PSUdain

GOP considers staunching bleeding by applying tourniquet to neck

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 04:10:00 +0000

GOP: Hey! We're getting really unpopular these days! What's the problem?

RNC: NOT CONSERVATIVE ENOUGH NOT CONSERVATIVE ENOUGH BLAAARGH!

GOP: Really?

RNC: YES, YOU MUST IMPLEMENT MY THING!

GOP: Oh, ok.

[a number of years later]

GOP: (falls over dead)

Okay, maybe not that extreme, but read this from the New York Times:

The battle among Republicans over what the party should stand for - and how much it should accommodate dissenting views on important issues - is probably going to move from the states to the Republican National Committee when it holds its winter meeting this January in Honolulu.

Republican leaders are circulating a resolution listing 10 positions Republican candidates should support to demonstrate that they "espouse conservative principles and public policies" that are in opposition to "Obama's socialist agenda." According to the resolution, any Republican candidate who broke with the party on three or more of these issues- in votes cast, public statements made or answering a questionnaire - would be penalized by being denied party funds or the party endorsement.

The proposed resolution was signed by 10 Republican national committee members and was distributed on Monday morning. They are asking for the resolution to be debated when Republicans gather for their winter meeting.

Here is the resolution’s list:

(1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama’s “stimulus” bill;

(2) We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run health care;

(3) We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;

(4) We support workers’ right to secret ballot by opposing card check;

(5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;

(6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;

(7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;

(8) We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;

(9) We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and

(10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership.

Now, even putting aside the metric fuck-ton of loaded language going on there, you've still got a resolution that appeals to the absolute most extreme fringe of the electorate. Now, I'll grant you, that's pretty much how parties have tended to operate, but they've never taken the, "This is our treehouse, no-one else allowed." approach.

I mean, seriously guys, think blue dog democrats. They exist, and the DNC is not trying to force them into the other party. That would be flat stupid in many ways. Some individuals might rather they be gone, but overall, it's easier for your party to have political success when your candidates can be, well, individuals instead of clones of each other and thereby appeal to the people where they're running. THEN you beat them into submission once they're in office. This is basic stuff here, guys.

The big tent is now the little treehouse. (Picture the following in a child-like scrawl.) ALSO: NO GURLS ALOWED!

Via: Pam's House Blend:: GOP's 'Purity Resolution' for its candidates

: (

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 19:40:00 +0000

The Associated Press: New Lutheran body to form after gay pastor vote:

NEW BRIGHTON, Minn. — The split over gay clergy within the country's largest Lutheran denomination has prompted a conservative faction to begin forming a new Lutheran church body separate from the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.

Leaders of Lutheran CORE said Wednesday that a working group would immediately begin drafting a constitution and taking other steps to form the denomination, with hopes to have it off the ground by next August.

"There are many people within the ELCA who are very unhappy with what has happened," said the Rev. Paull Spring, chairman of Lutheran CORE and a retired ELCA bishop from State College, Pa.

I am a gay man; I was born and baptized in this church; I was confirmed in this church; I have served this church in youth ministries and in the chancel as a layperson in this church; I someday hope to attend seminary and be ordained in this church; and I am saddened and hurt by this decision. I also have question:

Why?

I am trying to see this through your eyes; please try to see it through mine. When this vote was taken, when my LGBT siblings and I were affirmed by my church as full members in our shared mission, did this somehow reduce your place in our mission? I want to work with you, and I want to make sure you don't have to compromise your beliefs.

But at the same time, I couldn't allow our church to continue telling the next generation of little gay boys and girls that they aren't whole and that they can't be part of Christ's body. This has lead to too many suicides, too many broken families, too much pain for altogether too long; it could not continue.

Are we, your LGBT brothers and sisters that much of a deal breaker that you must leave? There are so many other things that we as a church have changed our minds on over the years, and we have worked through the disagreement together. Women's ordination is a fine example. We rightly welcome all manner of people in our church. Why is it that when we get down to God's LGBT children that people get so up-in-arms?

I want to be in communion with you; you are my brothers and sisters in Christ. This hurts me to see you leave. I think I can speak for most of us in saying that WE want to be in communion with you, and it hurts us to see you leave. When this action was taken, we swore to bear your burdens and you ours. Please continue in this journey with us. Please reconsider this action.

