Calling his bluff?

The Roundup collects several articles today that indicate perhaps the Governor's scary $20 billion figure is a bit of an overstatement: like $11 billion above Leg Analyst Liz Hill's estimates.

Hmmm. Weird, isn't it?

And does a scary number help motivate people to do better?

I don't know . . .

He's not gonna take it, No! He's not gonna take it

He's not gonna take it, anymore: Obama denounces Rev. Wright;ss latest comments. And it only took him at least one major primary loss to do so.

Calling Wright's most recent comments "a bunch of rants that aren't grounded in truth," a visibly angered Obama accused his former pastor of enjoying his recent three-day media blitz -- topped by Monday's appearance at the National Press Club -- at the expense of the campaign and the issues that confront voters . . . .

Today, remarking that "I did not vet my pastor before I decided to run for the presidency," Obama said Wright's latest comments "offend me, rightly offend all Americans, and they should be denounced. That's what I'm doing very clearly and unequivocably today."

But is it too little, too late? Better question: tell me right now what Wright said. Did you think Obama though the same? Really? Did you know or care if he did/did not wear a flag pin?

Didn't think so.

Clinton fatigue?

Has Bill done more harm than good, both to his wife's campaign and to himself?

I would disagree that he has. Those that hate the Clintons can find more fodder out of this election, but those that love him still love him. The status quo will prevail.

Fruit flies off the branches

Did you know fruit hanging and dropping on public areas is free for the taking? Me either. But you can go collect some with this group, if you need some salad fixings.

Voter ID law upheld

In a blow to Democratic opponents of state's efforts to enact voter ID laws, the Supreme Court upheld a voter ID law out of Indiana. Probably because of a glaring legal problem:

But the Democrats who sued to block Indiana's law in 2005 did not name a single plaintiff who had been barred from voting because of the law. And that failure doomed the legal challenge.

I'm no lawyer, but from how I understand lawsuits to work, someone has to have something to complain about that's actually happened, right?

It is a bit confusing, though, that at least one Justice seems to have no problem excusing the partisan roots of the law:

Stevens acknowledged the Indiana law may well have been "motivated by partisan concerns," but that alone is not enough to make it unconstitutional, he said. The challengers failed to show the voter ID requirement would pose a "severe burden" on many voters, he said.

That alone? Well, if you can point to it as a motivation, shouldn't that lead you to potential harm? How confusing.

Plot

It wasn't suicide that drove a man to drive his SUV on the Metrolink tracks, it was anger - and a plot to get back at, or just get back, his wife.

It's all too crazy and too tragic.

They claim the defendant had a history of suicide attempts beginning when he was 8 and tried to hang himself. They said he changed his mind about suicide only minutes before the train approached. After he saw the devastation he ran to a friend's house, got scissors and stabbed himself, they said, and was hospitalized for his wounds.

There doesn't seem to be too strong an argument in the article that this incident was caused by the defendant's mental illness. But that seems likely, no?

Afraid to fly, and it shows

So they can now check the content of our laptops at the airport without batting an eye. The courts say probably cause isn't required because its a matter of border security. Really? So, can they check it only at the Bradley International Terminal, or anywhere in the airport? I can't believe what we're allowing these days.

I don't want someone peeking at my laptop and I don't even have any of the stuff they're worried about - like kiddie porn. Don't look at my photos or read my email. Don't laugh at my bad poetry.

So do we just stay home now?

Drinking with Clinton

Over at MayorSam, they suggested a drinking game for Clinton-Obama interactions.

Take a shot or beer for every reference of "out of touch," "elitist," "bitter," "win-at-all-costs," "kitchen sink strategy," "Bush Republican," "beer and guns," "chose my words badly," "Bosnian sniper fire," and "small town America."

A bit like Clinton's whole bonding with the average guy through drink thing:

The Republican Farm Team

The Republican Party is forming a group to groom future Republican superstars.

You know, because they weren't creepy and self-congratulatory enough.

Don't worry, though.

We are seeking winners, and winners come in different shapes. There is not a total template that they have to fit," Wilson said during a conference call with reporters Wednesday.

Given the option, would they fight?

The reaction shots during this debate are priceless. You can almost hear the cameraman and directors licking their chops whenever one candidate swipes at the other as they quickly go for the B-roll shot of the attacked candidate's reaction.

I get the feeling that, given the chance, they'd just start slapping away at each other. Literally.

Maybe it would help voters decide between the two, who knows.

It doesn't look like these two are going to be exchanging Christmas cards in the future.

Don't lower taxes if it makes you have to borrow money?

Novel!

Obama just gave a great response about structuring taxes and saying - realistically - that John McCain's plan to effectively take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children and grandchildren while giving irresponsible tax breaks is bad business. Amen!

A little bit of fiscal realism would be amazing. I love that it comes from our party and never from the supposedly fiscally responsible GOP.

Blogger hits MSM paydirt!

This is why we blog: the undying hope that someday, we'll blog something that will make the real media pay attention. Yeah, I said real media, what of it.

A blogger snuck a mic into an SF Obama fundraiser and caught him saying, truthfully, that a lot of working class people are scared and pissed about the current economic climate and they'll blame most anything and cling to most anything. But oooh, let's beat him up!

Another non-story story, good for filling time, bad for solving anything important to the country.

But great for keeping blogger dreams alive.

I'm going to buy a recorder tomorrow. Just in case.

Can you haggle for a banana or at Banana?

