Seriously, enough is enough. Lately one can hardly tune in to any media source without being bombarded with stories about Nadya "Octomom" Suleman. She has become Paris Hilton for the less fashionable. It isn't even so much the fact that the media are talking about her that is so maddening, but the way in which they are talking about her. What does it say about the state of this country when I can turn on the evening news on any given day and hear reports along the lines of, "Now, let's all raise our eyebrows and point, maybe even chuckle a little bit, at the freak show with the big Angelina lips and eight freakin' babies. What a whack job this one is, huh?"
The sad thing is that there ARE some very compelling stories there. This case of a single woman who already has six children, living on student loans and disability, having fertility treatments and giving birth to octuplets can trigger some interesting debates about the ethicality of subjecting one's children to the financial and emotional burdens of such a situation. It can raise some questions as to whether or not a doctor should have the right to deny a patient treatments which he feels would be detrimental. It can cause examinations into the abstruse psyche of a woman who is obsessed by the idea of having children, whose "magical thinking" leads her to believe that she will be able to control a seemingly uncontrollable situation. If we look even more deeply into the case of the Octomom, we may even enter into a discussion about why many women and couples feel the need to go to such drastic lengths as fertility treatments to have children, rather than, say, adopting.
To see something like THAT on the news would interest me. But do the media focus on these issues? Alas, and not surprisingly, no. No, the media feel the people would rather laugh at the crazy lady. And so I say, enough already.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
God in America
Just over four months after California voters made inequality the law of the land by passing Prop 8 (which is currently on appeal) to ban gay marriage, President Obama reportedly will do what former President Bush had refused to do and sign a U.N. declaration calling for the worldwide decriminalization of homosexuality. Obama, who is a Christian, wants to send a message to the world that America does, in fact, support human rights and the ideas of equality and tolerance. These are fundamental ideals upon which our founding fathers built this nation. They are essential American laws. At least, they should be. However, while our current President has allowed his Christian teachings to instill in him a sense of fairness and acceptance of his fellow man, many so-called proud Americans have twisted these values in order to make America a country of discrimination.
Those founding fathers clearly meant for the United States to be a non-religious nation. We have freedom of religion, separation of church and state. Thomas Jefferson once said, "Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law." He obviously thought of religion as a personal, individual choice. And yet, there are many today who would make distinctly religious values American law. A constitutional ban on gay marriage is one example of this.
It was not all that long ago that racial minorities in this country did not have the same marriage rights as white people. We look back on that now with feelings of disgust, yet we are still allowing that sort of injustice to occur. Homosexuality as something negative is purely a religious concept. There are scientific studies that suggest that homosexuality is genetic, and homosexual behavior occurs often in nature. Regardless of how one feels about gay marriage or homosexuality in general, it is unconstituional and unamerican to deny any citizen any right that another citizen enjoys. This is especially true if a citizen is being denied a right because one religion suggests it should be so. What justification is there to perpetuate prejudice and inequality in the name of God and American values?
Those founding fathers clearly meant for the United States to be a non-religious nation. We have freedom of religion, separation of church and state. Thomas Jefferson once said, "Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law." He obviously thought of religion as a personal, individual choice. And yet, there are many today who would make distinctly religious values American law. A constitutional ban on gay marriage is one example of this.
It was not all that long ago that racial minorities in this country did not have the same marriage rights as white people. We look back on that now with feelings of disgust, yet we are still allowing that sort of injustice to occur. Homosexuality as something negative is purely a religious concept. There are scientific studies that suggest that homosexuality is genetic, and homosexual behavior occurs often in nature. Regardless of how one feels about gay marriage or homosexuality in general, it is unconstituional and unamerican to deny any citizen any right that another citizen enjoys. This is especially true if a citizen is being denied a right because one religion suggests it should be so. What justification is there to perpetuate prejudice and inequality in the name of God and American values?
