Edit From The Count: Mitt "My Wife drives a couple of Caddies" Romney goes 2 for 2.
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Monday, February 27, 2012
President Obama Wants Everybody To Go To College...
What A Snob!
Went to college and has 3 degrees! Not one in common sense.
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Oscars Open Thread.
Late Edit (6:38 PT): shows how much I know. Hugo has won four awards: Cinematography, Art Direction, Sound Editing and Sound Mixing, Dragon Tattoo wins Film Editing. The Artist has Costume Design. Billy Crystal is ok. Not killing it, but way better than James Franco and Anne Hathaway last year. Happy that Octavia Spencer won Best Supporting Actress.
Late Edit (7:37 PT): Nice to see that the Academy could screw Harry Potter one last time. To put this in perspective: 15 nominations over the past 10 years = 0 wins. Thanks, Academy. Also, if I ever age as gracefully as Christopher Plummer and win some huge award, that would be freaking awesome. Hugo continues its run, winning Visual Effects, while The Artist takes Score. Descendants wins Adapted Screenplay, while Woody Allen wins Original Screenplay. As usual, he's too cool to be there.
Late Edit (8:45 PT): The Artist wins Best Actor, Director, and Best Picture tonight. If you still haven't watched this terrific film, please do so. It is one of the best experiences i've ever had at the movies in years. Also: was I right, or was I right about Meryl winning Best Actress? She now ties Jack Nicholson for most wins by an Actor or Actress in Oscar history. I'll post the final tally later tonight. Final thoughts should be in by tomorrow morning.
Late Edit (9:11 PT): The final tally (Hat tip to Awards Daily.com)...
Edit From The Count (11:50 CT) Ed Cunningham won an Oscar That is beyond What the fuck. Haven't seen it, never will, don't need to. I know the Son of a bitches' work as a color analyst in college football. He's terrible. No actually he is worse than that. I wonder if he demanded everybody in the theater be thrown out.
- Best Picture: The Artist
- Best Director: Michel Hazanavicius, The Artist
- Best Actress: Meryl Streep, The Iron Lady
- Best Actor: Jean Dujardin, The Artist
- Best Supporting Actress: Octavia Spencer, The Help
- Best Supporting Actor: Christopher Plummer, Beginners
- Best Original Screenplay: Woody Allen, Midnight in Paris
- Best Adapted Screenplay: Alexander Payne & Nat Faxon & Jim Rash, The Descendants
- Best Foreign Language Film: Iran, A Separation
- Best Documentary Feature: TJ Martin, Dan Lindsay & Richard Middlemas, Undefeated
- Best Animated Feature: Gore Verbinski, Rango
- Best Cinematography: Robert Richardson, Hugo
- Best Film Editing: Kirk Baxter & Angus Wall, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
- Best Art Direction: Dante Ferretti & Francesca Lo Schiavo, Hugo
- Best Costume Design: Mark Bridges, The Artist
- Best Original Score: Ludovic Bource, The Artist
- Best Sound Editing: Philip Stockton & Eugene Gearty, Hugo
- Best Sound Mixing: Tom Fleischman & John Midgley, Hugo
- Best Visual Effects: Rob Legato, Joss Williams, Ben Grossman & Alex Henning, Hugo
- Best Makeup: Mark Coulier & J. Roy Helland, The Iron Lady
- Best Documentary Short: Daniel Junge & Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy, Saving Face
- Best Animated Short: William Joyce & Brandon Oldenburg, The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore
- Best Live Action Short: Terry George & Oorlagh George, The Shore
- Best Original Song: Bret McKenzie, Man or Muppet, The Muppets
Jonathan Goes To the Movies: Oscar Pick-Em
Best Picture:
The Artist
The Descendants
Extremely Loud, & Incredibly Close
The Help
Hugo
Midnight In Paris
Moneyball
The Tree of Life
War Horse
The Lowdown: You may notice that there are only 9 films on here - this is thanks to the new rule the Academy laid out earlier last year, where they changed the list on nominees yet again from anywhere between 5 to 10. This year, all the signs point to The Artist, the black-and-white silent film about a silent movie star fading into obscurity with the rise of the Talkies, dominating on Oscar night. It won Best Picture for a Musical/Comedy at the Golden Globes, the Critics Choice Awards, and the Producer's Guild of America Award for Best Picture. Oh, and the critics are madly in love the movie. How can it not lose?
The Winner Is... The Artist. There's simply no stopping this juggernaut.
The Winner Should Be...Save Extremely Loud and its shameless exploitation of a national tragedy for ethos, The Tree of Life and its pretentious 139 minute run time, War Horse and Spielberg's heavy-handed attempt to pull the audience's heartstrings, and The Help sticking to the shallows instead of going head-first into a unapologetic look at racism in the South, I don't have a problem with the other movies winning the top prize.
Best Director:
Woody Allen; Midnight In Paris
Michael Hazanavicius; The Artist
Terrence Malick; The Tree of Life
Alexander Payne; The Descendants
Martin Scorsese; Hugo
The Lowdown: Not really much of a race this time. Cancel out Malick's pretentious work, Allen's charming and beautiful sweeping romantic comedy, and Payne's strongest outing to date and we're left with Scorsese, who won the Directing prize for The Departed in 2006, and he won the Globe for Hugo back in January, and Hazanavicius, who won the Director's Guild, and the BAFTA for Achievement in Direction a few weeks back.
The Winner Is...Hazanavicius. He's got the hardware so far, and we haven't had a foreign filmmaker win the Directing prize since Ang Lee with Brokeback Mountain in 2005.
