Posts from July 2008

You decide: Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D), Speaker of the House of Representatives, is actively fighting against the wishes of the American people and is single-handedly preventing a vote on drilling legislation in the House. The Washington Post, bastion of leftward-thinking editorials in the same tradition as other papers such as the NY Times, Baltimore Sun and Boston Globe, then proceeded to print this:



A certain segment of our society loves pointing to polls suggesting that is the express wish of the American people for the Iraq war to end, and stomp their feet like spoiled children when their candidates teeter even slightly... especially when men who know what they are talking about (such as Gen. Petraeus) give that candidate information they find politically offensive. So much for "fact finding." I just have one simple question. Why is Speaker Pelosi ignoring the will of the American people on one issue while simultaneously trumpeting the will of the American people to justify her stance on another issue?

You see, Speaker Pelosi is playing a dangerous game on an issue she is dead wrong about. Forget this non-sense about opening the strategic oil reserve - it is a fallacious argument because these liberal politicians argue themselves that drilling won't affect price. Putting 90 billion barrels of oil on the market, they argue, will not affect price accordingly but putting 70 million barrels on the market is somehow a better solution in their eyes. Not only is this argument insulting to the intelligence of the American middle class who are being hurt incredibly by gas prices, but it defies even the most basic tenets of supply and demand. Even the length of time it would take to put the oil on the market has been incredibly overblown. Details aside, this is what the American people clearly want and if she doesn't allow the vote backlash against Democrats will be enormous, albeit unfairly for certain Democrats who, unlike Speaker Pelosi, respects the will of the American people.

Speaker Pelosi is willing to watch Rome burn to make a point and to stay true to the environmentalists she is beholden to. Even papers such as the Washington Post are now standing with mouth agape at Nancy Pelosi. She and she alone is to blame for preventing a vote, which she can do by decree as Speaker, which is a vote that would likely pass. What Americans want only matters to her when Americans agree with her. If she continues she will not be Speaker in another year and will be forced to walk the plank for potentially endangering the majority they currently enjoy.

Trent Lott lost his position for much, much less. If defying the will of the American people based on ideology is treasonous in the context of George W. Bush (sound familiar?), then in this context it is equally applicable as well. People should not be surprised to see that Congress is less popular than President Bush, and under the current leadership it is truly miraculous that in two years Democrats have proven that their leadership is even more haphazard than when Republicans ran things. It has only been two years! When Americans watch and listen to the leaders of Congress, can it be possible that by removing the incompetent Republicans that things have actually gotten worse? Watch and listen to Speaker Pelosi and judge for yourself.

Two extraordinarily unflattering articles regarding the Anointed One -

London Times mocks Obama in ways only the British can -

American press corps admits realities of Obama campaign's arrogance, stoking suspicions many Americans have always had of the man. FNC? National Review? Try The New Republic -

I have shit luck on eBay.

I've posted about this before - this is where @paul would find the old link and leave it here but I'm not that industrious.

For years now, I've been looking for a very specific copy of Jack Kerouac's On The Road. I've owned and read several copies previously and I suppose you could say that to me this is more than just a book. My interest in Beat literature has evolved from voracious reading to voracious reading with an additional wish to collect paperback copies with original cover art. Some examples -



I just bought The Subterraneans from another guy on eBay a month ago. Now I wish I would have waited... or maybe I'll buy this one and donate my copy to a local library or a friend.



This is a copy currently up for bid. THIS IS WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR. Cruelly (at least in my view) I just missed out on a copy like this a half-hour ago, for a third of the price. The guy who won? The guy who sold me The Subterraneans! Still though, this is a slightly nicer copy and is three years older (fourth edition, 1960). Even with the picture a bit fuzzy it is hard to believe that this is a 48-year old paperback. Is it worth up to $30? Had I not missed out on bidding I could have gotten the other copy for $11, including shipping. That is the frustrating bit - on eBay more often than not auctions get "bidded up" by armies of resellers. These people test maximum bid limits on honest people to bid up their auctions - I lost an auction on a similar copy of On The Road to a guy who got screwed like this to the tune of $64. Buyers with names such as f***e, a***r, t***a, etc. kept ratcheting up the auction to trigger this guy's maximum bid at the last minute. On other occasions I've seen someone flat out bid up on an auction within seconds from $4.50 to $20 - why would somebody increase the price they have to pay for the book? If you ask me, this kind of activity is borderline criminal and at the very least is completely unethical. Really, when the sellers cry about eBay's rules I laugh. Where else can people be readily ripped off and the company facilitating it all has no rules to protect buyers from predatory tactics like I've described?

So now somebody with a similarly anonymous name has bid on this copy I'm watching.... and I wait.

1. Regarding the big banks that are imploding due to bad assets - the stuff off of the balance sheet might be more interesting than what is on the balance sheet.
It will be interesting to see what happens if in fact the riskiest stuff wasn't on the balance sheet.

2. John McCain states that the figure he tries to model himself after is Theodore Roosevelt. While I wouldn't exactly call it a direct comparison, he might be the closest guy around. Teddy Roosevelt was far more intellectual than McCain is - Roosevelt had a brilliant, brilliant mind. He was a true Renaissance man and if you ask me is the single most interesting president we've ever had, with the possible exception of George Washington. Actually I'd skip the article about McCain and go straight to Theodore Roosevelt's Wiki page - it is much more interesting.