Friday, January 30, 2009
Sarah Palin's Wild Ride
Lately there seems to be renewed interest the rumors about Gov. Sarah Palin's fifth pregnancy and the birth of her son, Trig. These rumors started long ago in Alaska, before Palin even announced her pregnancy, and made it onto the national scene along with Palin during the RNC. For awhile they seemed to die down, but they are once again aggressively gaining attention. I myself did not have any inkling of the rumors until my sister told me, and even then I didn't think much of it until one day, bored and wishing to avoid the mound of housework that had piled up, I started researching Palin's last pregnancy on my own. When I began to really understand Palin's actions during and after her pregnancy, and her account of the labor and birth, it struck me as to how surreal it all seemed. Let's break it down:
In March 2008, Sarah Palin announced to her staff that she was seven months pregnant. No one, not a single person who had been working with her on a daily basis during this time, not even her immediate family, had had any suspicion that she was expecting. Palin attributed her invisible pregnancy to the fact that she was in good shape and "just didn't show." It's true that some women stay small throughout most of their pregnancies and don't "show" until the very end. However, there is a photo of Palin during her first pregnancy in which she was as big as a house. In most cases, a woman will show MORE and gain more weight with each successive pregnancy, and this is particularly true of women over the age of forty (Sarah was 44 at the time). Photos of her during this time show no conclusive evidence that she was or was not pregnant.
In Mid-April, Palin was set to give a speech at a convention in Dallas, Texas. According to Sarah Palin's own account, at 4 am on April 17 she began leaking amniotic fluid. That was "one of the signs" that led her to believe that the baby would be born soon. She was not due for another five weeks, and had found out during the pregnancy that the baby had Down's Syndrome. I am not clear on the exact figures, but a percentage of Down's babies are born with heart defects and need emergency treatment at birth. Palin called her doctor in Alaska, who gave her the go-ahead to continue her day as planned. Around noon Palin gave her speech, then skipped the rest of the convention activities to take a flight back home to Alaska. According to current airline records, the Palins (Sarah and her husband, Todd) would have taken two flights, approximately four hours each, with a one- or two-hour layover in Seattle. The flight attendants would later claim that "the stage of her pregnancy was not obvious." Upon landing in Anchorage, the Palins passed up that city's large hospital in favor of a regional hospital in Palmer, AK, about an hour's drive, to deliver the baby. The hospital was not equipped with NICU facilities. Sarah was induced, and Trig was born at 6:30 am on April 18.
Sounds straightforward enough, right? But let's take a closer look. Many people, men in particular, and also women of an older generation who were discouraged from learning about or even experiencing their own babies' births, may not have a great understanding of labor and childbirth. Birth is not a clean process. Nor is it at all predictable. Even if labor does not seem to be progressing, there is no way of knowing when things may suddenly pick up. When the membranes rupture and amniotic fluid is expelled (when a woman says her "water broke"), it is quite messy. Even a small leak towards the top of the amniotic sack (the "bag" in which the baby sits) will cause the amniotic fluid to trickle out consistently. Even with the use of sterile padding, caution has to be exercised to make sure the area is kept as dry and clean as possible to prevent infection. How could a woman who has already been leaking fluid for several hours get dressed and give a speech in front of a crowd of people? How can this same woman sit on a plane for hours, and show absolutely no signs to the flight attendants, who are trained to observe medical emergencies, that she was in labor? How can she bypass a big hospital in favor of a tiny hospital an hour away? How is it that this woman has not yet given birth, seeing as how each successive labor is typically (though not always) shorter than the last and this woman has boasted about her "easy labors" in the past? How can this woman's doctor think this kind of behavior is okay, without even checking her patient to see how the labor is progressing?
