January 9, 2007

Funnier than me

Filed under: The fine art of political discourse — by lahar @ 5:09 am

No More Mister Nice Blog: What are right-wing bloggers freaking out about now?

Granted, that’s not hard, but Steve M. certainly does a good job at it.

Anyway, the outrage of the week is that a Dallas pizza parlor is willing to take Mexican pesos as a form of payment. Horrible, I know.


January 5, 2007

We have a winner! Loser! Whatever!

Filed under: The fine art of political discourse — by lahar @ 4:47 am


Bradrocket wades through this kind of crap so you don’t have to:

The crime rates surrounding our libraries are not being told to us by the media nearly enough.

December 22, 2006

Too funny to pass up

Filed under: Science,The fine art of political discourse — by lahar @ 10:06 pm

This Modern World » Blog Archive » Aye, Robot

Yeah, I remember thinking the exact same thing about Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004. I’ve heard Republicans also say similar things about Dole in 1996. Which leads me to ask when are the Washington elite going to realize that Americans want a human being to lead them, not some talking-points shitting android who looks uncomfortable in his/her own skin?

Quick Notes

Filed under: The fine art of political discourse — by lahar @ 9:57 pm

No, I’m not dead. My internet access has been spotty lately.

I would be remiss if I didn’t note the following bits of idiocy. First, we have Virgil Goode (R-VA) going nuts over Keith Ellison’s (D-MN) religion not being on his ‘approved’ list. Of course, some other people and likely many other people have talked about it and said things better than I could have.

It’s refreshing to see Ellison taking the high road here instead of slamming Goode. I also get a kick out of Goode’s seeming conflation of immigration with Ellison’s Islamic beliefs, given Ellison was, uh, born in America, as are most black Muslims.

There’s also the Parents’ Television Council’s claim that FOX is the ‘most anti-religious network on television’. Particularly telling is their criticism of the Simpsons for depicting organized religion in the same satirical light as just about every other institution in society, particularly when the Simpsons are about the only family on TV who regularly go to church.

Religion was portrayed more negatively than positively, but only slightly more so. Negative portrayals led positive ones by 35% to 34%.

But certain types of religious references were overwhelmingly positive. By the PTC’s own measure, “simple expressions of faith” were depicted positively nearly 70% of the time. By contrast, “institutions and doctrine” negative nearly 50%, as described by the PTC, though several of the references cited fall under the heading of broad comedies, including Fox’s animated shows.

The thing that gets me here is that the PTC has some trouble differentiating between religion itself and the institutions who use it as a stick to get their way in social and political matters. As a veteran of the war the PTC waged on pro wrestling a decade back, that doesn’t really surprise me.

Happy Solstice, everyone.

December 13, 2006


Filed under: Satire,The fine art of political discourse — by lahar @ 6:21 am

Sadly, No: Father, son do battle over war

Dear Abby tries to help resolve intergenerational conflicts and international conflicts at the same time.

Create a free website or blog at