Name-Callin' Not Cool, Says Turd Blossom

Karl Rove, the man who leveraged the "wedge issue" strategy so far that it's finally going to split the Republicans permanently, is advising right-wingers to avoid calling Barack Obama "Barack Hussein Obama". From the linked article: Rove said that the use of “Barack Hussein Obama” would perpetuate the notion that Republicans were bigoted and would hurt the party. And we wouldn't want to perpetuate THAT notion. Especially now that African Americans have finally acheived complete equality!

Then again, maybe it's important, just to distinguish the candidate from other Barack Obamas. You know, a clarity issue.

In the early nineties, George Bush Sr. ran a campaign against Bill Clinton that seemed to rest entirely on referring to him as "Slick Willy" whenever he spoke. "There goes Slick Willy," he'd say. How'd that work out for him?

I've called my wingnut blogger friends on this behavior. I probably should shut up, because it makes them look worse to keep referring to Hillary! and Hitlery and Juan McCain and the whole Obama/Osama thing. Name calling is a form of insult shorthand, and in a lot of these cases it's an empty meaningless reference. It's a way to be insulting without taking the trouble to know what you're saying, and people catch wise to that usually around 4th grade.

I invite examples of the same bad behavior to the left. This is not a challenge; I know we do it too. I want to be balanced; I just don't think I have to be the one giving the specifics.

Enough Dick Already

I just got back for the same l'il Italian place I went to Monday - Andy Dick was there again. This time he was stinkin' drunk; rude, obnoxious, and pawing every woman under 3o who passed close enough. The waitress brought him a glass of water, he demanded a margarita in a gravelly voice, and when she left Andy threw the ice at a blond who had her back to him. They tossed him out once but he wandered back in an hour later.

I'm happy to report that he showed zero interest in me, though. And I suppose it's good to see that the stories I've heard around town are true - sometimes people make stuff up about celebrities and you want to believe them even when they're not true, as long as they're entertaining. And frankly, the West San Fernando Valley is celebrity starved. This is the first famous person I've seen in this place who wasn't in porn. Though with that name...

Ironically, one of my drinkin' and singin' buddies is a staff writer for the National Enquirer, and he left early, because there's no money in Andy Behaving Badly stories any more.I wonder if Britney's still awake?

Spotted Dick

I just want to report briefly that I went to my local italian restaurant/karaoke joint on Monday and there, with an entourage of about 4 guys, was Andy Dick. They were eating Italian food and listening to people singing Neil Diamond songs.

Happily, Mr. Dick and company neither seemed high nor drunk; there was no shouting, no fights were started, and they all left peacefully. Sadly, before I got up to sing.

Ginned-Up Phony Outrage - Or Misguided REAL Outrage?

Maybe I'm too charitable. I look at some of the things that the right wing gets upset about and I assume that, well, they must be kidding. Case in point: this recent Warner Todd Huston piece accusing a liberal media operative of slandering Dick Cheney by reporting he'd said something he didn't.

In one of the most egregious examples of MSM bias I've seen lately, Tim Rutten of the L.A.Times has blatantly lied about remarks that Vice President Cheney made at CPAC in a February 8th piece headlined "Bush's message for McCain." Rutten makes the outrageous claim that Cheney said he was "glad the administration had tortured people" during the Conservative Political Action Conference...

One of the commenters suggests that Ruttan should be fired for "lying...to advance (his) personal agenda."

Okay, so the outrage appears to be that the MSM misreported the content of Dick Cheney's speech. So I read Cheney's speech - it's true, he never said anything of the kind. But I also read Ruttan's piece, which starts as follows:

If you're one of the people who couldn't quite follow all the steps in the intricate little folk dance the Bush administration performed around the torture issue this week, don't feel left out.

Odd beginning for a straight news story. But since it's an editorial on the editorial page, it's a little less odd. What Ruttan is clearly doing is telling you what he thinks Cheney meant.

You can legitimately take issue with that opinion, but Huston is frothing at the mouth over the so-called "lie" perpetrated by the far-left media, furious that they're trying to fool you into thinking that Dick Cheney supports torture.

I tried to convince him otherwise, and I got a little snarky. Quoting myself here: There wasn't a LITERAL folk dance at the White House. That is a metaphor. Though the White House has held folk dances at times, it is seldom during discussions of policy issues. Metaphors are often an indication that the writer is expressing an opinion.

