Dear Hollywood folks:

I like you.  I really, really like you.  Lots of you are really my kind of people: funny, engaging, passionate about making great movies, earnest about progressive change (if a bit shallow in your politics, but lots of us are guilty of that mistake sometimes).  I confess: I am more susceptible to show biz gossip than I like to let on, and am liable to click through on the latest celebrity news quickly when no one's looking.  I care, guys.

So it is only with the deepest sincerity and concern that I ask you today to shut the fuck up about Roman Polanski already.

Seriously!  I don't know what you think you're doing, but it's not helping.  It's not helping anyone.  It's not helping him, it's not helping the situation and it's really not helping you.

Look, I know there are complexities at play here.  I know that the victim has, for most of the last 30 years, wanted to put the case behind her, and since January has wanted the case dismissed.  I know that Polanski was on the verge of locking in a plea bargain when the judge fucked him like.... well, like a 44-year-old director fucks a 13-year-old girl, I guess.  No one, as far as I can tell, believes that he poses a threat to anyone at this point.  I get it.

But please let us return to first principles: this is a man who pleaded guilty to raping a thirteen-year-old girl.  That is not usually classified as a victimless crime, Hollywood folks!  While the judge's apparent decision to reneg on accepting a plea bargain was a rotten thing to do, it does not reduce or lessen his guilt and it arguably does not justify fleeing justice for 30 years.

So if you want to lobby for his freedom by urging that the judge dismiss the charges, or sentence him to time already served: that is a fine argument!  Go for it.

But in the meantime, kindly do not:

• tell us that he should be excused because "he's a brilliant guy, and he made a little mistake 32 years ago"
• refer to raping a thirteen-year-old girl as a "so-called" crime
• attempt to excuse it on the basis that "it wasn't rape rape"
• dismiss the gravity of the issue because Polanski "is not responsible for killing anyone"
  

And above all, whatever you do, DO NOT allow Woody Allen within a HUNDRED MILES of commenting on this case.  I mean, Jesus H. Christ on a camera dolly.

Or, as muckefuck put it so eloquently: I ❤ Luc Besson.

I love you, guys.  I really do.  Now stop fucking up.

Earlier today, agaran posted a very thoughtful question about the Wall Street bailout bill: if the underlying cause of this crisis can be traced to bad mortgages, then why isn't anyone taking this as an opportunity to straighten out the actual mortgages and provide homeowners with a path to getting back to solvency?

I took a bit of a devil's advocate position: that even though those things should happen, the goal of the current bill is to keep the credit market functioning long enough for the dust to settle, until we know how many banks are left standing and can start to put the pieces back together.  If we are indeed on the brink of catastrophe, it doesn't make sense to hold up the rescue plan with negotiations over long-term fixes, no matter how sensible those fixes may be.  Only after we've achieved short-term stability should we even think about the long term.

I was feeling pretty smart about that answer.  Then I got this from another friend on a mailing list I'm on:

OK, now I support the bailout bill. They are finally meeting my needs.  Check it out.

 From <http://marketplace.publicradio.org/pdf/senatebillAYO08C32_xml.pdf>

Page 300 of the Senate's version of the bailout bill:

SEC. 503. EXEMPTION FROM EXCISE TAX FOR CERTAIN WOODEN ARROWS DESIGNED FOR USE BY CHILDREN.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (2) of section 4161(b) is amended by redesignating subparagraph (B) as sub-paragraph (C) and by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following new subparagraph:

(B) EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN WOODEN ARROW SHAFTS.—Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to any shaft consisting of all natural wood with no laminations or artificial means of enhancing the spine of such shaft (whether sold separately or incorporated as part of a finished or unfinished product) of a type used in the manufacture of any arrow which after its assembly
"(i) measures 5⁄16 of an inch or less in diameter, and
"(ii) is not suitable for use with a bow described in paragraph (1)(A)."

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this section shall apply to shafts first sold after the date of enactment of this Act.

