Needed something light for the morning post, so I’m going to pinch an idea from John Cole. Please use this post to submit some of your favorite Rumproast comments of 2008. Provide a link to the associated post with the comment and context where necessary.
The irony of all ironies is that I’ll miss Sarah’s speech because I have a PTA meeting tonight.
I am going to be sure and scan the crowd for the 2012 VP nominee.
Hell, those are just four quick and random (and glorious) picks. There are several Roasters not even represented above who knock out ripsnorters on an hourly basis, so you’ve got a lot to choose from. Get to it!
I emphasize “safe” because holidays tend to emphasize alcohol and too much alcohol decreases safe behavior. A year ago tomorrow, Denver Broncos player Darrent Williams was shot to death as he left a Denver nightclub after members of his party had engaged in alcohol fueled verbal altercations inside the club with known gang members. Less publicized, but no less important, are the assaults on non-celebrities and incidents of domestic violence which do tend to increase around holidays.
Since Darragh Murphy has been centering a lot of her posts at PUMAPac lately around “woman lynching”, apparently her term for any number of physical assaults on women although possibly just women who are murdered, it might be edifying to discuss some actual statistics and facts concerning domestic violence. For instance her post today claims that “woman lynching” is up 42% since 2005. Her cite for this statement, which is the Bureau of Justice Statistics National Crime Victimization Survery in fact says no such thing. The survey does not even address murder except to note that murder rates, like all violent crime in the country, have actually decreased since the Bureau began making its surveys in 1998. The survey does not address murder because it is based on interviews with victims and you can’t , unfortunately, interview someone who’s been murdered. However statistics provided by NOW indicate approximately 1,400 women per year die as a result of domestic violence (and definitely that’s 1,400 too many).
The Bureau of Justice Survey does report on incidents of assault and sexual assault. The survey compares 2007 rates to 2006 and 2005. I tried every which way to come up with Darragh’s report of a 42% increase but could not. There was a statistically insignificant increase in the incidence of sexual assault from .08% to .1% from 2005 to 2007. Rates from 2006 to 2007 declined. And, as is frequently reported, the majority of assaults on women are committed by men they know. However, and without minimizing for a second the seriousness of sexual assault, or any kind of assault, and certainly not murder, let’s look at what this means.
Based on the incidents of sexual assault reported for 2007 of approximately 248,000 which results in about a .1% chance of being sexually assaulted, the incidence of being murdered by a husband or boyfriend (based on approximately 1,400 per year) are enormously smaller. Adding in incidents of aggravated and simple assault, and assuming all assaults on women are related to domestic violence (which is not true, but let’s come up with a worst case scenario here) adds about a 1.5% chance of being other than sexually assaulted due to domestic violence.
So, Darragh and fellow lunatics, for every 1.6% of males out there assaulting women, 98.4% of males are not! In fact they are just out there being good husbands, good partners, good fathers, good sons, good brothers, good nephews, good uncles, good friends, and on and on. So until you at least try and get some of your facts straight on this whole, very complex, subject, why don’t you all just STFU, quit calling on people to buy guns and quit relating your lurid castration fantasies, so the rest of us can have a Happy New Year!
But as I said before, domestic violence is still a serious problem and not to be taken lightly. After the fold, some resources to use if anyone you know may be in an abusive relationship and needs some help.
A piece of advice for obnoxious, pig-ignorant blowhards who glean their international affairs talking points from Rush Limbaugh and Little Green Turdballs: Don’t fuck with Zbigniew Brzezinski. Check out Dr. B poleaxing the insufferable Joe Scarborough:
“You have such a stunningly superficial knowledge of what went on it’s almost embarrassing to listen to you.”
As he lamely protests that he reads The New York Times, Washington Post and Foreign Affairs (hey, we know he does because he holds them up for the camera every day!), you can see Scarborough’s porcine little eyes frantically darting around in search of his balls. Suh-WEET!
I know there are two days of potential failure to go, so perhaps this is premature. But here is my list of top 10 epic political fails of 2008. Discuss!
#10—PUMA Movement: A “movement” in the same sense and level of importance of “bowel movement,” PUMA might be rated #1 if entertainment value and copious evidence of failure were the chief criteria. However, in my poll, consequence counts too, so PUMA struggles into the top 10 at the bottom slot. And only because I personally found them amusing. By rights, the “Bratz” vs “Barbie” kerfluffle should edge them out.