Another tip-off - Tim Ruttan is referred to as a "columnist" and not a reporter. Yes, sometimes columnists do break stories (Robert Novak famously did a few years ago, for example) but generally they try to not break the story and offer opinions about it at the same time. Novak didn't say "Valerie Plame is a CIA operative AND therefore Joe Wilson must have been lying." See how that works? Because it dilutes the impact of the story.

Here's another paragraph that might indicated that it's opinion and not reportage:
"It's hard to read this week's events as anything other than an attempt to put McCain on notice that he'd better acknowledge the unitary executive theory if he wants help with the conservative base."

Whether you agree with the sentiment or not, it's really hard to advance the idea that he's trying to fool you into thinking this is not an opinion piece.

Sorry I was so snarky in the early paragraphs, but I'm assuming you're not really serious either. You can't really believe this was an attempt fool readers, can you? You're better than that, Warner.

Honestly, I don't know if I've gotten through to him on this. He's changed the subject so either he agrees with me or feels he doesn't want to repeat himself. But again I can't help but wonder - is this stuff an attempt to whip up the base because he thinks they're dumber than him, or is he the base?

A President With Experience

First of all, put that idea out of your head. None of the people running for president have any experience in the job of President. And if George W Bush has taught us anything, it's that being in charge of the whole country is different than being in charge of, say, Texas. Or a baseball team. 

We're in interesting times right now, because all of the front-runners are Senators. Senators traditionally make bad candidates because of their voting records, which tend to be a little, um, nuanced. Because of the horse trading that goes into making laws, voting for any particular bill usually means voting for a hundred odious riders that can be used against you in ads. I suppose this is true in Congress also, but because there are less Senators one's options are more limited. 

This is why Obama is the most electable candidate, as far as I'm concerned. Clinton and McCain have both made voting decisions which probably were wise and sensible at the time but which have infuriated their respective bases. Hillary Clinton voted for (and vocally supported) a war which was obviously a horrible mistake even if you didn't have security clearance. McCain, well, everything he did that I like makes him unelectable to half the Republicans. Ironically, I probably would have voted for him if he'd gone against Gore because he seemed more honest. Now I have Democrats I like well enough to stick with.

Obama has almost no record. You can view this a negative or you can view it, as I do, as a savvy move by a smart, smart man. To me, it makes him the first nominee I wanted to vote for since 1996; as opposed to the choice after you decide who to vote against. And as sunny and naive as he seems, he's smart and vicious enough to sling a little mud back at Hillary Clinton when it becomes necessary. So I think we'd be in good hands.

Anyway I hope to God that he makes it to the finals, because the idea of sharing a candidate with Ann Coulter would depress the hell outta me.

ROI

Mitt Romney has announced he's suspending his candidacy. Behold the destructive power of Super Tuesday! I'm having trouble deciding which pundity to advance on this one, so I'll throw 'em all at you and you can pick the ones you want.

First of all, the undisputed conclusion - Romney was getting a terrible Return on Investment. He outspent his rivals 20 to 1 and saw an increasing downward trend in votes. He could still buy the Vice-Presidency, which is much cheaper but considerably less powerful; but even then he's likely to get trounced in the marketplace by the rival Huckabee brand and he will probably decide it isn't worth it. He is the Mitt who can't catch votes.

So what does it all mean?

Option 1: Americans don't trust good-looking white guys any more. They've fallen by the wayside one by one. John Edwards, Joe Biden, Mitt Romney - these are the WASP prom dates of politics, the White Alpha Males, and there is a feeling that that kind of guy will get the country drunk, take advantage of it, then not call the next day. We are thus left with the old white guy with the enormous cheeks, the younger white guy with the friendly jowls, the sexless battleaxe and the hot UN-WHITE guy. If the trend continues, I'm pretty sure the battleaxe will be running the country by this time next year.

Option 2: Americans are kidding about hating the illegal immigrants. That was Mitt's trademark, stopping the flow of illegals because the illegals are dismantling the country. And a lot of people claim that's at the top of their list of concerns, yet they voted for the guys who gave it the least lip service. Perhaps on some level we secretly LIKE paying less for vegetables and construction.

Option 3: Mormons creep the rest of us out. I have Mormon friends and they are perfectly decent folk, normal and friendly. But the Mormon narrative, with its Jesus in Utah tales and the cannibalism and the magic underwear and the aversion to caffeine (what kinds of monsters ARE these people) makes you question not just their faith, but faith itself. And when I say this remember I grew up Catholic, so I know a little bit about weird narratives.