Pope Palpatine, We have a few issues…

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:06:00 +0000

From Slap Upside The Head:

Speaking to a reporter who clarified that gay tourists are traveling for personal visits and admiration, not political demonstrations, Bishop Kaleta had this to say:

I consider if someone is homosexual, it is a provocation and an abuse of this place. Try to go to a mosque if you are not Muslim. It is abuse of our buildings and our religion because the church interprets our religion that is not ethical. [...] If you have different ideas, go to a different location."

//Now, My thoughts.

Aww! I love you, too! But we have some issues here.

You see, I find you to be a provocation and abuse of decency and loving human behavior. Between your statement that condoms help spread AIDS (which will probably help to kill even more people) and your church's financial support of anti-gay political measures in MY country, I think it's become clear that if you are Christ's Vicar, then Christ must be a complete ASSHOLE.

Fortunately, I really don't think that's the case.

Via: Slap Upside The Head: Gay Tourists Not Welcome At Vatican: Bishop

VOLUNTEERING IS EVIL!

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 21:49:00 +0000

So says Glenn Beck. At least, that's what it sounds like. I'm never absolutely sure what he's trying to communicate, except for a general mania.

First this new pièce de résistance of the Beck collection so far:

What. The. Hell.

Ok, I get that he's trying to communicate that the Evil Librul Media™ is collaborating with Chairman MaObama™ (came up with that all by myself--I should see if I can sell it to the crazies) to get us to give over to the power of...HELPING OTHER PEOPLE!! (THUNDERCLAP!)

Sorry, but I'm not buying that aspect of it, and the rest of it just sounds like he's being down on volunteering. I mean, this is just getting rediculous. They've nuked the fridge, jumped the shark, and, just for good measure, jumped the fridge and nuked the shark at this point.

Is there anything that the President could support that these folks wouldn't jump up and down screaming about? I mean he could speak in support taking care of sick kids and---(sigh)---never mind...

It's been... a while.

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 05:26:00 +0000

You see, I've been meeting my bloggery needs mostly through twitter these days, but I wanted to say a few things at greater length.

First, I am so jealous of everyone who was able to participate in the march today. I wish I'd been able to be there.

Also, there has been a lot said in the past week about President Obama and his action--well, actually his lack thereof--on LGBT rights. Andrew Sullivan broke out his potty mouth, and Joe Solmonese got out his apologist britches (or are they slacks?).

Frankly, re: Obama; he's done jack diddly. I'm sorry, but giving a few speeches to LGBT audiences doesn't really cut it. Sure the Hate Crimes bill will be up for his signature (maybe, hopefully) soon. Sure there's stuff going on. But it seems to have mostly moved without him.

I'll grant that it's possible that these things wouldn't be moving without his presence in the White House, and I'm no insider, so I don't know what goes on in the smoke-filled back rooms. But really, by all appearances, he's coasting on this.

And here are a few more opinions, courtesy of CNN/YouTube.

Money quote from Lt. Dan Choi: "When I hear the word 'incrementalism', I think I hear the words 'shut up'."

(One last note: I know it's a bit juvenile to comment upon this, but I have to say it. Hillary Rosen's voice drives me absolutely up a wall. All nasally and irritating. Ergh!)

Those representatives of the people don't represent the people!

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 01:25:00 +0000

Want to hear some crazy?

Listen in:

So, now that they lack the "activist judges" argument for Vermont, what tack to they take? "THOSE REPRESENTATIVES ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE AREN'T REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE."

They just sound crazier and crazier.

And just as a side note, the people in Vermont, according to polls, DO support same-sex marriage. So, sorry. You're just flat wrong about what the people of Vermont "really want". Not every state is a small-minded, but much larger, version of the offices of the "Liberty" [HA] Council.

And then there's the typical lines of crap about "activist judges" "changing the definition of marriage" in Iowa. These people are just impossible to take.

What the hell matters so much about denying me my rights that they spend this much time on it? Why are they so obsessed with it? Why can't they spend their lives actually doing good and helping people in a real and tangible way, instead of in their theoretical/political way?