After searing some scallops at home last night in celebration of @jason's bonus our apartment smelled like seafood. This morning, the apartment still smelled like seafood - the air circulation is extremely poor and so I've left fans on and windows open in the kitchen to air it out. I can't get the smell out of my nose as I type this - I think somehow the seafood searing smoke got into my shorts, which I happily wore again (THE HORRAH!). Actually, today I think it is a horror given the circumstances!

This is a bit of a damning report on how the security cameras in cities such as ours have been expanding but actually help very little.

This is what I worry about -



It's all too common. These people are not informed; they are starstruck.

As I predicted, the City of Buffalo wants to expand the usage of the cameras, an idea openly advocated for by city officials because it will increase revenue $3.5 million per year. Keep in mind - this system was built with $5m in grant money and the city really has never paid a dime for it. They want to send a ticket in the mail if you run a red light. What is next down the slippery slope? Tickets for jaywalking? Tickets for parking on the street overnight when a cop is too lazy to patrol? As I've said, and actually as the city has said, this camera system is no replacement for law enforcement. Apparently only one of us was being honest.



The advocacy group Cameras For A Better Police State, aka the Buffalo Common Council and the Buffalo Police Department, cynically prop up the suggestion that safety is the primary concern. Everybody knows that is bullshit. I am sick and tired of our elected officials treating us like children in a juvenile detention center, who can't possibly possess the intelligence and foresight to realize how dishonest these fork-tongued bastards are. I wonder if they even regard us that much. This is what you get when your populace doesn't care - the people in power can fuck with you with no repercussions to their careers or reputations. Hell, if it isn't City Hall being buffoons and making a complete mockery of our city, it's the School Board. None of this is going to stop without the citizens demanding that they do so. I'm for safer streets like anybody else - I'm not for this tripe the city is trying to serve us in the form of reasons. I'm not hearing reasons; I'm hearing excuse making and patronizing vomit speech. Speaking of vomit speech, FUCK Byron Brown, the police department and our city officials. The idea that they are on our side and working to make our city a better place to live is a joke - our city is one or two plant closings away from being a certified hollow shell. They are currently worried about spending grant money in a way that will generate "revenue" to prop up their wasteful and utterly ineffective government. Misplaced priorities? Buffalo? Naaah. Let us keep building Security Cameras that will build us a "bridge to the future" (thanks Slick Willy) and ensure that our city will thrive well into the 21st Century. Don't these idiots know that sooner rather than later, there won't be a tax base left to nickel and dime, annoy, and generally take the piss out of?

Here's some comedy to temper the madness -



Indeed, because if you don't laugh you might cry. Or in the case of the City of Buffalo, you might die.

Today all counties in the State of California are issuing marriage licenses to gay men and lesbians who wish to legally wed.



These ladies are 87 years old and 84 years old, respectively. The length of their relationship is actually longer than that of my grandparents, who were together for 52 years prior to my grandpa's passing. The pursuit of happiness, with few exceptions, should not have limitations. Yet, we live in an America where some people have to wait until they are 87 years old before they can legally marry. And why?

I can barely force back the tears when I see a picture of a couple in their 80's who have had to wait 55 years to fully live their lives out loud. I can't fathom it... I really can't. It rips me apart... this shouldn't be. In America we need to think very carefully about the denial of happiness to others and the consequences of doing so. In my opinion it makes a mockery of our country and its laws, to say the least. Some suggest that comparing gay rights of today and civil rights of the 1960's is wholly inappropriate. I suggest this - if we have rights that some people are excluded from, we have no rights to be proud of at all.

I see this event as a major exercise in freedom. Seeing the smiling faces of the people who have finally been granted this right shows that in more way than one they have been set free. That is something to be celebrated.

@jason and I are also sorry that we couldn't make the get-together - we had a long standing appointment at a golf course with our father that required us to be in Jamestown on Saturday. We missed his birthday so we made it out to hang with him. It was good to see Dad, seeing as we rarely make it back to good ol' J-Vegas. We also visited Grandma, who is still coping with the fact that people think she is funny... as if its a bad thing.

On Friday though, gratuitous fun was had by all at the M*A*S*H Bash. It was my first time attending, and all in all its your standard carnival-style tent with food, a stage with a band, free wine and beer, cigars and lots of people. It was staged, if you didn't notice it, at the Red Cross building on Delaware. I think I should have ate before I drank - it got ugly and my friend had a camera to document it all. Here are some of the more publicly acceptable images.



My brother, myself, my buddy JV and our friend Anne, a former Buffalonian who was visiting from NYC. I was very impressed with her willingness to smoke a stogie with us - she didn't even give it a second thought. She golfs as well so I suspect that she's been around enough golf events to have learned to appreciate fine tobacco. I shouldn't have been so surprised.



My brother and I - as you can see its still daylight but I'm already too drunk to keep my eyes open. @jason was amused.



At Gordon's towards the end of the night. Me, Anne and one of the girls JV and I played darts against. I don't recall this particular picture being taken, and as you can see at this point I probably wasn't taking much into consideration at all. JV told me that I came up with a "classic line" before I left - I'm a bit terrified to find out exactly what I said, to be honest!