Apparently, you might be able to, which is weird. I will try this at Nordstrom. I doubt it will work. Maybe I can bring in the daily paper. Whatever day it is, I'm pretty sure I can point to another article about how the economic sky is falling (Thanks, Bush administration!) and hope they'll have pity.

Stop poisoning my mind!

Marxist professors or sensitive students? is the question debating between two columnists in the Times today.

Does it have to be either/or? Can't they all be nitwits? Yeah, they can.

The "crazy marxist" corner bases its argument in data showing overwhelmingly liberal-leaning departments at universities - as evidenced by political contributions and self-identification. But those views shouldn't seep into the classroom. Right, I'd agree. Why does the available data support that profs are politicking in the classroom?

The "sensitive students" camp cites the same stuff I'm talking about and blames, rightfully, pissy students and, worse, knee-jerk, scardey cat administrators. They are the worst.

So who's the baddy? Or should we just seal off colleges completely and hope they come out alright and readjust later?

Copy! Copy?

The Daily Journal scrapped their whole copy desk. A newspaper with no proofreading?

Wow, nutty.

Celebrity Death Match, Blogging LA Style

What's worse? Drivers who block intersections or gang violence?

Hmmmm.

Actions have consequences. Film at Eleven.

Mirthala Salinas, one of Villaraigosa's other, other women, has spoken to a magazine about her affair with the Mayor, and how she feels bad, and didn't know the affair would have such far reaching consequences.

Did the consequences need to reach any further than those immediately involved - the Mayor, his wife, their kids to make the who thing a bad idea?

They're both morally culpable, of course. I hope this doesn't read like I only have a problem with her. He's a repeat offender.

But the number one thing to take from this article: Girl, get new friends:

Salinas said her friends encouraged her to take a chance with the mayor.

"I felt special," Salinas told the magazine. "OK, putting the whole world aside, the media scrutiny, the people hurt, I felt special. It was a beautiful feeling."

Sorry, You're Going to Have to Stay in Iraq

General Patraeus says that we shouldn't withdraw anymore troops because of the recent surge in violence.

Let's send more troops, see, see, a drop in violence; take a way some, ooh a surge; put some back...

It starts to seem like a game of trial and error. Don't the generals have a better idea than let's try this, oh no, that didn't work.

Bumper fish

What do our bumpers say about our ethics? Our tolerance? Our bigotry?

I find Darwin fish offensive. First, there's the smugness. The undeniable message: Those Jesus fish people are less evolved, less sophisticated than we Darwin fishers.

The hypocrisy is even more glaring. Darwin fish are often stuck next to bumper stickers promoting tolerance or admonishing random motorists that "hate is not a family value." But the whole point of the Darwin fish is intolerance; similar mockery of a cherished symbol would rightly be condemned as bigoted if aimed at blacks or women or, yes, Muslims.

As Christopher Caldwell once observed in the Weekly Standard, Darwin fish flout the agreed-on etiquette of identity politics. "Namely: It's acceptable to assert identity and abhorrent to attack it. A plaque with 'Shalom' written inside a Star of David would hardly attract notice; a plaque with 'Usury' written inside the same symbol would be an outrage."

But the most annoying aspect of the Darwin fish is the false bravado it represents. It's a courageous pose without consequence. Like so much other Christian-baiting in American popular culture, sporting your Darwin fish is a way to speak truth to power on the cheap.

I think that's an amazingly powerful statement. We're like that, though, aren't we, as a culture? Do we have more of this crap here in LA because of our tried-and-true car culture? But the real point of this column is a frighteningly critical film from the Netherlands that uses raw images and shocking language to argue against Muslim immigration. Super bad stuff. So the columnists greater point is:

It's fine for Muslim moderates to say they aren't part of the cancer; and that some have, in response to the film, is a positive sign. But more often, diagnosing or even observing this cancer -- in film, book or cartoon -- is dubbed "intolerant" while calls for violence, censorship and even murder are treated as understandable, if regrettable, expressions of well-deserved anger.

It's not that secular progressives support Muslim religious fanatics, but they reserve their passion and scorn for religious Christians who are neither fanatical nor inclined to use violence.

Some of the points here are a bit nuanced too link together clearly. But still - my thoughts have been provoked.

Long live the peripheral canal!

Or at leastthe legend of the peripheral canal, as part of our colorful aquahistory.

Absolut stupidity

Absolut apologizes for Mexican vodka ad, though I can't really figure out why.

The ad said "In an Absolut World" and showed an old map from the 1830s when most of the Southwest was Mexico. The article says "Mexico still resents losing that territory in the 1848 Mexican-American War and the fight for Texas independence." Really? Maybe. But c'mon, aren't large parts of the South still kinda resentful about that Yankee victory?

There were dozens - DOZENS! - of complaints on, like, a website and stuff. Man, heated. Seriously, who cares. Mexico isn't going to wage a war to take the land back. We're going to keep making bone-headed and offensive comments about it already seeming like they have taken it back.

Stupid.

Finding the limits of our religious fervor

Tolerance has its limits. Intolerance has its place. Even those on the religious right can find a place where their god just won't go. Like this compound in Texas - home to a fundamentalist sect that broke off from LDS and in the course of freely exercising its religion, molests underage girls. They're married off, or used as wifely prototypes from their pre-teen years - at least that's part of what led authories to take nearly 200 people from the compound.

Stories like these should make us more honest about just how far we'll push the First Amendment. I like having limits. I like that we'll admit we have limits. 'Cause this kinda stuff is just wrong.

Now, what about Scientology?