Word to my mother

As a tribute to my mom and the leftward-leaning ladies in her office, I'm posting this fun animation here...you know, just in case any of you lose your BackwardsBush keychains, or BackwardsBush calendars or BackwardsBush ringtones.




Enjoy!

I almost wish I were a Yankees fan...almost

I don’t know if I should thank or curse my buddy JDL for forwarding this video, which he discovered on Deadspin. To begin listing its horrors would take too long, but let’s just say that the Mets’ 1987 anthem was no “Bless You Boys”.



Finally, a Mets song that makes fans pine for “Our team, our time”.

U-G-G-L-Y…you ain’t got no alibi

Boy, I tell you – whoever is writing editorials over at YPC, that guy is good! Remember his whole charity vs. philanthropy thing? Well, now he's back with another, slightly less serious (and, dare I say, more PatRoW-ish?) rant. Some folks might take offense, but I think that's what he had in mind. Enjoy.

(text since copied to PatRoW directly)

Women of Chicago: I write this to you because I care. I love your fashion-forward attitudes mixed with Midwestern common sense. I love your glam, and I love your ball caps. I love that you can pull off ‘cosmopolitan’ without a ridiculous attempt to copy Paris or New York; I love that you can do ‘comfortable’ without ditching your femininity.

Women of Chicago have a style that is both beautiful and unique…and that’s why this intervention is so important.

Ladies, on behalf of men everywhere I tell you this: the whole “UGGs” thing has got to stop.

Now.

UGGs, for the lucky few who haven’t noticed these atrocities on the feet of otherwise sane women around town, are the sheepskin boots in which women often tuck their pants or jeans. I love a good 80’s fad as much as the next guy, but people stopped wearing moon boots around the same time they remembered they had perfectly good full-length mirrors hanging in their homes. Can you see where I’m going with this?

No one is suggesting you wear stiletto heals to trudge through winter’s snow, ice, and slush (although we wouldn’t complain if you made that sacrifice), but please, you look ridiculous. The worst Australian exports since the “Crocodile Dundee” franchise, UGGs need to disappear into the same historical black hole that swallowed Paul Hogan. And yes, we’d rather you wore his leather vest and Outback hat than another pair of down under monstrosities.

Today, not all UGGs are even UGGs (this ghastly crazy is so popular that “UGGs” has become the generic term for multiple manufacturers’ footwear freak shows), but no matter the brand, they all have one thing in common – they make you look stupid.

I hate to be so crass, but ladies, it is entirely out of character for you to perpetuate such an unflattering look. You have so much going for you, but your UGGs tell the world “Why should I care about looking intelligent or attractive? My toes are warm.”

I’m sure most of you will brush off my warnings because – if TV interventions have taught me anything – you can’t change for someone else; you have to want to change dangerously addictive behaviors for yourself. When the weather warms up, you will delicately stow away your UGGs and replace them in daily rotation with those cute Crocs you found on sale last August.

And when you put those rubbery, Swiss cheese looking monsters on your feet, you’ll be hearing from me again.

Quote of the Year

I know that we still have two more weeks to go before the end of 2006, but I don't think I'm out of line by officially awarding PatRoW's prestigious "Quote of the Year" award to a certain attempted murdering vice president.

At Donald Rumsfeld's Pentagon going-away party , Vice President Dick Cheney, who began his career as an intern for Rummy in 1969, said "I've never worked harder for a boss and I've never learned more from one, either."

Senior Administration sources reveal that President Bush was not offended by Cheney's snub because he a) has never tried to teach his VP anything; and b) never realized he was actually Cheney's boss.

Fun with conspiracy theories

When South Dakota Senator Tim Johnson suffered what was first reported as a stroke this week, the news sent ripples of fear down the spines of Democrats everywhere…and not just because they liked Johnson and were worried about his health. You see, if a Senator dies in office, a replacement may be named by his state's governor. The governor could choose the candidate of his preference, regardless of political party.

Tim Johnson is a Democrat and South Dakota Governor Mike Rounds is a Republican. You see why there was cause for alarm; assuming Rounds would appoint a Republican senator, the Democrats' 51-49 Senate advantage would become a 50-50 split, with Vice President Dick Cheney providing the tie-breaker for the GOP.

And yet, Johnson's "intracerebral bleed caused by a congenital arteriovenous malformation" doesn't appear to be life threatening, and after successful brain surgery, he is said to be "appropriately responsive to both voice and touch". So why are Dems still sweating their slim majority? Old fears about the treasonous intentions of one of their own…

That's right, folks – it's time for another Joe Lieberman conspiracy theory!