Audio source: Audio: As our rights become 'marrier', our opposition becomes scarier - Good As You

More Good News from Iowa

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 19:46:00 +0000

The Iowa State Senate president stands up for same-sex marriage. A beautiful statement.

“‘You guys don’t understand. You’ve already lost.’ … No, Senator McKinley, I will not co-sponsor a leadership bill with you.”

(The first part is quoting his daughter, but...well, he still said that on the floor.)

Iowa Senate President Blocks Same-Sex Marriage Ban | Box Turtle Bulletin

Dear Vermont Legislature,

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 17:57:00 +0000

Just wanted to say

THANK YOU

Love,

Me

Same-Sex Marriage Legalized in Vermont | News | Advocate.com

Dear Governor Douglas,

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 05:32:00 +0000

Why don't you go give up your marriage and enter into one of those "perfectly sufficent" civil unions with your wife?

JACKASS

Sincerely,

Me

V-T- gets its irrational E O - Good As You:: Gay and Lesbian Activism With a Sense of Humor

The religious right and torture memos--What's in it for them?

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 18:22:00 +0000

I was reading an interesting article today on The Daily Beast about some recent political wrangling over Bush era torture memos. Republicans are threatening to filibuster two of Obama's legal apointments (Remember when Republicans were arguing that it was impermissible to filibuster apointments, back when their guy was in office and it was those meanies, the Democrats, who were doing the filibustering? Oh how the times do change!) if Obama releases some of the potentially incriminating memos.

Full article is here: Are Republicans Blackmailing Obama? - The Daily Beast

But besides all that other stuff (which is, sadly, just typical Washington) I saw this little nugget:

[One of the nominees up for confirmation,] Johnsen has met recently with moderate Republican Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, both of whom are being lobbied heavily by colleagues and religious right groups to oppose her nomination. [Emphasis mine]

What stake, exactly, do religious groups have in opposing releasing torture memos? This sounds like a purely political move on the part of any religious group participating in this.

Has it finally happened? The Religious Right has not subsumed, but been subsumed by the political machine it sought to control?

Or is this a mutual back-scratching arrangement: "You pester Arlen to protect our political ass, and we will go out and get the 'homos' and 'baby-killers' for you. (Or at least pretend to.)"

UPDATE: Or, perhaps, the third option: the politico right wants these nominations to go down and they've fed the religious right some lines about her being an "abortionist" or a "homosexual activist" or somesuch in order to prompt them to oppose her.

In which case the relationship would be more Pavlov and Dog than subsumption or mutuality.

IOWA: What the Tweeple on the street say

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 22:28:00 +0000

First off: HORAY FOR IOWA!

And second, here are my collected reactions from the folks I follow on Twitter:

But the award for best reaction goes to one of my favorite guests on Wait Wait...Don't Tell Me, a comedienne appearing tonight in Des Moines, Paula Poundstone:

Dalek found in pond

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:06:00 +0000

They are coming: Dr Who Dalek found in pond - Telegraph.

"Sales executive Marc Oakland was pushing a rake around the bed of the shallow pool when he found the object with its distinctive eye stalk.

The 42-year-old said: 'I'd just shifted a tree branch with my foot when I noticed something dark and round slowly coming up to the surface.

'I got the shock of my life when a Dalek head bobbed up right in front of me."

If that had happened to me, I think I would have lost control of my bowels. I would have, pardon my french, SHIT myself. Messed my britches. Went whoop in my shorts. [Feel free to mentally add any folksy euphemisms of your own here.]

I can think of few things that would frighten me more than what appeared to be a Dalek rising out of the water in front of me in real life. I am not joking. They are terrifying enough on the TV.

(Shudder.)

UPDATE:
Additional Coverage:

• The Dalek of the deep: Doctor Who's nemesis is found in pond [Daily Mail]

• Extract me, mate! [The Sun]

• Dalek pulled from murky pond [Metro]

• Dalek Found Submerged in Pond [The Doctor Who News Page]

And, from The Sun another photograph:

EHH! Even as pond junk, it gives me the flying heebie-jeebies.

