It's really disturbing in so many ways that even if you are a mere weatherman for CNN, the gossip websites see you as enough of a celebrity to publish any juicy pics.
Rob Marciano had these pics published over at Dirt. But there isn't anything particularly salacious or even dirty about the pics at all. But Rob's friend made the mistake of trying to reason with dirtbags who make a living, or enjoy as a hobby, being the perpetual "mean girl" their entire life. Rob's friend's note is much more embarrassing than the pics.
Lesson learned. Don't wrestle in mud with a pig. You get all dirty and the pig likes it.
Saturday, December 27, 2008
It's really disturbing in so many ways that even if you are a mere weatherman for CNN, the gossip websites see you as enough of a celebrity to publish any juicy pics.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 5:02 PM
You may have seen posts regarding Caroline Kennedy's interview where she used "Ya know" about a dozen times in the course of a minute.
Gawker Magazine noticed:
Aspiring senator Caroline Kennedy might want to hire a vocal coach in addition to her PR help. Today's NYT headline reads "As a Candidate, Kennedy Is Eloquent but Elusive," but the accompanying audio clip says:
As in, Kennedy says "you know" a dozen times in the 49-second "I'm a traditional Democrat" clip. We can't listen to two years of this! Caroline: every pause need not be filled with wordage, you know?
Only thing? It seems the NYT has changed it's headline since Gawker posted that. The headline no longer reads, "As a Candidate, Kennedy Is Eloquent but Elusive." It now reads, "As a Candidate, Kennedy Is Forceful but Elusive" I wonder if this post had anything to do with that? Heh.
Now that is a correction. I guess they couldn't say with a straight face that she is "eloquent." But they could have noted the correction.
I'm sure SNL will be all over it, right? Right.
*I wanted to add this. We are all aware of the modern Kennedy exploits, but did you know this about Caroline's grandfather? Good grief.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 3:02 PM
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 12:33 PM
Friday, December 26, 2008
Anderson Cooper of CNN titles his post "RNC chair candidate sends out controversial Obama song."
Why is is controversial to make fun of a liberal black columnist calling Obama "The magic negro?" It absolutely begs to be made fun of.
It all started with Time's columnist David Ehrenstein wrote a piece titled "Obama the 'Magic Negro" back in March of '07. (You will notice that Anderson doesn't bother to link that column, which would have taken all of 10 seconds to find, to make it clear where the song came from). Paul Shanklin (known of his parody songs) then recorded a parody song as satire directed at the Times that played on Rush Limbaugh's show.
To this day there are still leftwing bloggers who use that as example of Rush being a racist, thinking that Rush himself made up or approved of a song calling Obama "the magic negro" himself. Apparently never listening to the song which mentions the LA Times in the chorus several times.
I would think that the column itself would be what is controversial, not the song making fun of it.
But, that's liberals for ya.
The LA Times column reads in part:
The Magic Negro is a figure of postmodern folk culture, coined by snarky 20th century sociologists, to explain a cultural figure who emerged in the wake of Brown vs. Board of Education. "He has no past, he simply appears one day to help the white protagonist," reads the description on Wikipedia.
He's there to assuage white "guilt" (i.e., the minimal discomfort they feel) over the role of slavery and racial segregation in American history, while replacing stereotypes of a dangerous, highly sexualized black man with a benign figure for whom interracial sexual congress holds no interest.
Ehrenstein ends with this:
Like a comic-book superhero, Obama is there to help, out of the sheer goodness of a heart we need not know or understand. For as with all Magic Negroes, the less real he seems, the more desirable he becomes. If he were real, white America couldn't project all its fantasies of curative black benevolence on him.
So, basically saying that Obama is non threatening, unlike most black men, without a past to be afraid of, he appears to help the white man say to himself that he can live with a black such as this.
Now that isn't controversial enough for Anderson to even link or mention that a liberal black wrote it, but the RNC chair sending out the song as the funny parody it is, is controversial.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 4:37 PM
It was the day after Christmas and all was quiet in the house.
The kids were all spoiled with toys and videos lying by their beds
The mother was exhausted with wrapping and cooking
But being the dweeb that she is, she is still up blogging.
How was your Christmas? I am about to go run 4 miles to make up for the ridiculous amount eating I did. From hot chocolate stirred with chocolate/peppermint spoons to cakes, cookies, and even the vegetables are covered with things like bacon and cream.