The Winner Should Be...Scorsese. The world's finest filmmaker embraces cinema's newest form of visual storytelling and crafts a compelling love letter to the beginning of moving pictures as only a master storyteller can craft.
Best Actor:
Demián Bichir; A Better Life
George Clooney; The Descendants
Jean Dujardin; The Artist
Gary Oldman; Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
Brad Pitt; Moneyball
The Lowdown: One upon a time, George Clooney was the odds-on favorite for his performance as a detached father bringing his family together despite personal tragedy, infidelity, and a decision about land and money in The Descendants. Then The Artist was released, and the Awards circuit fell for Jean Dujardin's performance as George Valentin, the silent film star and his decent into obscurity after the rise of the Talkies, winning awards at SAG, the Globes, and BAFTA. It's hardware and momentum vs...George freakin' Clooney.
The Winner Is...Dujardin. Again, this is building into a total sweep.
The Winner Should Be...Brad Pitt. This is his most mature performance to date, and his best as manager Billy Beane, defying the old ways of building a baseball team.
Best Actress:
Glenn Close; Albert Nobbs
Viola Davis; The Help
Rooney Mara; The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Meryl Streep; The Iron Lady
Michelle Williams; My Week with Marilyn
The Lowdown: In this corner: 17-time nominated and 2-time Oscar winner Meryl Streep. Her performance as Britain's first female PM Margaret Thatcher reminded all why she's one of the great actors of our generation. And in the other corner: 2-time Oscar nominee Viola Davis. her captivating role as a maid in Jackson, Mississippi in The Help, has to be the strongest performance to dare from her. Meryl's got the Globes and BAFTA, Davis has the SAG for best Actress and critical support behind her. In this battle of acting heavyweights, it's anyone's game.
The Winner Is...Meryl Streep. Sorry Viola, but Meryl's got the upper hand here in being an Oscar favorite, and it's been too long since we seen her onstage.
The Winner Should Be...Rooney Mara. She delivered the best performance this year as troubled hacker Lisbeth Salander, lacing sorrow and menace and brief moments of happiness to a dark, tormented character.
Best Supporting Actor:
Kenneth Branagh; My Week with Marilyn
Jonah Hill; Moneyball
Nick Nolte; Warrior
Christopher Plummer; Beginners
Max Von Sydow; Extremely Loud, & Incredibly Close
The Lowdown: I can easily sum up, in a few sentences, the state of this race: You could get most of your picks wrong, you'll still have at least one right: Plummer winning Best Supporting Actor for his role as a man coming out after his wife died in Beginners. He's won all the big awards this year, and there's no one who's even a threat of challenging him.
The Winner Is...see above.
The Winner Should Be...Albert Brooks or Alan Rickman...wait, they're not nominated, and it's a damn shame as well. Brooks ditches the deadpan humor and goes into tough, frighting mode as a L.A.'s mob boss in Drive, and Rickman steals the show as Snape, as he reveals his true nature, and his tortured, grieving heart in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part II. Two excellent performances that got shortchanged by the Academy.
Best Supporting Actress:
Bérénice Bejo; The Artist
Jessica Chastain; The Help
Melissa McCarthy; Bridesmaids
Janet McTeer; Albert Nobbs
Octavia Spencer; The Help
The Lowdown: Again, not really a lowdown since Spencer has won all the major Awards during the lead up to tonight. The only reason this isn't over, IMO, is that The Artist is in this category, and if i've learned anything, it's to never underestimate Bob and Harvey Weinstein.
The Winner Is...Bejo as my wildcard pick of the night, because of the weight behind her.
The Winner Should Be...Octavia Spencer. Easily the best job of the five nominated this year as the sassy Minny Jackson.
Best Director:
Woody Allen; Midnight In Paris
Michael Hazanavicius; The Artist
Terrence Malick; The Tree of Life
Alexander Payne; The Descendants
Martin Scorsese; Hugo
The Lowdown: Not really much of a race this time. Cancel out Malick's pretentious work, Allen's charming and beautiful sweeping romantic comedy, and Payne's strongest outing to date and we're left with Scorsese, who won the Directing prize for The Departed in 2006, and he won the Globe for Hugo back in January, and Hazanavicius, who won the Director's Guild, and the BAFTA for Achievement in Direction a few weeks back.
The Winner Is...Hazanavicius. He's got the hardware so far, and we haven't had a foreign filmmaker win the Directing prize since Ang Lee with Brokeback Mountain in 2005.
The Winner Should Be...Scorsese. The world's finest filmmaker embraces cinema's newest form of visual storytelling and crafts a compelling love letter to the beginning of moving pictures as only a master storyteller can craft.
Demián Bichir; A Better Life
George Clooney; The Descendants
Jean Dujardin; The Artist
Gary Oldman; Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
Brad Pitt; Moneyball
The Lowdown: One upon a time, George Clooney was the odds-on favorite for his performance as a detached father bringing his family together despite personal tragedy, infidelity, and a decision about land and money in The Descendants. Then The Artist was released, and the Awards circuit fell for Jean Dujardin's performance as George Valentin, the silent film star and his decent into obscurity after the rise of the Talkies, winning awards at SAG, the Globes, and BAFTA. It's hardware and momentum vs...George freakin' Clooney.
The Winner Is...Dujardin. Again, this is building into a total sweep.
The Winner Should Be...Brad Pitt. This is his most mature performance to date, and his best as manager Billy Beane, defying the old ways of building a baseball team.
Best Actress:
Glenn Close; Albert Nobbs
Viola Davis; The Help
Rooney Mara; The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Meryl Streep; The Iron Lady
Michelle Williams; My Week with Marilyn
The Lowdown: In this corner: 17-time nominated and 2-time Oscar winner Meryl Streep. