i m N s h o

Old news by now, but it's taken me this long to even try and get my head around this headline. Tab for financial bailout: $700,000,000,000 Then again, Bush was all over the place yesterday, assuring everyone the sky was falling and we're all going to hell in a handbasket if we don't pass his bailout bill. So I guess I haven't missed my chance to rant. What's truly staggering about this plan isn't the price tag, frightening as that is. It's this little tidbit: But the most distinctive -- and potentially most controversial -- element of the plan is the extent to which it would allow Treasury to act unilaterally: Its decisions could not be reviewed by any court or administrative body and, once the emergency legislation was approved, the administration could raise the $700 billion through government borrowing and would not be subject to Congress' traditional power of the purse. That's right, we're going to give the Treasury Secretary a $700 BILLION b

From the "KNBC Noon News Update" email I just received: Lohan Confirms She's Dating Woman Clay Aiken: 'Yes, I'm Gay' A) These stories cannot possibly be considered "news" to anyone. At best, they are confirmation of long held assumptions. That's not NEWS. B) It's six weeks before the next Presidential Election; the current lame-duck tries to further dismantle the Constitution as he attempts to "address" the Mortgage bank failure; battles over gay marriage and the California budget continue… and we get a pair of fluff pieces to lead off their email update? (And no, this was not the Entertainment email update, though both stories appear there as well.) And the rest of the damn email is just as bad, with a headline about Lionel Richie's NEIGHBORS getting robbed, the latest from the OJ Simpson trial, and a FACEBOOK update. WTF?  

Just because I can always appreciate a little hyperbole… McCain-Palin: 15th Century Solutions for the 21st Century. Of course, it doesn't hurt that I agree with the cause.  

McCain Rips Obama Over Lohan Snub Seriously? It's already this stupid? At least I like Obama's spokesman's reply.

I guess, after 8 years of Bush, Rove & Cheney, I should learn never to underestimate Republican tactics. But I obviously didn't think this one all the way through last week. My initial reaction to the Sarah Palin announcement (along with that of many of my friends) was to view it as a cynical attempt to counter the Obama ticket… "Oh yeah, you're running an African-American? Well we've got a woman on our ticket!" But then I saw this story. Belittling Palin? The latest McCain/Palin ad takes Obama and Biden to task for being "disrespectful" to Sarah Palin. According to the FactCheck.org article, those claims are blatantly misleading. (One could, uncharitably I suppose, call them lies. Let's just say I'm not feeling very charitable today.) But the lying is beside the point. What's disturbing here is the notion behind this attack ad. We can see now that Sarah Palin is not simply there to balance the ticket, to serve as some (presumably misguid

So Obama makes a remark to the effect that adding Sarah Palin to the Republican party ticket may 'pretty up' the ticket, but that you can put lipstick on a pig and you'll still have a pig. Now the McCain camp is up in arms , accusing Obama of calling Palin a pig. Without debating the accuracy of that particular denigration, can we please GROW UP now? No one with a modicum of sense believes he was referring to Palin with that remark, and McCain himself used the same cliché to describe one of Hilary Clinton's proposals earlier in the campaign. So we should all be aware of what the phrase means. Obviously, this is just a chance to get a little political mileage out of this non-issue, but doesn't it seem a bit disingenuous for a campaign that's been milking Palin's potshot at community organizers at every campaign stop to have a fit over this? (I guess it's OK to take those cheap shots, since that whole "community organizer" thing smacks of hippie-

If you use a PC* today, you likely know this person. You've probably got at least one friend that's in the cult of Apple, and mocks your bad decision-making on a regular basis. The Mac faithful are quick to extol the virtues of their chosen platform and gleefully seek to enlighten you as to why you should agree with them. (Of course, sharing articles like this one with those Mac faithful tend to fall on deaf ears.) And god help you if they're new to Macs. There's nothing more fervent than a recent convert. What I find amusing about this discussion is the notion that a) the Mac is somehow, inherently, the correct/best choice for personal computing and b) all it takes is to use a Mac and this will be immediately apparent. There's an assumption that the PC user simply doesn't know any better, and the Mac user is simply trying to help him see the light. This, of course, is flawed logic, but not too surprising coming from the Mac camp. The funny thing is, I've

So McCain's VP choice was announced on Friday, and everyone's abuzz with his choice… either it's a daring, enlightened choice, or smacks of desperation, depending, I assume, on your political inclinations. (Though judging by this story , that may not be quite so clear a distinction this time around.) Then, over the weekend we find that his new VP's daughter is 17 and pregnant, but we're assured that she'll be marrying the baby's father. Ah, what a relief! It is reassuring to know they're doing the responsible thing here, forcing a 17 year old into marriage to protect mom's career. Truly enlightened. (Of course, being a 21st century Republican, I guess her options are limited… unwed motherhood being second only to abortion as the gateway to hell, and adoption probably smacks too much of liberalism. Good choice for the kids, though, I'm sure — that's mom, dad and the newborn, for those keeping track of the minors involved.) In other news, appa