Option 4: Americans saw through Mitt Romney. Cynics beware, this one is a hard option to swallow. To buy Mitt Romney's positions, you have to believe that all the positions he so fervently held as governor of Massachussetts were mistakes which he saw the light about just a couple of years before he ran for president. Sure it could happen, just as it's possible for Bill Clinton to believe he wasn't lying to the Grand Jury because he didn't think THAT was SEX. But, you know, c'mon. So voters may have heard him claiming he was a social conservative and simply didn't buy it. Ah well, at least Rush Limbaugh bought it.

Option 5: Americans didn't buy the name. Mitt Romney is the name of a character from PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE. It's not the name of a president. BTW, if this one is true it doesn't auger well for Huckabee, who is a better Theme Restaurant than a president. And come to think of it, Barack Obama doesn't exactly suggest leadership as much as Pebbles Flintstone's boyfriend.

Option 6: Ron Paul paid Romney off. I'm completely talking through my hat on this one, but Ron Paul is making so much internet money that who knows, maybe he saw a chance to narrow the field and Romney saw a chance to make a little cash back on a bad deal. And you can't tell me Paul isn't crazy enough to make the offer.

Option 7: Romney isn't actually pulling out. I think he said he's "stepping aside" and "suspending his candidacy". Language like that means at the last minute, he might step in again, maybe after Huckabee mysteriously comes down with Dioxin poisening.

That's what I got. Anybody have other analysis?

Coulter For Clinton!

Last night on Hannity and Colmes Ann Coulter said if McCain wins the nomination, she will vote for Hillary Clinton.

Yes she did.

If you consider Coulter to be a radical right failsafe device (if the crazy ideas catch on she's cutting-edge; if not she's just kidding) then this is big news. It represents a serious tantrum of the far right, and that's good for my side. If they torpedo McCain, then weirdo Mormon Romney is the candidate to beat. If McCain prevails, no matter who wins those guys will be so demoralized that they might keep out of our hair for the next four years. Cross your fingers, remaining 90 percent of the country! We're going to be making the decisions again!

Danger: Meme Approaching!

My antennae are up - I just heard Andrew Cohut, the pollster, talking about John Edwards. Now that he is out of the running, where will his voters go? Cohut says that white males are the x-factor here because they look at the remaining choices and, well, they don't have anything in common with them. (Edwards biggest block was white males.)

I was a little taken aback by this. And just now I read that Dick (el chupacabra) Morris was happily chatting up the same idea on HANNITY AND COLMES. I'm certain that they'll trot out Juan Williams to assure us that there's nothing wrong with a LITTLE bigotry. It will be their version of balance.

Me, I think enough of white male democrats to believe that they won't vote for McCain by mistake. I'm plenty cynical; but I think people's knee-jerk hatred of Bush's policies will trump the other hatred. But watch for more "those racist democrats" talk. It's good for a few easy points.

By the way; if we're so racist why have we driven all the white male candidates out of the race?

More Fun With RNC Talking Points

Hey great news! Remember John Bolton? He was the furious moustache with a man attached who was our UN Representative until everybody in the government except the president forced him out. Well, he says that "the mullahs in Tehran" are hoping for a Democrat to win the presidency.

You may recall that the prevailing talking point before the 2006 election was that if Democrats became the majority in Congress, we'd fail in Iraq and terrorists would be everywhere here at home. However, now you can't hear a Republican speak without mentioning that we're winning the war in Iraq, and there hasn't been a major attack on American Soil since a Republican ran the White House! So given that predictions are dubious but results are rock solid, it stands to reason that Bolton's suggestion will have the opposite effect - Tehran is as good as destroyed once a Democrat gets the presidency.

While I'm at it, I might as well address the rumor that Barack Obama was a Muslim but has converted to a Christian; a few right-wing columnists have suggested that electing him would thus infuriate the Muslim world, who would hate the President and put out orders to assasinate him. As always with the RNC talking points I'll take the conversion thing as fact; but how would it be any different than the way the Muslim world feels about the current guy?

And by the way, I'd like to see a definition of "the Muslim World" which doesn't assume ALL the Muslims are bomb-weilding terrorists. I don't have figures, but I do know the majority of them are not, just as I know the majority of Christians aren't picketing Heath Ledger's funeral.