Palin returned to work three days after Trig was born, and brought the baby with her. Never mind the question of why the hospital would release a premature Down's baby who needed treatment for jaundice after only a couple days; how could a woman be back to work as usual three days after giving birth? The first few days, weeks even, postpartum are uncomfortable to say the least. The mother is sore. She is tired, she is bleeding heavily. She is adjusting physically and mentally to her new body. I have never met a brand new mother who could think of doing anything other than lie in bed and bond with her baby.
After learning all of this information, I can say with 100% certainty that this scenario DID NOT HAPPEN. Biologically, it is nearly impossible. Even on the remote chance that it is all true, it proves that Palin acted with unbelievable recklessness and irresponsibility and put the life of her unborn child at risk (not a very nice thing for a staunch pro-lifer to do).
So, why would she fake a pregnancy? That is a matter of debate. I have heard many theories, from the plausible (to hide the pregnancy of one of her unwed teen daughters, most likely Bristol, but Willow's name has also been thrown around), to the bizarre (she adopted a Down's baby and passed it off as her own and concocted the story of choosing to have the baby anyway to appeal to the pro-life Right), to the downright ridiculous (the baby is that of the Palins' son Track and Bristol's boyfriend's mother, and to keep it quiet they shipped Track off to military school and claimed the baby was their own). Who knows?
Another question would be, why is this important? It is important because Sarah Palin nearly became Vice President of the United States, with a chance at becoming President, and is likely gearing up for a run in 2012. It is important because she wants abstinence-only sex education to be taught in schools. We have already been told that Bristol has had a baby, and if Trig is actually Bristol's (or even Willow's) first child, it would be another glaring example of why preventing teens from learning about birth control is a bad thing. It is important because a large part of Palin's public persona is her "hockey mom," pro-family image. All Palin would have to do to clear up these rumors is to release SOME form of proof that she gave birth to Trig, yet she has not done it. Her way of "proving" that she was Trig's mother was to throw her poor daughter Bristol under the bus and announce to the world in a very public way that Bristol couldn't have been Trig's mother because she was already pregnant when he was born. Is that really all she's got?
In March 2008, Sarah Palin announced to her staff that she was seven months pregnant. No one, not a single person who had been working with her on a daily basis during this time, not even her immediate family, had had any suspicion that she was expecting. Palin attributed her invisible pregnancy to the fact that she was in good shape and "just didn't show." It's true that some women stay small throughout most of their pregnancies and don't "show" until the very end. However, there is a photo of Palin during her first pregnancy in which she was as big as a house. In most cases, a woman will show MORE and gain more weight with each successive pregnancy, and this is particularly true of women over the age of forty (Sarah was 44 at the time). Photos of her during this time show no conclusive evidence that she was or was not pregnant.
In Mid-April, Palin was set to give a speech at a convention in Dallas, Texas. According to Sarah Palin's own account, at 4 am on April 17 she began leaking amniotic fluid. That was "one of the signs" that led her to believe that the baby would be born soon. She was not due for another five weeks, and had found out during the pregnancy that the baby had Down's Syndrome. I am not clear on the exact figures, but a percentage of Down's babies are born with heart defects and need emergency treatment at birth. Palin called her doctor in Alaska, who gave her the go-ahead to continue her day as planned. Around noon Palin gave her speech, then skipped the rest of the convention activities to take a flight back home to Alaska. According to current airline records, the Palins (Sarah and her husband, Todd) would have taken two flights, approximately four hours each, with a one- or two-hour layover in Seattle. The flight attendants would later claim that "the stage of her pregnancy was not obvious." Upon landing in Anchorage, the Palins passed up that city's large hospital in favor of a regional hospital in Palmer, AK, about an hour's drive, to deliver the baby. The hospital was not equipped with NICU facilities. Sarah was induced, and Trig was born at 6:30 am on April 18.