The Obligatory Rush Limbaugh Post

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 19:37:00 +0000

The Daily Beast has a series of videos up covering the more outrageous moments of the career of a certain professional loudmouth who's been much in the news as of late: The Nine Lives of Rush Limbaugh

One video in particular stuck out at me:

His callous disregard for people living with and dying from AIDS is startling. Now, I can understand being ruffled by hecklers (that was kind of the point of ACT UP), but to frame your defense of your position's correctness in terms of, "Most people agree with me, [neener neener neener] so I'm right"? Beyond requiring a startling lack of thought, that takes chutzpah. And clearly this putz has plenty of that.

What a schmuck.

The Religious Right: Wrong on how to help gay kids

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 04:20:00 +0000

4/20: The 'Truth' is that their booking will rightfully raise some eyebrows [Good As You]

Orlando, FL- Two Christian organizations are teaming up to empower youth to express their views on sexuality by co-sponsoring this year's annual Day of Truth event held April 20 on high school campuses nationwide. Exodus International, a ministry that helps those affected by same-sex attraction to live a life that reflects their biblical beliefs and Alliance Defense Fund, a legal support organization, are co-sponsoring the event this year and are hoping for a record turnout that will continue ongoing dialogue on issues surrounding faith and sexuality.

Originally designed to give students an opportunity to openly voice their views regarding theGLSEN-driven Day of Silence event, the Alliance Defense Fund first launched the Day of Truth four years ago. The event has grown from a handful of students to over 13,000 participants in all 50 states. As the movement has grown, the vision has expanded beyond providing legal assistance to ensure student rights to providing practical resources to students wanting to help peers dealing with same-sex attraction. The relational aspect of this event has become the dominant focus and as such, Exodus International will assume leadership in the future...

[ Full Story: Exodus International & Alliance Defense Fund Team Up For Day of Truth Event ]

This stuff really bothers me. Now, obviously you can't take away kids' right to free speech. But it's really troubling to me that the materials they had out support such disproved (and proven to be harmful) programs as those associated with Exodus International. This is not what kids in high school struggling with their identity need. One line really irritates me above all the others:

As the movement has grown, the vision has expanded beyond providing legal assistance to ensure student rights to providing practical resources to students wanting to help peers dealing with same-sex attraction.

Geez! I can tell you how to do that. Are you ready? It's very simple:

ACCEPT THEM FOR WHO THEY ARE.

Like I said, simple, no? And yet these people who claim to be fighting for what's best for kids continually ignore study after study that shows acceptance, by themselves and others, of an LGB or T identity is healthy for kids who are LGB or T. It has been show to reduce suicides, and, according to my experience, allows a person to live a much fuller and more normal live in relation to other people.

But why listen to that? Let's, instead, plow ahead with our agenda-driven pursuits, to hell with the kids who get hurt.

HEADLINE: Mat Staver Supports Westboro Baptist Church, Apparently

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 00:18:00 +0000

Audio: You connected these dots, Mat, not us! [Good As You]:

Wherein Mat Staver of the "Liberty Counsel" supports the wonderfully "pro-family" actions of Westboro Baptist Church. I wonder if his listeners know just who he was verbally supporting. I wonder if he does. Or is he just spouting off without thinking, as per the usual.

Really, I see little difference besides the amount that each is willing to say...and the viciousness with which they say it.

New Twitter Avatar?

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 07:53:00 +0000

So, currently, I'm using a photo of Taft as my profile picture on Twitter. I think it's quite amusing, personally. Not quite sure why. I have some others lying around, however, which I was considering giving a whirl in that most coveted spot.

First up Chester A. Arthur, mostly because he has the best mutton chops of any major U.S. politician* in history:

Next up we have Tom Baker, in his role as the Fourth Doctor. This is on the list more or less because he is making an exceedingly silly face:

Also in the running is Charles Babbage. Who, I admit, does not look funny. But, I ask you, what other man has baked himself in an oven? (Not to mention creating massive steam-driven mechanical computers, and designing the first Turing Complete computer. He was also very eccentric.)

So, why have I written this? Mostly so I could post a bunch of pictures which amuse me. And also so I could mention Charles Babbage again.