#9—Joe the Plumber: Like a cockroach scrambling for purchase in a swirling toilet, John McCain latched onto the sturdiest-looking turd in the bowl as his campaign foundered. He chose poorly. Not only did bullet-headed lunk (not) Joe the (not) Plumber say wingnutty shit that alienated the McCain supporters with triple-digit IQs (both of them!) and leave McCain in the lurch at rallies, he subsequently disavowed his erstwhile patron and made the world’s worst amateur porn flick.
#8—Fred Thompson’s GOP Presidential Candidacy: Gravitas bestowed by a rumbling baritone voice and numerous flinty-eyed performances on film and TV? Check. Confirmation of virility ostentatiously conveyed by decades-younger wife? Check. Actual vigor and energy? Not so much. The Great GOP Hope clearly preferred a scotch and a nap to campaigning. Oh well.
#7—Mitt Romney’s $35M Investment: Romney’s chief credential is his financial acumen, but what does it say about his investment prowess that he blew $35M clams on his own crappy campaign and failed to convince anyone but Hugh Hewitt of his inevitability? His campaign stunk like a stream of runny dog shit flowing from atop a Country Estate Wagon. But lefty bloggers had the Five Brothers Blog to ridicule for a few precious months.
#6—Paultards: At least their heroine Ayn Rand managed to write some crappy books that inspired a future Fed chairman to enact economy-wrecking policies. Ron Paul supporters’ only accomplishments of note were to fund a stupid blimp and organize flying monkey swarms to derail GOP internet discussions. However, their rEVOLution blimp alone entitles them to primacy over the PUMAs, who couldn’t even gas up the Mini-Winnie RV of Haka Doom.
#5—Giuliani’s Electoral Strategy: What the fuck was that all about? After focusing solely on states that start with an “F” and end with a “Lorida,” Giuliana got his ass handed to him in the state by both McCain and Romney, who each received twice as many votes as Giuliani did. A noun, a verb and 9/11 only go so far.
#4—L’affair Edwards: I long suspected Edwards of being a self-aggrandizing phony. But his focus on poverty during the primary season struck me as at least partially authentic and admirable—and remember, this was before Great Depression Part Deux struck and made it more likely that many of us will join Edwards’ displaced mill workers in the breadline. But then he had to go put a camera-toting chippie on the payroll and get ambushed in the toilet of a fancy hotel while visiting his love child. Idiot.
#3—George W. Bush: The opposite of King Midas (Gnik Sadim?), everything he touches turns to shit. He’s topped my political fail list for the better part of a decade now, and his attempts to salvage a legacy at this late hour are as contemptible as they are pathetic. Digby said it best: “They need accept that the best they can hope for is to end up among history’s inept clowns instead of history’s villains. It’s not much, but it’s all they’ve got.”
#2—Sarah Palin: Oh, I’ll admit, she had me worried at first. On paper, she looked good. But then she opened her piehole, launching 987,693 punch lines and finally dooming the McCain campaign. The only question now is whether the sticky little starbursts she coaxed from the (ahem) hard right will congeal into a resolve to repeat the epic fail in 2012. Let’s hope so.
#1—John McCain: To be fair, McCain had Bush around his neck like a millstone, but whose fault is that? If McCain truly possessed the principles and honor on which he bases his personal mythology, he could have set himself up as a credible opponent to Bush ages ago and had a real shot at winning this year. But he defended the indefensible. He said dumb things and stuck to them. He needlessly alienated a sycophantic press corp. He squandered the unearned good will he’d spent decades deceitfully amassing. So he’s the top loo-hoo-hoo-ZER of 2008 in my book.
Early this morning while I was waiting up for my brother to roll in from the airport I found out that Rumproast is a finalist for Best Small Blog in this year’s Weblog Awards. That was the “good start.”
After finally getting to bed at 2:30 AM and then dragging myself out to go to the gym four short hours later, I felt wetness down the back of my left leg as my wife and I were a block away and realized that the entire contents of my water bottle had emptied into my gym shorts, both of which were in the bag slung over my shoulder. I bid farewell to Chris, turned around and plodded home, knowing full well that I wouldn’t be able to fall back asleep again (once I’m up, I’m up). That was the “bad start.”
I think I prefer one start mornings. Consider this an open thread.
For the last decade, apparently, Russian academic Igor Panarin has been predicting the end of the U.S. as we know it. The big fall apart will occur in 2010. Well, considering the way things have been going lately, Panarin might just have something. So he’s even made up a little map to show how things will shake out:
Hallelujah! We get to go with Canada! (But can we leave Boulder behind? Just sayin!) And, as we can see, our pal Sarah is going with the Rooskies. Should have kept a better eye on Putin’s big rearin’ head Sarah! He’s comin’ for ya!