Sounds straightforward enough, right? But let's take a closer look. Many people, men in particular, and also women of an older generation who were discouraged from learning about or even experiencing their own babies' births, may not have a great understanding of labor and childbirth. Birth is not a clean process. Nor is it at all predictable. Even if labor does not seem to be progressing, there is no way of knowing when things may suddenly pick up. When the membranes rupture and amniotic fluid is expelled (when a woman says her "water broke"), it is quite messy. Even a small leak towards the top of the amniotic sack (the "bag" in which the baby sits) will cause the amniotic fluid to trickle out consistently. Even with the use of sterile padding, caution has to be exercised to make sure the area is kept as dry and clean as possible to prevent infection. How could a woman who has already been leaking fluid for several hours get dressed and give a speech in front of a crowd of people? How can this same woman sit on a plane for hours, and show absolutely no signs to the flight attendants, who are trained to observe medical emergencies, that she was in labor? How can she bypass a big hospital in favor of a tiny hospital an hour away? How is it that this woman has not yet given birth, seeing as how each successive labor is typically (though not always) shorter than the last and this woman has boasted about her "easy labors" in the past? How can this woman's doctor think this kind of behavior is okay, without even checking her patient to see how the labor is progressing?
Palin returned to work three days after Trig was born, and brought the baby with her. Never mind the question of why the hospital would release a premature Down's baby who needed treatment for jaundice after only a couple days; how could a woman be back to work as usual three days after giving birth? The first few days, weeks even, postpartum are uncomfortable to say the least. The mother is sore. She is tired, she is bleeding heavily. She is adjusting physically and mentally to her new body. I have never met a brand new mother who could think of doing anything other than lie in bed and bond with her baby.
After learning all of this information, I can say with 100% certainty that this scenario DID NOT HAPPEN. Biologically, it is nearly impossible. Even on the remote chance that it is all true, it proves that Palin acted with unbelievable recklessness and irresponsibility and put the life of her unborn child at risk (not a very nice thing for a staunch pro-lifer to do).
So, why would she fake a pregnancy? That is a matter of debate. I have heard many theories, from the plausible (to hide the pregnancy of one of her unwed teen daughters, most likely Bristol, but Willow's name has also been thrown around), to the bizarre (she adopted a Down's baby and passed it off as her own and concocted the story of choosing to have the baby anyway to appeal to the pro-life Right), to the downright ridiculous (the baby is that of the Palins' son Track and Bristol's boyfriend's mother, and to keep it quiet they shipped Track off to military school and claimed the baby was their own). Who knows?
Another question would be, why is this important? It is important because Sarah Palin nearly became Vice President of the United States, with a chance at becoming President, and is likely gearing up for a run in 2012. It is important because she wants abstinence-only sex education to be taught in schools. We have already been told that Bristol has had a baby, and if Trig is actually Bristol's (or even Willow's) first child, it would be another glaring example of why preventing teens from learning about birth control is a bad thing. It is important because a large part of Palin's public persona is her "hockey mom," pro-family image. All Palin would have to do to clear up these rumors is to release SOME form of proof that she gave birth to Trig, yet she has not done it. Her way of "proving" that she was Trig's mother was to throw her poor daughter Bristol under the bus and announce to the world in a very public way that Bristol couldn't have been Trig's mother because she was already pregnant when he was born. Is that really all she's got?
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Just Who is Running the Show?
The crisis in the rural native town of Emmonak, AK is worsening day by day. With the brutal combination of unusually cold weather, increased fuel prices, and a collapse of the salmon fisheries upon which many natives rely heavily have left many Emmonak residents literally having to choose between starving and freezing to death. This story may never have seen the light of day if not for a letter written by a man named Nicholas Tucker that was circulated in local papers and around the blogosphere. Mr. Tucker has pleaded with the Alaskan government for aide, and the response he's received is that, while everyone is very upset about the situation, the governor has no immediate plans to visit the area and witness the damage. So, just where IS Gov. Palin?
Shopping around her memoirs.