* Clearly this man has the best mutton chops ever:

Apparently he didn't embarrass them quite enough

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 06:04:00 +0000

Box Turtle Bulletin: More Proof: Buttars Sanctioned for Being An Embarrasment, Not for Being A Bigot

See also these posts:

• One Cheer For Senator Buttars?

• Sen. Buttars Responds (It's about what you'd expect.)

I think I see a "God Hates the UK" website in the works...

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 03:36:00 +0000

Fred Phelps, Daughter Barred From Entering U.K. [Advocate.com]

According to London's Daily Telegraph, Phelps and his daughter have been barred from entering the country because their church has called for violence against gays.

[...]

"Both these individuals have engaged in unacceptable behavior by inciting hatred against a number of communities,” a U.K. Border Agency spokesperson told the Telegraph. “The Government has made it clear it opposes extremism in all its forms.

This is clearly just another Intolerable Act by the britons against us. They could have taken them off our hands for at least a couple days.

I vote we pull a slight historical reverse and protest by throwing the Phelpses into Boston Harbor.

Everyone wins, including the Phelps clan, who could probably do with the free bath. (And they get something new to complain about.)

UPDATE: Maybe no "God Hates the UK" site after all. Wesboro Baptist apparently just has a catch-all site for this stuff now: God Hates the World, but I'm sure as hell not linking it. I guess all the individual ones for each separate country that God apparently hates just got to be too much.

However, you can watch what I'm sure is a charming video about how "God Hates the UK". Thanks, Westboro, for not disappointing!

Sen. Buttars Responds (It's about what you'd expect.)

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 18:56:00 +0000

Quote via Latter-day Chino: Chris Buttars YouTube Dump. He's got a load of videos of the guy saying offensive things. He also commented on my last post, so you should totally check his blog out.

"I was disappointed to learn of the Utah State Senates censure on February 20, 2009. However, this action will not discourage me from defending marriage from an increasingly vocal and radical segment of the homosexual community.

In recent years, registering opposition to the homosexual agenda has become almost impossible. Political correctness has replaced open and energetic debate. Those who dare to disagree with the homosexual agenda are labeled "haters" and "bigots," and are censured by their peers.

The media contributes to the problem. Increasingly, individuals with conservative beliefs are targeted by a left leaning media that uses their position of public trust as a bully pulpit. This pattern of intimidation suppresses free speech.

For the record, I do not agree with the censure. I see it as an attempt to shy away from controversy. In particular, I disagree with my removal as Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, since my work there is entirely unrelated to my opposition to the homosexual agenda.

Still, I'm a grown man and I can take my knocks. When it comes right down to it, I would rather be censured for doing what I think is right, than be honored by my colleagues for bowing to the pressure of a special interest group that has been allowed to act with impunity.

Thanks to the many citizens who have written and called to express their support. Please know that I'll live through this to fight another day. In years to come, we'll all look back at this point in history and see it as a crossroads. I have no intention of resigning."

One Cheer For Senator Buttars?

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 07:11:00 +0000

By now you may have heard a bit about what is going on in Utah. Or not. First we have the utter failure of every one of the Common Ground bills. These were launched after Prop 8, to try to get the Mormon church to make good on its statements that it did supported at least some kind of minimal benefits for LGBT couples. I think we can all see how far that support went:

No Common Ground In Utah [BTB]

Utah House Business and Labor Committee Endorses Anti-Gay Discrimination in Employment and Housing [BTB]

Utah Legislators Show Blatant Contempt for LGBT People [BTB]

And then we had the astoundingly bilious comments made by the titular (in this post) Utah state senator Chris Buttars (Box Turtle Bulletin has a full transcript and audio.)

Well, now we have some more news about Buttars:

Utah Senate May Sanction Buttars [BTB]

Now, there's not much info now, according to Jim Burroway:

It’s unknown right now what the GOP leadership will announce tomorrow. They may strip Buttars of his committee chairmanships, or they may extract some sort of apology. Resignation, at the moment, appears unlikely. But whatever the move, it seems to be an attempt to head off threats by minority Senate Democrats to bring the embarrassing episode to the Senate floor.