I had a party Tues. night and I got party trays from Jason's Deli. I am telling you if you have one in your town, use them for parties. They make delicious food and even the fruit is fresh and yummy.
The funniest/weirdest thing to happen yesterday is that my son got a remote controlled VAMP. Here is what one looks like. It sorta looks like a bat, right? Anyway, so my son is flying it outside and out of nowhere swoops a hawk and grabs the VAMP right out of the sky and flies off with it!!! Can you believe it??! My son starts yelling and then runs in the house and everyone goes off in the neighborhood to find this stupid thieving hawk. No luck, but we had a good laugh.
I got an acer laptop. Tiny little thing. It's like 7 by 10 inces. I love it. I can carry it in my purse while traveling through airports.
But my favorite gifts are always those given by my kids when they are still young and they buy stuff themselves like at Walgreens. One year when my daughter was eight she gave me a little plastic angel. I just loved it and I Keep on my vanity. This year my youngest got me this little fishbowl with plastic fish that swim around somehow (magnetic or battery..something) I have it right here beside the computer. I've named them Reagan and Palin after my two favorite conservatives. Heh.
Hope your Christmas was wonderful!
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 9:14 AM
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 8:26 PM
Sgt. Chris Burleson and his son Hunter enjoy a moment of joy during a welcome home ceremony at Camp Shelby, Miss., for returning troops of the Arkansas National Guard's 39th Infantry Brigade Combat Team.
3,200 of our bravest and brightest warriors came home from a yearlong deployment in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.
I love it.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 10:18 AM
Because you know you love to read them. Just admit it. Tis the season.
Bobby was getting cold sitting out in his backyard in the snow. Bobby didn't wear boots; he didn't like them and anyway, he didn't own any. The thin sneakers he wore had a few holes in them and they did a poor job of keeping out the cold. Bobby had been in his backyard for about an hour already. And, try as he might, he could not come up with an idea for his mother's Christmas gift.
He shook his head as he thought, "This is useless, even if I do come up with an idea, I don't have any money to spend."
Ever since his father had passed away three years ago, the family of five had struggled. It wasn't because his mother didn't care, or try, there just never seemed to be enough. She worked nights at the hospital, but the small wage that she was earning could only be stretched so far. What the family lacked in money and material things, they more than made up for in love and family unity.Bobby had two older and one younger sister who ran the household in their mother's absence. All three of his sisters had already made beautiful gifts for their mother. Somehow it just wasn't fair. Here it was Christmas Eve already and he had nothing. Wiping a tear from his eye, Bobby kicked the snow and started to walk down to the street where the shops and stores were.
It wasn't easy being six without a father, especially when he needed a man to talk to. Bobby walked from shop to shop looking into each decorated window. Everything seemed so beautiful and so out of reach. It was starting to get dark and Bobby reluctantly turned to walk home when suddenly his eyes caught the glimmer of the setting sun's rays reflecting off of something along the curb.
He reached down and discovered a shiny dime. Never before has anyone felt so wealthy as Bobby felt at that moment. As he held his new found treasure, a warmth spread throughout his entire body and he walked into the first store he saw. His excitement quickly turned cold when salesperson after salesperson told him that he could not buy anything with only a dime.
He saw a flower shop and went inside to wait in line. When the shop owner asked if he could help him, Bobby presented the dime and asked if he could buy one flower for his mother's Christmas gift.
The shop owner looked at Bobby and his ten cent offering. Then, he put his hand on Bobby's shoulder and said to him, "You just wait here and I'll see what I can do for you." Bobby waited, he looked at the beautiful flowers and even though he was a boy, he could see why mothers and girls liked flowers.
The sound of the door closing as the last customer left jolted Bobby back to reality. All alone in the shop, Bobby began to feel alone and afraid. Suddenly, the shop owner came out and moved to the counter. There, before Bobby's eyes, lay twelve long-stem, red roses, with leaves of green and tiny white flowers all tied together with a big silver bow.
Bobby's heart sank as the owner picked them up and placed them gently into a long white box. "That will be ten cents young man," the shop owner said, reaching out his hand for the dime. Slowly, Bobby moved his hand to give the man his dime. Could this be true? No one else would give him a thing for his dime!
Sensing the boy's reluctance, the shop owner added, "I just happened to have some roses on sale for ten cents a dozen. Would you like them?" This time Bobby did not hesitate, and when the man placed the long box into his hands, he knew it was true.