You heard me. Sarah Palin is reportedly trying to strike a deal to publish her memoirs, and the asking price is somewhere between $7-$11 million. It would seem like the great governor who loves her state soooo much is more concerned with advancing her career and making money for herself than she is with doing her job. Honestly, it doesn't surprise me. Well, it does surprise me a LITTLE, but not a whole lot.
I have to admit that I'm a little obsessed with Sarah Palin. Everything about her is just so...weird. We've never seen anyone like her. She is either a complete moron, or the smartest person in American politics (either way, a frightening prospect!). While I disagree with many (okay, all) of her policies, here is the thing that really bugs me about her: she's a phony. With her, it's all about image. She says quite a lot, but behaves differently. She claims to be a pro-family, super-woman hockey mom, yet she totes her children around like props, takes them out of school to tag along with her on the campaign trail without bothering to bring tutors for them, and throws her daughter Bristol to the wolves to quiet rumors about herself. She is fanatically religious and preaches abstinence-only sex education, yet she was pregnant when she got married. She wants everyone to believe that she is qualified to lead the country, yet she honestly believes that Alaska's geographical proximity to two foreign countries and a plane refueling stop in Ireland count as foreign policy experience. She gives powerful speeches, but can't give an interview to save her life. She builds herself up as this approachable, regular-gal kind of outsider, but nothing about her is real. It's almost like a pageant queen used her charms to get elected to public office, and then had no idea what to do once she got there.
Oh, wait...
Shopping around her memoirs.
You heard me. Sarah Palin is reportedly trying to strike a deal to publish her memoirs, and the asking price is somewhere between $7-$11 million. It would seem like the great governor who loves her state soooo much is more concerned with advancing her career and making money for herself than she is with doing her job. Honestly, it doesn't surprise me. Well, it does surprise me a LITTLE, but not a whole lot.
I have to admit that I'm a little obsessed with Sarah Palin. Everything about her is just so...weird. We've never seen anyone like her. She is either a complete moron, or the smartest person in American politics (either way, a frightening prospect!). While I disagree with many (okay, all) of her policies, here is the thing that really bugs me about her: she's a phony. With her, it's all about image. She says quite a lot, but behaves differently. She claims to be a pro-family, super-woman hockey mom, yet she totes her children around like props, takes them out of school to tag along with her on the campaign trail without bothering to bring tutors for them, and throws her daughter Bristol to the wolves to quiet rumors about herself. She is fanatically religious and preaches abstinence-only sex education, yet she was pregnant when she got married. She wants everyone to believe that she is qualified to lead the country, yet she honestly believes that Alaska's geographical proximity to two foreign countries and a plane refueling stop in Ireland count as foreign policy experience. She gives powerful speeches, but can't give an interview to save her life. She builds herself up as this approachable, regular-gal kind of outsider, but nothing about her is real. It's almost like a pageant queen used her charms to get elected to public office, and then had no idea what to do once she got there.
Oh, wait...
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Obama Soft on War Crimes?
On his second full day in office, President Obama signed an executive order to close Guantanamo Bay and end torture once and for all. It was a promise he'd made time and time again during his campaign, and he made sure that the whole world knew that the United States would not torture under his administration. Though the president is certainly making good on his promise to close Gitmo and restore the U.S.'s image as a peaceful nation, there is still something missing. The president doesn't seem to have any plans to prosecute those who perpetrated torture. Over the past two weeks we have witnessed admissions from both Fmr. President Bush and Fmr. VP Cheney that they both knew about, authorized, and supported the use of torture as a means of interrogating prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. What has been Obama's reaction to these startling confessions? He says we should focus on the future rather than the past. I don't know, that just sounds a little, well...like something Bush would say. If torture is a war crime, why not investigate these crimes and bring all those who perpetrated them to justice? If a crime has been committed - and we KNOW a crime has been committed - then no one, not even a former president, should be allowed to get away with it.
This country is expecting a lot from you, Mr. President. Please don't let us down.