My official opinion on the subject of the bailout is now JESUS FUCK YOU GODDAMN FUCKING MORONS GET YOUR FUCKING ASSES BACK IN YOUR FUCKING CHAIRS AND IF YOU COME OUT OF THERE WITHOUT FIXING EVERY SINGLE FUCKING SUBPRIME MORTGAGE I WILL PERSONALLY COME OVER THERE AND SO HELP ME GOD I WILL SHOVE THE FANNIE MAE FY2008 BUDGET UP YOUR FUCKING ASS

.... is that it always seems to get promoted by people like this guy:

"Anyone who is married to Christie Brinkley and has to masturbate at all is probably a sex addict," said Doug Weiss, a licensed psychologist and the executive director of the Heart to Heart Counseling Center in Colorado. ... "The fact that a man would spend money on women who are probably less beautiful and less wonderful than his own wife is often an indication of a sex addiction," said Weiss, who has not treated Cook or Brinkley.

Really!  Having to masturbate at all makes you a sex addict?  And does that only apply to men who are married to supermodels, or is it forgivable to resort to the sin of onanism if you have the misfortune to be married to an actual human being?

Kudos to ABC News for managing to find the person who must be the most sexually neurotic and immature soi-disant "sex counsellor" in the country for a sound bite on why people masturbate.  Is Lou Wildmon no longer returning their calls or something?

Dear Mr. O'Reilly:

Having heard so much about your recent comments about Michelle Obama, I was very grateful to learn I was misinformed.  Knowing that you do not yet want to go on a lynching party against her is a deep relief to me and, I am sure, many if not most other white Americans.  It is pleasing and humbling to know that in this day and age, lynching is no longer the immediate response to Negro recalcitrance, but has become a last resort, to be employed only when all other options have failed!

Truly, it is a proud day for America!  No reasonable person could possibly disagree, and it is astonishing indeed that Michelle Obama does not share your pride at the diminished popularity of lynching.

Now that you have made yourself clear on this subject, I am hoping that you can also clarify some additional matters:

• In your opinion, does the yellow peril still warrant the issuance of Jap hunting licenses?
• Does it make sense at this time to stock up on crosses and gasoline, or should we wait until we are 100% sure that they are warranted?
• Would you support the construction of concentration camps for Jews who do not admit to being wholly proud of their country?  Failing that, how about at least some yellow stars?

I am sure that you have received some negative feedback from so-called liberal agitators.  Please do not be alarmed; I understand that no one plans to act in retaliation unless they have complete and total proof that you are as much of a dingbat bastard as you sound.

Yours in solidarity,
qwrrty

This has been an absolutely fabulous summer, in terms of political football:

• July 9: Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) admits having employed the services of the D.C. Madam.
  
• July 11: Florida State Rep. Bob Allen (R) arrested for soliciting sex in a men's room.
• August 7: Glenn Murphy, chairman of the Young Republicans, resigns after being charged with performing nonconsensual fellatio on an acquaintance.
• August 13: Karl Rove resigns "to spend more time with his family."
• August 27: Alberto Gonzales resigns, though without even pretending that he wants to spend more time with his family.
  
• August 27: Larry Craig's June arrest for "lewd behavior" in a restroom comes to light.

(Am I missing anything, dr_memory?)

The headline for today is "The GOP's Bathroom Problem."  It is a line so pitch-perfect that not one or two but three separate publications or blogs have independently run it.  It's like Christmas every day now, I swear to god.

The latest jaw-dropping piece to come out of the White House is Dick Cheney's assertion that the office of the Vice President is not part of the executive branch of the U.S. government, and therefore not subject to the usual oversight processes that apply to the rest of the White House.

Even more astonishing and alarming is that he may be right.

There's a document known as the Plum Book, formally titled "United States Government Policy and Supporting Positions," which is released every four years and apparently documents the structure of the Executive and Legislative branches, plus dozens of independent government agencies.  Appendix 5 of the 2004 Plum Book is titled "Office of the Vice President," and says:

The Vice Presidency is a unique office that is neither a part of the executive branch nor a part of the legislative branch, but is attached by the Constitution to the latter. The Vice Presidency performs functions in both the legislative branch (see article I, section 3 of the Constitution) and in the executive branch (see article II, and amendments XII and XXV, of the Constitution, and section 106 of title 3 of the United States Code).

Smoley hokes.  It makes sense from a separation-of-powers point of view (remember that the Vice President is also the President of the Senate), but still.

I am, of course, not an expert in Constitutional law and don't know how authoritative these sources are.  Some part of me is sure that this is not a real loophole, and that elsewhere in the vast shadowy behemoth of Federal regulatory law there is a stipulation that presidential orders which apply to the executive branch are also held to apply to the veep.