But there is this interesting tidbit that has come out of the whole thing:

A Republican senator told the Deseret News that GOP leadership is already asking that work get under way on a new version of the Common Ground bills intended to secure rights for gay and other nontraditional couples. The package of bills carried by Democrats has failed this session, but the senator said leadership is interested in seeing if “a common point of reference” can be found on issues including the ability to file a wrongful death suit and secure health insurance benefits.

Perhaps this lends itself to a new strategy. I don't know if it would be repeatable or not, but maybe a good way to get at least some basic protections in places where the odds are stacked against us is to get ragingly homophobic politicians to speak out and give their tirades, thereby shaming their more humane colleagues into taking at least minimal action.

So, while I'm not going to give you three cheers (or any, like as not), I would thank you, Sen. Buttars, for being a big enough public asshat to inspire shame in your party members. (And, of course, for once more showing people what the anti-gay movement tends to look like when the mask slips a bit.)

The Swedish Chef

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 19:53:00 +0000

So, one of the people I follow on Twitter posted a link to a YouTube video of the Swedish Chef. This resulted in a protracted bout of Chef video watching. I found a few classics. But I was also surprised about how violent some of the videos were...I mean, not horrendously or graphically violent, but there's this sort of dramatic cartoon violence. It doesn't help that most of the food appears to be sentient, I suppose.

For example, I am very glad that my bread dough never moans and growls at me. That would be deeply creepy:

And then there's this murderous spaghetti:

And next time you make cake, don't forget your cake smoosher, in case it speaks...Japanese?

And then there's this, which speaks for itself:

And there are quite a few instances of him chasing something with a meat cleaver:

Also, he can butcher music (hehe):

Really, though, the Swedish Chef is one of my favorite Muppets, hands down. And this was pretty much just an excuse to post some videos. And to make a blog post for @pishkinn, who complains (just about whenever I see her) about how little I blog.

I've actually been gathering them into a playlist on YouTube, too. You can find that here.

This is becoming too much, The Onion

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 05:10:00 +0000

Another one. Yet another one.

Ok. We get the point. Isn't this becoming needlessly violent and graphic? Do you have a point? Would you care to tell us what it is? Or is it just a base impulse. I'm certainly not a fan, either, but this is getting to be over the top.

Single-Engine Cessna Crashes Into Bush (6 January 2009)

Complete coverage here.

The Onion Just Keeps Going With It

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 01:43:00 +0000

I did my semi-weekly check of The Onion, and once more it's chock full of Bush abuse news briefs. This time they put out two since I last read it. What are they trying to say? What is their larger satirical point?

Bush's Eyelid Accidentally Nailed To Wall (8 December 2008)

Bush Dragged Behind Presidential Motorcade For 26 Blocks (4 December 2008)

I [heart] This American Life

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 19:52:00 +0000

As you may or may not know, I am an avid fan of Chicago Public Radio's This American Life. This show has such a talent base which it draws from, running from David Sedaris, to Sarah Vowell, to John Hodgman, and on to other extremely talented individuals.

And the work they do is simply superb. They capture facets of life that are either so visible that we tend to ignore them as a simple and familiar part of the landscape or which are so subtle that we tend to just not notice them. One of my favorite episodes is What I Learned from Television. But just two weeks ago they featured a rebroadcast of a very early program from 1998 about music lessons, which very nearly supplanted the TV episode:

This American Life #104: Music Lessons

Not only did we get both David Sedaris and Sarah Vowell recounting humorous anecdotes and "lessons" learned in music lessons, but we got a truly poignant story from Anne Lamott. Her story in Act Three falls at the intersection of faith and music, and the little miracles that happen at that strange and wonderful crossroads. Both times that I've listened to it now, I have wept. It is a wonderful story. As much as I enjoy Sedaris and Vowell, if you've a chance only to listen to one of the three acts, make it the last, "Act Three. Knockin' on Heaven's Door."

(Also, if you enjoy this bit of This American Life, try out the episode from last week, their annual Poultry Slam. Another great episode.)

The Onion Continues Bush Abuse

noreply@blogger.com (PSUdain) — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 06:13:00 +0000

They've got one more story up in a nearly identical format. Similar topic, similar ending similar length. What gives? I blogged about this a while ago, as you may remember. Anyhow, without further ado, here's the link to the new story:

Bush Passes Three-Pound Kidney Stone (28 November 2008)