This country is expecting a lot from you, Mr. President. Please don't let us down.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Open Letter to Glenn Beck
Dear Mr Beck:
Congratulations on your new show which premiered on Fox News this week. Let's face it, your style did not exactly fit your former home of Headline News. I am sure it pleases your fans to be able to watch you alongside the likes of Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly, without even having to change the channel. On your inaugural show, you asked why the mainstream media never reported on things like the lack of huge fires in the viewers' neighborhoods, or how there weren't any horrific car accidents that day. You suggested that the reason is because the mainstream media focuses only on the fringes of society, not the normal majority into which you lumped yourself and all your viewers. Mr. Beck, the reason the media will never do a story about my neighborhood not burning down is because it is NOT NEWS. No one is interested in hearing about things that have NOT occurred. Who would watch the evening news if the anchor said, "Tonight's top story: there were no robberies in Springfield, IL last night," and follow with a five-minute story? Why would anyone report on an event that never happened?
Instead, the media chooses, rightly so, to report on actual NEWS. I am sorry that, with all the crises this country and the entire world is facing right now, you feel it is not important to talk about real things that actually happen. Every time I see your show, I am struck by how uninformed you seem to be as to that about which you are speaking. For example, you probably recall the time you suggested that the children's movie Happy Feet about a penguin who liked to dance was left-wing propaganda aimed at convincing kids to care about the environment. a) Huh? And b) why is it a bad thing to care about the environment? No matter how many times you say, "Oooh, global warming" in a scary ghost voice, the fact remains that the polar ice caps are melting and sea levels are rising. If this problem is not slowed down and ultimately corrected in a timely manner, within a matter of decades the polar ice caps will melt completely, causing sea levels to rise dramatically. Every coastline of every continent will be under water. That includes major cities in our own beloved country, like New York, Los Angeles, and even our nation's capitol. Global warming IS news, and that is why almost everyone besides you is talking about it.
Alas, instead of reporting actual news, you pass yourself off as the voice of the people, the lone voice that is not afraid to say what everyone is thinking. Yet, you manage to say things that NO ONE is thinking. Like the time you said to Rep. Keith Ellison, the first Muslim U.S. congressman, "I have been nervous about this interview with you because what I feel like saying is, 'Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies.’” Now, even though I think that is a terrible, terrible thing to say, I will come to your defense on this matter. I know that you are a Mormon, and that the Book of Mormon tells the story of how Jesus came to North America and that there were two tribes of people, one good and one evil, and God made the skin of the evil tribe dark so that everyone would know how evil they were. So you see, you cannot help being a racist jackass, Mr. Beck; your religion tells you to be so.
In summary, I am happy to see that you are now in the company of those who share your wacky, misguided views. You are finally where you belong. After all, no one else on Fox News really seems to know what they are talking about, either. Good luck to you.
Regards,
Allison
Congratulations on your new show which premiered on Fox News this week. Let's face it, your style did not exactly fit your former home of Headline News. I am sure it pleases your fans to be able to watch you alongside the likes of Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly, without even having to change the channel. On your inaugural show, you asked why the mainstream media never reported on things like the lack of huge fires in the viewers' neighborhoods, or how there weren't any horrific car accidents that day. You suggested that the reason is because the mainstream media focuses only on the fringes of society, not the normal majority into which you lumped yourself and all your viewers. Mr. Beck, the reason the media will never do a story about my neighborhood not burning down is because it is NOT NEWS. No one is interested in hearing about things that have NOT occurred. Who would watch the evening news if the anchor said, "Tonight's top story: there were no robberies in Springfield, IL last night," and follow with a five-minute story? Why would anyone report on an event that never happened?