Walking out the door that the owner was holding for Bobby, he heard the shop keeper say, "Merry Christmas, son."
As he returned inside, the shop keepers wife walked out. "Who were you talking to back there and where are the roses you were fixing?"
Staring out the window, and blinking the tears from his own eyes, he replied, "A strange thing happened to me this morning. While I was setting up things to open the shop, I thought I heard a voice telling me to set aside a dozen of my best roses for a special gift. I wasn't sure at the time whether I had lost my mind or what, but I set them aside anyway. Then, just a few minutes ago a little boy came into the shop and wanted to buy a flower for his mother with one small dime. When I looked at him, I saw myself, many years ago. I too was a poor boy with nothing to buy my mother a Christmas gift. A bearded man, whom I never knew, stopped me on the street and told me that he wanted to give me ten dollars. When I saw that little boy tonight, I knew who that voice was, and I put together a dozen of my very best roses."
The shop owner and his wife hugged each other tightly, and as they stepped out into the bitter cold air, they somehow didn't feel cold at all.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 9:53 AM
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
The Hill blog:
Last week, the website Change.gov — the official website of the Obama Transition Team — asked the public to provide them with a list of the top public policy questions facing America. Visitors to the site were then asked to vote on which questions should take priority for the incoming administration.
What was the number one priority for these Obama supporters? What was the top question about? Healthcare? The genocide in Darfur? The war?
They would like to get high legally.
You gotta laugh (or you might cry).
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 3:48 PM
Looking at the two highly visible Senate appointments of New York (Hillary's seat) and Chicago (Obama's seat), illustrates how the Democrat machine works. If Democrats could pick and choose their winning candidate without benefit of the people's vote, this is what we would get. Caroline Kennedy or Andrew Cuomo for New York. Do the names sound familiar? Of course they do. They are Democratic royalty and the princess and the prince are fighting it out to get the Governor's attention.
The Caroline Kennedy scenario (which is almost sure to happen) is laughable because of the hysterical left insisting that Sarah Palin was not qualified to be Vice President. Now that one of their own is truly hardly qualified to be a Senator, they have nothing but praise for her. It's all about the star power bequeathed to Caroline and Andrew from their families.
As Victor Hanson perfectly points out:
Ms. Kennedy is about as undiverse as one could imagine. She was educated at exclusively private schools among those of her like race and class. Her financial security is due to either inheritance or marriage; there is no evidence of a self-employed stellar legal or business career. But there is plenty of evidence that Ms. Kennedy reflects the current Democratic Party’s obsession with celebrity and Hollywood-like imagery.
Yet someone like Palin, who came from a family much like you or I, completely middle class, is not considered good enough for the Democrats. Palin put herself through college because her family simply could not afford it. She proved her mettle and leadership qualities completely on her own all the way to being Governor of Alaska, and she is ridiculed by the Democrats. But someone like Caroline is held up as a standard of someone who can "fight" for the people. People whose lives she has never known or understood in her elite Democrat bubble.
The same can be said for the Chicago Senate seat (which is in limbo now obviously). But it easily could have gone to Jesse Jackson Jr. Another one who was bequeathed his star power. Hillary took her star power from her husband and we all can't wait for Chelsea's first run for office.
To be fair the same can be said of the Bush's. Bush got the star power from his Dad, as did Jeb.
But enough is enough. We aren't a Monarchy here. We don't have dynasties (or at least we shouldn't). These kind of leaders/politicians illustrate an incestuous political game that benefits only the families involved.
Enough with the Kennedy family, the Bush family, the Jackson family, the Clinton family, and the Cuomo Family.
There is nothing we can do about the New York appointment. But elections are about the voice of the people. Dynasties are not what America is about. It is about "we the people." It would do us well to remember that.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 9:00 AM
Monday, December 22, 2008
He just returned from Rome. "I came back to Iraq because I believe that we can live here," he says. "I have so many [Muslim] friends and we are so happy they started to think about things from another point of view and we want to help them."
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 9:10 PM
I knew years ago, after fighting in the pro-life movement for unborn children, that one day we would legalize euthanasia. It was only a matter of time. Once a society has decided that certain life has value and certain life does not, then we slide down that slippery slope of determining who should die and rid us of the burden of their presence, and who shall be allowed to live.