Perhaps more realistic than the talk about Hillary's nefarious scheming in Iowa, there are new grumblings that the Connecticut senator would consider leaving Congress if offered the job of US Ambassador to the United Nations. The reasons to take the position (perks like "a big apartment in the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, a chance to live in Manhattan rather than Washington and a turn on the world stage in the tradition of the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan") hardly match reasons for declining (the Senate is somewhat prestigious as well), and yet, who can claim to understand a man who claims he has "Joe-mentum" at the end of a losing campaign?

Of course, if Lieberman were to leave office, the South Dakota scenario would come back into play. Connecticut's Republican governor, Jodi Rell, would be allowed to name a replacement. Does anybody else smell a 50-50 split?

And while the post itself would be a draw (last December, it was reported that Bush had offered the job to Lieberman, who thought about it for a week before saying no), the less obvious reasons may make the job so tempting. Perhaps some GOP duplicity (who saw that coming?) could wrest away Democratic majority by playing to Lieberman's ego:

…if the Republicans really want to steal the Senate back before the Democrats take over, they can certainly whisper tempting blandishments into [Lieberman's] ear. How about a nice, million-dollar job with, for instance, the Carlyle Group?

Or maybe even the ego-boosting prospect of another vice-presidential nomination in 2008 -- this time on a "bipartisan" ticket with friend and fellow hawk John McCain?

And for an egotistic, self-serving, ass-kissing, aisle-crossing douchebag like Joe Lieberman, a few delicate strokes (to his ego – get your head out of the gutter) may be all it takes to sell out the Democratic Party one last time.

The Small Penis Doctrine

One of the worst things about being a "grown up" (the fact that I'm married, own a house, two cars and a 401k makes this a sad reality) is having to be reasonable, bite our tongues and save most of our vicious name-calling for bits of road rage-induced fury or our self-important blogs. Even politicians, often devoid of both principles and common sense, know that they can't make personal attacks without definitive proof, and some have suffered from being too closely linked with groups that employ "swift boat" warfare against their enemies. And yet, who knew that a mainstream medium not only accepted, but encouraged this kind of maliciousness, and who knew the doctrine by which this is allowed would have such a catchy name?

It all started in March, when TNR's Michael Crowley wrote an article about popular novelist Michael Crichton and examined his 2004 best-seller, State of Fear:

The thriller presented global warming theory as the work of a fiendish cabal of liberal environmentalists, celebrities, journalists, academics, and politicians. Crichton's populist disdain for these "experts" dovetailed neatly, I argued, with the Bush administration's anti-intellectual streak…

OK, not even Dick Cheney wants to be associated with the Interloper these days, so it's no surprise that Crichton would be upset with this characterization. That a popular writer would lake a pot shot at a critic in his art is also perfectly reasonable; but just HOW Crichton struck back was a lesson in juvenile maliciousness that could teach the girls in my high school a lesson. Take this passage from Crichton's 2006 book, Next:

Alex Burnet was in the middle of the most difficult trial of her career, a rape case involving the sexual assault of a two-year-old boy in Malibu. The defendant, thirty-year-old Mick Crowley, was a Washington-based political columnist who was visiting his sister-in-law when he experienced an overwhelming urge to have anal sex with her young son, still in diapers. Crowley was a wealthy, spoiled Yale graduate and heir to a pharmaceutical fortune. ...


…[Crowley's lawyer] tried the case vigorously in the press months before the trial, repeatedly characterizing Alex and the child's mother as "fantasizing feminist fundamentalists" who had made up the whole thing from "their sick, twisted imaginations." This, despite a well-documented hospital examination of the child. (Crowley's penis was small, but he had still caused significant tears to the toddler's rectum.)

Oh, snap! Did you get all that? The fictitious *Mick* Crowley was a Washington political journalist who attended Yale. Real-life Michael Crowley is a Washington political journalist who attended Yale. As the real Crowley recognized, "in lieu of a letter to the editor, Crichton had fictionalized me as a child rapist."

Nice. Stay classy, Michael Crichton.

Oh, there's a bit about the "small penis doctrine", an apparently well known publishing industry trick employed by enthusiastic defamers to discourage their targets from filing lawsuits. Basically, no man will ever step forward to complain "that character with the small penis – that's me!"

You have to admit, the logic is brilliant. And in an unrelated matter, I'm proud to unveil today a few of the major players in my debut novel, Patience and the Reign of Witches, set to be published in mid-2007:

· Cal Rove – pudgy presidential advisor by day, kiddy porn aficionado by night. And he's got a small penis.

· Will O'Reilly – obnoxious media pundit who spews hatred and lies because of self-loathing due to his small penis.

· Dick Charmy – what's the opposite of onomatopoeia? This politician-turned-business man-turned politician is a smarmy asshole hung like a young boy's pinky finger (spoiler alert! That metaphor may be tested in Chapter 6).

· Matthew S. Myth – our hero, this truth-seeking crusader must topple a corrupt government using only his rapier wit and ridiculously giant cock.

I'll stop there, because I really do want to keep some of the surprises for the book. Let's just say that a certain President John W. Bish will cause some kind of global crisis through his gross mismanagement of resources, third-grade reading level and overwhelming shame about his poorly-endowed member.

Damn, being a writer is fun. Bring on the Pulitzer!

Next up – the White House hosts a conference on international diplomacy

In a story destined to elicit spit-takes from casual readers around the world, Iran – that last bastion of enlightened intellectuals – will host a conference on the Holocaust.

Yes, that Iran – the one whose president infamously declared the Holocaust "a myth". The same Iran that refuses to acknowledge Israel and makes killing Jews a higher national priority than, oh I don't know, literacy.

So what gives, anyway?

Iran's Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said in a welcome address that the conference's goal was to "create an opportunity for thinkers who cannot express their views freely in Europe about the Holocaust."

Ah, now this is making more sense. What kind of Holocaust views can't be expressed freely in Europe? The denials, of course!

And from the too-easy-to-predict file, it seems that former KKK Imperial Wizard and Louisiana gubernatorial candidate, David Duke will be there as well. What? George Allen couldn't make it?

Remember when folks other than Kramer were getting in trouble for using the “N-word”?

Virginia's George Felix Allen, outgoing US Senator and all-around douchebag (what – you forgot? I did a whole series on this loser) has given his first formal interview since losing to Democrat Jim Webb. What did "Macaca Goldstein" reveal? Well, for one thing, he likes using ridiculous football analogies. For another, he's an idiot.

"When you lose a game by one point, you can go through every play in the game and say, 'If we didn't jump offside, if the referee makes that call, if we caught that pass, if we didn't fumble, we could have made a difference," he said.

There is no word on whether anyone on Allen's staff explained to the senator that giddily throwing racial epithets isn't the same as "jumping offside", or that sticking a deer head in someone's mailbox is slightly different than dropping a pass, or that posing for pictures with the Confederate flag is a bit removed from a referee making a bad call, or, that adamantly denying, then begrudgingly accepting one's Jewish heritage is a bit more than a fumble, or, well, you get the picture.

But the mock redneck wasn't done making an ass of himself.

"Everyone, including myself, could have done a better job. I have high standards and high expectations for myself. I could have done better."

How? Allen wouldn't say.

"I'm not good at psychoanalysis," he said.

No, he sure isn't. Nor is he good at tolerance, or being humble, or recognizing the importance of education. But the next time you need to burn a cross, best keep George Allen on speed dial.

Quick Hits - Week(s) in Review

What happens when Republicans falter, Democrats don’t screw up and my political blood pressure cools from a boil to a mere simmer? PatRoW readers get the shaft with (at best) infrequent postings or (at worst) mediocre baseball analysis. But don’t fret, friends – Quick Hits has returned to pick up the many pieces that are worth a word or two, if not a full-fledged rant.

There is a gay agenda -- winning elections – I don’t believe it. Barney Frank, you sly dog you!

K-K-Kramer – anyone else still have Michael Richards’ catchy apology rap stuck in his head? Um…me neither.

Likability poll bad news for Kerry – perhaps the most understated headline of the year. It seems that the Massachusetts Senator, flubbed joke making, once-and-future Democratic presidential candidate finished dead last in a nation-wide likability poll of 20 top American political figures. Saying that this is “bad news” for Kerry is akin to saying that the passing of a kidney stone will lead to “some discomfort” or that the war in Iraq has been “notably different” results than what administration officials had hoped for. Way to go out on a limb, Reuters.

How is Kate Winslet like a car? – from those zany folks at Broadsheet, comes the latest in a series of wacky headlines. So how is Kate Winslet like a car, you ask? Hell, I can play this game without reading the article!

· She has “Oldsmobile” tattooed on her bumper

· Heh, heh. Hummer. Heh, heh.