Maybe These Two Killed Music Video

I just ran across the two most incredible music videos ever. Look at this!

The thing that amazes me about Terri's little effort here is even though it's clearly a vanity project NOBODY involved seems the slightest bit interested in it. Maybe her husband paid for it. Maybe she's one of the Shaggs, all grown up. But I defy you to come up with an explanation of this that makes any sense.

Post this to all your blogs - I want to see it go viral, like it should have in the eighties. Never too late!

On a related note, maybe this one is the lost dream sequence from ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST. Thanks to MySpace friend and real life friend Anna Borg for calling my attention. Happy Birthday, Anna!

His Name Is Either Chuck Or Herb, I'm Guessing

Ouch! Check out the last line of a comment from the previous post:

No wonder no (one) comes to your blog. Useless drivel.

Compassionate conservatives! Well, dude's got a point: even by blog standards, I'm not setting the world on fire. I average about 37 visitors a day, and most of them are looking for pictures of the ugly dog pageant winner. And I haven't had an entry syndicated to Reuters since November! I'm a slacker.

Useless drivel? Yeah, I'll cop to that too. Unless you absolutely refuse to form your own opinions, you really don't need mine. I hope you're entertained by the way I present them, but I'd hardly call them useful. In fact GWK, I'd call your opinion more useful than mine, because it provided a springboard for this post. Then again it's useless drivel that no one reads anyway, so I suppose we're both outta luck.

Anyway GWK, since this is spillover for a comment fracas we're having over at WHERE ARE MY KEYS, I certainly apologize if you took my remarks as personally insulting. I was only trying to attack your ideas, not you, and I must have crossed a line somewhere. You're usually a classy guy. 

Beating a Horse Which, While Not Dead, Is Accruing Crippling Hospital Debt While On Life Support

I've been having that universal health care argument over at WHERE ARE MY KEYS again. Great White Knight insists that the high number of uninsured people is misleading because so many of them are unemployed; and then most of them don't WANT insurance. He has friends who are saving the money they'd pay for insurance premiums and intend to use THAT for medical bills. Presumably, that's what everyone else is doing too.

So let me just reiterate my position here about the handful of poor people in the nation who AREN'T saving up and cannot afford health insurance. I know it's only a handful; and they are all poor because they want to be. But if there is some untoward epidemic or plague, who is going to get shots? The rich, because they can afford it. Who won't? The poor. The more people who can't get health care, the more to spread disease. Check out Africa some time. They don't have universal health care, they got plenty of poor people, and they're dying of AIDS in record numbers. And that's a non-airborne contagion.

Bird flu, typhoid, something new - the poor are going to kill you unless you protect them. More importantly, they're going to kill ME, and I'm not for that at all.

Why The Surge Is Doomed

It doesn't matter how much progress we make - our enemies still have weapons of mass destruction. Thus, once we have delivered the fatal blow to Al-Quaeda, they will simply dig 'em out and destroy our troops. We should therefore pull out now.

An Embarassment of Riches

Twice this month I've gone out for drinks to find impeccable, beautifully executed jazz combos. Perfect Chet Baker style bands, just chugging away with their five minute solos, playing their standards. For the record, if you're in the San Fernando Valley, call The Back Room at Henri's in Woodland Hills, or check out JAX in Glendale.

And I'm marvelling at the technical skill of these house bands. If you put them up against a typical house rock band, it's like comparing (my new favorite metaphor) Apples to Lobsters.

What the hell happened to jazz, that people this good are playing gigs this accessable? Seriously, if it were the same in rock I'd be seeing U2 playing an accoustic set at the local coffee house.

Thompson Seedless

Yesterday Fred Thompson, a damn good actor, dropped out of the presidential race. In some ways I can make even less of this than I could of his candidacy in the first place.

They guy clearly wasn't really trying. Compared to the monomaniacal efforts of Clinton, McCain, Obama, Guiliani (yes, Thompson was putting even less steam into his race than Guiliani, who to date has only campaigned heavily in one state) Fred just wasn't bringin' the heat. In fact, until I read a Warner Todd Huston piece I didn't even know what Thompson represented.

He represented, as it turns out, grass roots conservatism.