Nevertheless.  I really hope this gets played out to its logical extreme.  It will be very interesting to watch.

Thanks to dr_memory for bringing to my attention the original Time Blog article (linking to both the Cheney quote and the Plum Book).

The dust has begun to settle in Boston.  If you have been ignoring the news for the last twenty-four hours or so, we had a bomb scare yesterday: the sudden discovery of dozens of mysterious electronic devices installed at outdoor locations throughout downtown Boston caused the city to shut down several roadways and bridges for several hours and destroy the mysterious things, until someone figured out that they were part of a guerilla marketing campaign for Aqua Teen Hunger Force, arranged by Turner Broadcasting.

(I'm not providing links -- if you need more background, go to your favorite news site and search for "Boston bomb")

It is hard for me to see that anyone involved in this debacle was really making with the smrts.  The BPD certainly did not exactly have their finest hour.  The first device that they were alerted to?  That I can understand approaching with care, even if it doesn't appear to fit any known bomb profile.  But once it had been neutralized and disassembled?  It should not have taken a genius leap to figure out that they were following a pattern of defusing NON-BOMBS.  The fact that they have gone on to arrest the guys who were hired to build and install these things is just a shameful attempt at saving face.

On the other hand, it's not as though Turner Broadcasting and the marketing company they retained for this stunt are blameless.  I would love to have been in the planning meeting for this one:

"I have a pitch for our new ATHF campaign.  Let's build a bunch of circuit boards with flashy lights and install them anonymously around major metropolitan areas!"

"But won't everyone be able to tell that it's a cheesy marketing campaign?"

"Good point.  Let's just not include anything on the device that identifies us.  And make sure that we don't coordinate with the local authorities either!"

"Perfect!  What could go wrong?"

There's an old Bloom County comic strip, making fun of The People's Court, that has Judge Wapner saying, "Bailiff, would you please kick both these litigants in the butt?"  That's about how I'm feeling today.

As the Harriet Miers nomination marches on I am becomingly increasingly convinced of a grotesque irony: the Republican wing of the Senate is putting up the hue and cry against someone who is probably ( the very person they most want to have on the Supreme Court. )

Courtesy of tfarrell:

California elementary school tracks students with RFID badges

Earlier today I sent the following letter to the school principal, whose e-mail address can be found on the school's web site. An abridged version went to a couple of newspapers.

Mr. Graham -

I have recently read with great interest Brittan Elementary School's experiment with active badges to monitor students' location during the school day. I am writing to commend the school for its forward-looking stance on these sensitive matters, and to suggest some improvements.

We live, unfortunately, in a dangerous and difficult world — a world where our children may at any moment turn into vicious killers, or where trusted family friends may turn out to be dangerous molesters. It is regrettable that not everyone recognizes the urgency of ensuring our security in these distressing times.

With that in mind, I suggest that, while distasteful, it would be advisable for not only the school students but also faculty and staff to wear badges to monitor their position, so that parents can be sure of the continued physical safety of their children. In the unlikely but tragically possible event that a school employee were to take advantage of a child, school administrators and parents should have the opportunity to know right away and be able to intervene instantly. Monitoring faculty and staff locations would also keep administrators apprised of teachers who, for example, neglect their responsibilities to the school by skipping department meetings or taking extended cigarette or coffee breaks.

I believe that extending the system to school employees as well as students would do a great deal to ensure student safety. I cannot imagine that anyone who does not have something to hide could object to such a program, so I have great confidence that the school board would approve it promptly.

Thank you for your consideration —

Tim Pierce

This afternoon All Things Considered discussed the plans by the right wing to redouble their attack on abortion. A university political observer was quoted, "Religious conservatives have been, in their view, very patient with the Republican party... now that Republicans control both houses of Congress as well as the White House, conservatives are going to expect some action on their agenda." Bill Frist, that nice moderate guy who now happens to be majority leader, announced his intention to start the session with a head-on attack on partial birth abortion.

These days I'm pissed off all the time about this, and I can't even figure out who to be pissed off at. I'm pissed at Nader and the Green Party for playing Russian Roulette with our few shaky political gains, and I'm even more pissed off at the Democratic Party for demonstrating their exquisite ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Who do you turn to now? It's enough to make the anarchists look good.