The details of how this will come about are, as yet, a little sketchy -more on the lines of 1. America the Evil will Collapse. 2. Yada, yada, yada 3. Here’s a map!
Just when you thought those persnickety and petulant PUMAs couldn’t get any goofier or EPIC FAIL-prone, Caroline “Obot” Kennedy’s pursuit of Hillary Clinton’s Senate seat has, once again, pushed them over the ledge of laughable ludicrousness. Late last week they launched a web site to announce that Harriet Christian “has approached NY Governor David Paterson’s office seeking consideration in her quest for the appointment to the US Senate as Senator for New York” (“press release” here). For those of you who aren’t familiar with Harriet Christian (you lucky duckies), here’s her renowned introduction to the world following the RBC meeting in DC on May 31st:
To the best of our knowledge, the first time the idea of appointing Harriet Christian surfaced via a snarky commenter on a Facebook forum titled “Informal Survey for Hillary’s Replacement” long-lost PUMA leader Will Bower was frequenting:
Double wrote at 6:52am on December 9th, 2008
I can’t believe no one has suggested Harriet Christian yet. She is the best nominee possible and she’s no second-class citizen. She will not shut her mouth anymore. She supports equality for all of us. It’s about time we stood up for it.
Well, they asked for it and they got it. The harrietchristian.net site hit the ground stumbling with a truly guffaw-worthy header image:
Why is this so funny? Because of all of the pictures of Harriet they had to choose from for this faux-campaigning photoshoppery, they picked this one from AP:
A security guard tries to get Harriet Christian to leave the hall after she started yelling she was going to vote for Sen. John McCain after the Democratic National Committee Rules and Bylaws committee voted what to do with Florida and Michigan delegates during their meeting in Washington, Saturday, May 31, 2008.
In the following video you can behold Harriet’s batshit crazy, pro-McCain meltdown that preceded the above photo. You can see her get up from her seat at the RBC meeting at about the 2:30 mark and her “McCain in ‘08!” chants start about a minute later. And then all hell breaks loose at the end. It’s nearly as much of a must-see as her infamous Firedoglake video:
So, yeah, imagine that unleashed in the United States Senate. Yikes.
“99% of the blacks don’t even know why they’re voting for him. How can we allow this?”
And how can we not allow Harriet Christian to represent all New Yorkers in the upper house of the bicameral United States Congress after reading quotes like that? David Paterson, now it’s up to you to prove you’re not like 99% of the blacks and do the right thing.
I’m blogging to explain to the superego side of my brain that I am quite busy with important stuff, thank you, and have no time to clean up the Xmas mess existing all over my house.
So what’s the Sunday roundup today?
Well, first of all, J.‘s lovely Hanukkah menorah picture did not make it in time for Kevin’s holiday picture post as she was waiting (and waiting and waiting and waiting) for her Official Obama T-Shirt to arrive, thereby transforming the holiday into OBAMAKKAH! So here it is in all its splendor!:
I do think the inspired candle selection sets off the t-shirt brilliantly!
And according to the poll, the second most admired woman? Sarah Palin. Gah! She came in ahead of Oprah! (And, just for the record, I do not see exactly why people do admire Oprah so much, but I merely accept that she is, for whatever reason, an American Icon). The official results were Hillary 20%, Palin 11% and Oprah 8% followed by Condi at 7% and Michelle O with 3%. The men’s results were a lot more lopsided. Barack garnered 32% and the next closest finisher was, seriously?, yes, really, he was second, W., with 5%. W. beat out McCain (3%) and the Pope, B. Clinton and Billy Graham, tied at 2% each.
So, speaking as an amateur sociologist, what should we make of these results? First of all, we haven’t seen the last of Sarah Palin by a long shot. Or Oprah, I guess. And Barack is still enjoying a significant honeymoon despite the media’s attempts to find a scandal somewhere, anywhere, WHERE THERE’S SMOKE THERE’S GOT TO BE FIRE FOR GAWDS SAKE, in the Blago story.
Also I’m thinking people must be buying some of the W. camp’s frantic spin effort to create a “legacy” out of a presidential travesty. I mean, he polled ahead of the Pope and the Pope’s kept a pretty clean profile lately (although if I’m missing something here feel free to point it out as I don’t actively monitor the Pope’s comings and goings.)
I guess what annoys me more than anything is that Michelle only picked up 3% and she’s our new First Lady and a terrific person to boot! Did people really buy into that “angry radical” rhetoric during the campaign? Or maybe the public just needs to get to know her better.
Who would you guys pick for “Most Admired” man and woman? And what do you think these results say about our society?