The result is a state that has devolved to Second World status and is well on the way to Third World status.
If the Chronicle wants to productively address the whole question of illegal immigration, why not start with the root cause: the endemic corruption of Mexico and other countries that deprives people of not only political representation, but health care, education, security and, in many instances, simple subsistence? And if you want to clarify the debate and what is really at stake here, start calling these unfortunate souls what they are: Refugees.
http://www.chron.com/default/article/Letters-Who-pays-for-health-care-1721208.php
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Government Subsidized Monopolies
There was an article in the paper a while back that reminded OffHisMeds once again of the consequences of government-run monopolies and how unfriendly they are to their customers. The article describes how the Houston Texans had reduced the size of their over-priced ($7.75) beer from 24 oz. to 20 oz. Their alleged reasons? To keep fans from getting drunk, and to "avoid having to raise prices".
In these hard times, why is it that it would never occur to them to take a smaller profit, like the Chinese restaurant down the street that recently dropped their prices 12%? That 24 oz. beer cost them less than a dollar, including the collectible cup. Wasn't their 700% markup enough? The Houston Texans were granted a monopoly on professional football in Houston, hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars to build their stadium, and the bulk of the profits on concessions and parking.
Just like our Education system, professional sports franchises are immune to the needs of their customers, exist only to serve themselves, deliver an inferior product, and use every lame excuse in the book to explain why they're overcharging us.
This is what happens when the government picks winners and losers, all subsidized by taxpayers. And while it would be easy to blame this all on Big Government Democrats, OHM may have to revisit his thinking on the whole issue in light of recent events. As the Health Care debate devolves to some inevitable compromise, it seems that Republicans are as happy with the status quo.
In these hard times, why is it that it would never occur to them to take a smaller profit, like the Chinese restaurant down the street that recently dropped their prices 12%? That 24 oz. beer cost them less than a dollar, including the collectible cup. Wasn't their 700% markup enough? The Houston Texans were granted a monopoly on professional football in Houston, hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars to build their stadium, and the bulk of the profits on concessions and parking.
Just like our Education system, professional sports franchises are immune to the needs of their customers, exist only to serve themselves, deliver an inferior product, and use every lame excuse in the book to explain why they're overcharging us.
This is what happens when the government picks winners and losers, all subsidized by taxpayers. And while it would be easy to blame this all on Big Government Democrats, OHM may have to revisit his thinking on the whole issue in light of recent events. As the Health Care debate devolves to some inevitable compromise, it seems that Republicans are as happy with the status quo.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)