Thus his departure worries me. The one thing I have found valuable in Republicans is conservatism. Some times it is useful to progress; but sometimes it's wiser to maintain what you have. If Thompson was that guy, and he's out, then we got no force to balance the urge for radical change.

Thompson, with his nebulous voting record and relative lack of experience, was also the Republican Barack Obama. I'm not sure what kind of omen is implied by this, because as the anti-conservatives, Democrats view lack of experience as an opportunity to think outside the box.

Of the Republican candidates, the one who least scares me right now is John McCain. Even with the pandering to the evangelicals, he still mostly seems to say what he believes and act on it. I don't trust Huckabee because he ain't panderin' - he really IS evangelical. I don't trust Romney because he panders to everyone simultaneously. And both of them are scarred by they ridicule they received in grade school due to their ridiculous names.

Giuliani? Fascist. What's worse, he acheived his greatest success applying fascist tactics, circumventing established law to clean up New York City. And it did work, undeniably; not onlike the way the trains were so much more prompt under certain other famous Italian leaders.

I'm starting to warm to Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama. The experience she keeps touting won't help her govern directly, but it WILL help her defend against the increasingly shrill and crazy attacks from Republicans. Maybe we need a Democrat who is out for revenge in that position. Because, you know, Obama will get eaten alive. Yes he should guard against assasination, but the real danger to the body politic is character assasination. Whatever Democrat gets elected they're going to throw every crazy accusation in the book at 'em; maybe we need someone who is ready to jump in the mud with 'em give 'em a good kidney punch while she's down there.

I know there IS a John Edwards, but I just don't trust him. He's our Mitt Romney.

Commuting by Bicycle - An Overview

Top 5 upsides to bicycle commuting
1. You don't have to feel guilty about not exercising.
2. You don't have to feel guilty about not carpooling.
3. Exposure to the elements, which is surprisingly good for you.
4. You attract the attention of hippies -nice people!
5. No gas, no noise, no carbon footprint.

Top 5 downsides to bicycle commuting
1. Sidewalks: frequent level changes, slow pedestrians, cars tend to wait in driveways by blocking sidewalks.
2. Helmets: dorky but necessesary.
3. Most motorists ("piston jockies") would just as soon kill you as slow down.
4. Wherever you go you arrive soaked in your own rank sweat.
5. The nagging feeling that you are becoming a hippie - annoying people!

I'd Say I Was "Elitist", But Most People Don't Know What That Means

Right now, as I write this, AMERICAN IDOL is embarking on its seventh season; and like in previous years, it's taking off without me. I have never seen a full episode of AMERICAN IDOL. The only reason I've ever seen any of it is because I set my DVR to start two minutes before HOUSE so I don't miss anything.

It's hard to have a beef with a show I've never seen, but I'm managing with this one. I know I'm in the minority. When the TV ratings come out next week the top slots will be filled with American Idol. If they have three shows a week, they will be numbers one, two and three. What's wrong with you people? How did Simon and company suck you in? 

As I've written before, the show is less entertainment then it is a money-making strategy, squeezing dollars out of the audition process (on some shows it's prep, on this one it's the show) the voting, even the hosts' beverages. Then an idol is picked, and Simon's record company puts out an album which you will want to buy because you just watched a season-long informercial for it. It's sinister! But also - the music is crappy and unimaginative, the judges are insufferable, and Ryan Seacrest isn't a personality: he's a dotted line into which you are supposed to insert a personality.

But most importantly, AMERICAN IDOL is a reality show. It's a little late to nip this trend in the bud, but for Pete's sake, when will people stop watching that crap? Scripted television is less inauthentic than reality shows! Professional wrestling is more convincing than THE GREAT RACE or THE APPRENTICE. Of all the reality shows, AMERICAN IDOL is the reality-est. That is to say, the most staged. How much weight do you think your fifty-cent vote carries, eh?  I like to think that last year's contestant, Sanjaya, the kid with the bad hair and inconsistent performance, was the public's unconscious attempt to see how far Simon would listen to the public before he simply pulled the plug. 

So you guys watch, I'll blog. When I run out of blog material, I'll make a sandwich and maybe play a little solitaire, or download TORCHWOOD from the BBC and watch that. It's only five months... I can hack that.

"Wave" Bye Bye

You know how something can be so inoffensive, so bland, so nondescript that it winds up offending, grating at you and standing out like a sore thumb? The guy in the cubicle next to me has a radio just barely at audible level which plays "The Wave" all day.