· She has dumps like a truck, truck, truck

· “At 17 I went to prison for murder. By 19, I was penniless and heartbroken. I almost drowned at 20. My mind started to go at 24. Then I had my memory erased at 28. And by 29, I was in Neverland.” OK – so that really has nothing to do with how she’s like a car, but every time I see that stupid American Express commercial I want to run Kate over with my Honda Accord

Feel free to add your own idea for “how Kate Winslet is like a car” by posting a comment below. Trust me, it’s a blast!

Peace out, my Wigga – amazingly, this is not another Michael Richards joke. Rather, it’s an amusing tongue-in-cheek “entertainment” piece written by Salon’s sports writer, King Kaufman. Not so amusing is the fact that this seems to be a real story, not a spoof.

Sex and the single septuagenarian – and you laughed when I joked about this back in March. You know, there really is nothing sexier than the thought of busting a nut and breaking a hip at the same time.

‘Not charity, but a chance’

I read a brilliant editorial today that makes the important distinction between charity and philanthropy. It's a solid read for all of us, and God knows, the author's talent seems to ooze out of every line of his glorious prose. Enjoy.

The words charity and philanthropy have similar meanings and are often used interchangeably; however, it is the difference between the two that can have the biggest impact on someone’s life.

Charity is ingrained in our cultural fabric – we give to charity because we feel a moral or religious calling to do so. Charity is how we show our caring for people displaced by natural disaster, or our support for victims of crime or violence. Charity is the change we leave behind in the jar to help find homes for abandoned animals, or the extra dollar we contribute to help fight poverty in Africa.

Each not-for-profit company faces the challenge of distinguishing charity and philanthropy for its staff and supporters. And this challenge is not new; in 1902, the Reverend Edgar James Helms (the founder of Goodwill Industries), wrote that his organization should serve as “not charity, but a chance” for people in need.

How did Helms, and how do others provide that chance? The answer is philanthropy.Steve Gunderson, president and CEO of the Council on Foundations helped distinguish the two ideals:

"Charity seeks to provide immediate rescue and relief – it is the emotional response of our donations given to immediately respond to a disaster. Philanthropy is more focused on the long-term rebuilding, the problem-solving aspect of our society. In an educational perspective, this difference can be described in that age-old axiom of ‘I gave a person a fish and they ate for a day; I taught them how to fish, and they ate for a lifetime.’ The initial outpouring is charity; the longer-term education is philanthropy."

Whereas charity is essential to address immediate needs, philanthropy is the means by which organizations and individuals can support a long-term objective and create a legacy of change.

At YPC, philanthropy is our belief in education as life’s great equalizer. We strive to enhance university opportunities (both scholastically and financially) for Chicago high school students through our College Bound program. We support special individuals for whom access to education is the only chance to lead the type of life many of us take for granted. And we strive to provide our members with professional development opportunities to ensure that they don’t stop learning just because they may have completed a degree (or two, or three).

As young professionals, few of us can make the kind of gift that adds a wing onto a hospital or builds a new laboratory at our alma mater, but all of us can – with a little planning – utilize philanthropy to address the issues that matter to us most. The key is realizing that our philanthropic potential is not necessarily tied to our budgetary (or time) limitations.

Our philanthropy begins by opening our hearts and minds to the issues that matter most to us. Our philanthropy begins by taking action – any action – toward change. Our philanthropy begins when we realize that charity is a great beginning, but not the end of getting involved in something important.

There is a difference between charity and philanthropy – a difference that all of us can help define.

To make a charitable contribution this holiday season, YPC suggests consulting Charity Navigator to see their rankings of the most effective and efficient nonprofit organizations. Some of our favorite local charities are Chicago Cares (organizes volunteer opportunities for community groups) and Goodwill Industries of Metropolitan Chicago (provides work opportunities for people with barriers to employment).

Chalk one up for Panicky Pete

Remember when I was all fired up about the prospect of the Democrats losing the mid-term election because of electronic voting machine fraud? Well, all's well that ends well, right?

Uh…not so much.

The Washington Post reports on National Institute of Standards and Technology findings that confirm my conspiratorial fears. In short, "paperless electronic voting machines… cannot be made secure". Here's a bit more:

NIST says in its report that the lack of a paper trail for each vote "is one of the main reasons behind continued questions about voting system security and diminished public confidence in elections." The report repeats the contention of the computer security community that "a single programmer could 'rig' a major election."

In related news, Karl Rove has begun taking computer programming classes. And yes, even my blind coworker saw that one coming.