From The Weekly Standard:
On December 5, Montana District judge Dorothy McCarter ruled in Baxter v. Montana that the state law banning assisted suicide violates not only the right to privacy guaranteed in the Montana constitution but also the constitutional clause that reads, "The dignity of the human being is inviolable." McCarter found here a "fundamental right" for the terminally ill to "die with dignity"--meaning in the case at hand, to commit suicide by drug overdose.
McCarter also ruled that doctors have a concomitant right to be free from "liability under the State's homicide statutes" if they help a patient commit death with dignity: "If the patient were to have no assistance from his doctor," she explained, "he may be forced to kill himself sooner . . . in a manner that violates his dignity and peace of mind, such as by gunshot or by otherwise unpleasant method, causing undue suffering to the patient and his family." That suicide is not a necessity apparently never entered the judge's mind.
Once again, as in Roe v. Wade, the courts are making these decisions and the people have no debate, no vote, and no say. I the same reaction has and will occur that occurred in 1973 with Roe v. Wade. The people uncomfortably ignore it. They shrug their shoulders and say to themselves, "The courts have spoken. There is nothing I can do."
Isn't assisted suicide really just a way to get rid of the unwanted and justify it by assuring ourselves that it was they, the suicide victim, who wanted it themselves?
Oregon already passed an euthanasia law 10 years ago with over 200 patients overdosing themselves with the supervision of a Doctor. Their law provided a 15 day waiting period. But the legal director for the assisted-suicide advocacy organization Compassion & Choice says the waiting period is "unduly burdensome." Does that sound familiar? It should. Planned Parenthood and other pro-choice groups have long fought the 24 hour waiting period for a woman considering abortion. What is it about these people that they don't even wish for a short time period that the patient think about the life ending/altering decision he or she is about to make?
How many times in my personal experience have I seen a woman coerced into abortion by the boyfriend, husband, or father? How many times will we see the same with the family of the elderly? Especially if an inheritance is involved or the care for the patient is costing too much money. Is there any way to truly monitor that? Of course not. It's a moral nightmare and we, as a society, just allow it.
People on the euthanasia side say that we must be allowed to die with dignity. A pro-longed death is not dignified. But can one honestly say that a suicide death has dignity? Many people have chosen that path without benefit of court approval. They overdose on drugs. Same path. Was that dignified? I don't think so. Does an Doctor administering or authorizing the final dose suddenly make it more dignified? No. It does not.
Because in reality, it's not really about dignity. It's about giving up. It's about fear. It's about being a burden. What does it say about us that allow people we love to feel that way? I've had close ones die of prolonged illnesses of cancer and Alzheimer's. Dying is hard, but then again, so is living. It's what do about it and how we love that makes the difference.
Dignity comes from loved ones comfort and help at the end. Dignity comes from a society that says we still care for you and you still matter in your illness. Would anyone want to die earlier than their natural death if the ones they loved were with them and wanted them here as long as possible?
It's not about the way we die. It's about the people we love that love us as we die. That is what gives us dignity.
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 8:45 PM
What a shocker!
Years ago I was President of the PTA of the Catholic school my children attended. I had the power to decide what programs to implement and what to cut. It gave me a bit of an insight into Congress, but a really good insight into liberals. When you are the one deciding where money goes, suddenly you feel like the benevolent one. It's not your money, so giving generously is easy and feels quite good.
I have found that liberals see themselves as "compassionate" as long as they are fighting for the greater good with other people's money. I remember when they published what Al Gore gave to charity when he was Vice President and I just couldn't believe how much more my family gave. I'm sure he justified it to himself by thinking, "look at how much I do for environmental causes!"
As the NYT points out:
Arthur Brooks, the author of a book on donors to charity, “Who Really Cares,” cites data that households headed by conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than households headed by liberals. A study by Google found an even greater disproportion: average annual contributions reported by conservatives were almost double those of liberals.
This doesn't surprise me. Liberals tend to think that the mere act of voting for someone who claims to help the poor is the equivalent of giving. Where conservatives actually see helping the poor themselves as the way to go.
It's not just in financial ways that conservatives are more generous:
Conservatives also appear to be more generous than liberals in nonfinancial ways. People in red states are considerably more likely to volunteer for good causes, and conservatives give blood more often. If liberals and moderates gave blood as often as conservatives, Mr. Brooks said, the American blood supply would increase by 45 percent.
Isn't it interesting is the truth is so far from the perception?
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 9:14 AM