I'm not sure you know what "The Wave" is. It's a "smooth jazz" format station. In Las Vegas, where I just was, they call it "The Oasis." I suppose in Alaska they call it "The Hot Spring." They playlist tends heavily toward R&B with something that you might define as jazz every couple of hours. For example, that remake of TAKE FIVE that someone cleverly arranged in 4/4.

Remember PICK UP THE PIECES by the Average White Band? That's odd. The Wave does! Not only do they play it on a daily basis, they also play a plethora of inexplicable covers by series of faceless saxophone artists. I'd have never imagined that there was a PUTP subculture out there. This daily basis thing is important - they play EVERYTHING on a daily basis. I know I'll hear two Anita Baker songs in the course of a work day, and about nine versions of Pick Up the Pieces, and a little Steely Dan, and some Hiroshima, and yes, Kenny G. It's like a country music station playlist, only more limited. It's not like there isn't enough material to fill out the genre - oh how I wish that were the case! - it's that the programmers have decided that familiarity breeds comfort. They've smoothed jazz to the point that you can skate across it.

They don't play any Miles Davis or Chet Baker or Ornette Coleman, perhaps out of fear of attracting the late greats' attention and causing unnecessary grave-spinning. My feeling is, for god's sake, let the spinning begin! I'm weary of David Sanborn. I'm no longer enamored of Enya. Maybe my problem with the station is that when I listen, I perpetually feel like I'm about to get a massage that never comes.

When I get home tonight, I'm going to pack the iPod with speed metal.

Photo Proof of Liberal News Bias!

{irony}Warner Todd Huston is right! Look at this news photo of Barack Obama!  I think there is a very clear message being sent by those rays of light shining down upon him from a higher source. Photo courtesy of The Washington Times. {/irony}

The Washington Times, of course, is the ultra-right-wing tabloid run by Sun Myung Moon.  Today's edition seems especially kind to liberals. Sample headlines: SEX ED FOUND TO PROLONG TEEN VIRGINITY; LIBERAL AND PRO-US? WHO KNEW? (a review of "Charlie Wilson's War", a movie starring Tom Hanks; PROGRAM LENDS HAND TO POOR INDIAN TRIBES. There is a CLINTON NEIGHBOR ARRESTED IN NY KILLING, but that's off the wires. 

What's up with the paper today? Spirit of Christmas got a hold of 'em? Or is the regular editor off for the week? If so, do I buy a condolence card for the guest editor now or wait until he meets with a freak accident around New Years?

Thanks For Asking

And since you ask, I've simply been too busy hanging around with people to write. I've found this is a much more effective way of tamping down the Seasonal Affective Disorder than simply brooding, which is my usual strategy. Go figs!

Went to my office Christmas party last night, which was held at a swanky bowling alley in Hollywood. I was gunning to win a flatscreen HDTV in the raffle. Didn't quite make it, though I did win a wind-up generator portable TV with a lantern on it. And a memory foam pillow. And a DVD player. And a wind-up flashlight and radio. And LED stick-on laps for under-lit places. And a SEX IN THE CITY trivia game, which I gave to the waiter as a tip. 

The reason for all the prizes was everyone was given 5 tickets at the beginning of the evening, then more tickets were awarded to our bowling teams using an arcane selection of rules - how many strikes, how many combinations (3 / 7 split? You win!) and so on. I didn't understand it, but I got another 50 tickets. 

Another guy won two telescopes. Give him a little duct tape, and he's got the best damn binoculars ever.

What I found tremendously disappointing about the evening was this: Nobody, I mean nobody got embarrassingly drunk. The golden age of the office party is clearly past. I remember just a little over ten years ago going to one where a marriage broke up, somebody fell off a bar stool, and a women I barely knew came at me out of nowhere and french-kissed me.  I miss being around that kind of madness. A couple of years ago I was a the Christmas party of a mortgage company and it came pretty close; but since we had all just been laid off it was mighty bitter drinking. Embarrassing but no fun.

You are going to ask me about my plans for Christmas. I know you are. Well, I'm going to Vegas on Friday and I'm staying in town until Christmas day. There are few places more Christmas-immune than Vegas, baby. The Noel is pretty weak sauce in that town. You'd barely know there WAS a holiday except it's half deserted and the dancers in the Rio sky parade are wearing Santa hats.  If I don't write before then, just re-read this post until I get back.