Instead, the media chooses, rightly so, to report on actual NEWS. I am sorry that, with all the crises this country and the entire world is facing right now, you feel it is not important to talk about real things that actually happen. Every time I see your show, I am struck by how uninformed you seem to be as to that about which you are speaking. For example, you probably recall the time you suggested that the children's movie Happy Feet about a penguin who liked to dance was left-wing propaganda aimed at convincing kids to care about the environment. a) Huh? And b) why is it a bad thing to care about the environment? No matter how many times you say, "Oooh, global warming" in a scary ghost voice, the fact remains that the polar ice caps are melting and sea levels are rising. If this problem is not slowed down and ultimately corrected in a timely manner, within a matter of decades the polar ice caps will melt completely, causing sea levels to rise dramatically. Every coastline of every continent will be under water. That includes major cities in our own beloved country, like New York, Los Angeles, and even our nation's capitol. Global warming IS news, and that is why almost everyone besides you is talking about it.
Alas, instead of reporting actual news, you pass yourself off as the voice of the people, the lone voice that is not afraid to say what everyone is thinking. Yet, you manage to say things that NO ONE is thinking. Like the time you said to Rep. Keith Ellison, the first Muslim U.S. congressman, "I have been nervous about this interview with you because what I feel like saying is, 'Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies.’” Now, even though I think that is a terrible, terrible thing to say, I will come to your defense on this matter. I know that you are a Mormon, and that the Book of Mormon tells the story of how Jesus came to North America and that there were two tribes of people, one good and one evil, and God made the skin of the evil tribe dark so that everyone would know how evil they were. So you see, you cannot help being a racist jackass, Mr. Beck; your religion tells you to be so.
In summary, I am happy to see that you are now in the company of those who share your wacky, misguided views. You are finally where you belong. After all, no one else on Fox News really seems to know what they are talking about, either. Good luck to you.
Regards,
Allison
Blago the Clown
Today we were treated to another press conference from Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who has been accused of, among other things, trying to sell Barack Obama's vacant senate seat to the highest bidder. I can't get enough of B-Rod. This guy has got a serious pair. He was asked to resign as governor and told he could not appoint anyone to the senate, and what does he do? He goes and appoints Roland Burris, a man who, by all accounts, is an upstanding guy and perfectly qualified for the job (not to mention the only African American in the senate). This was a genius move. No one really wanted to have to deny Mr. Burris the position, so after an initial attempt to delay proceedings, Blago's opposition was left standing around going, "Wait a minute...but he can't...did he just...but...oh, come ON."
Blagojevich's press conferences have been entertaining, to say the least. Previously he'd quoted poetry and proclaimed his innocence over and over. Now, apparently, he's just a cowboy accused of stealing a horse. Not only that, but he's the victim of an elaborate plot to raise taxes. I personally think he is stupider like a fox (as Homer Simpson would say) and knows full well what he's doing. Today he called on the Chicago papers to do an expose on two laws which, he says, prevent him from having a fair trial, and I actually found myself agreeing with him...for a few minutes at least, until that I learned he'd recited the law incorrectly and he DID have the chance to name his own witnesses (something he claimed he'd been denied) but did not do so before the deadline. Oops! Whether or not he is found guilty and impeached (and possibly worse), I don't think this man is going away any time soon. And I don't want him to. The circus, the moxie, the haircut...everything about him is gold.
Blagojevich's press conferences have been entertaining, to say the least. Previously he'd quoted poetry and proclaimed his innocence over and over. Now, apparently, he's just a cowboy accused of stealing a horse. Not only that, but he's the victim of an elaborate plot to raise taxes. I personally think he is stupider like a fox (as Homer Simpson would say) and knows full well what he's doing. Today he called on the Chicago papers to do an expose on two laws which, he says, prevent him from having a fair trial, and I actually found myself agreeing with him...for a few minutes at least, until that I learned he'd recited the law incorrectly and he DID have the chance to name his own witnesses (something he claimed he'd been denied) but did not do so before the deadline. Oops! Whether or not he is found guilty and impeached (and possibly worse), I don't think this man is going away any time soon. And I don't want him to. The circus, the moxie, the haircut...everything about him is gold.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)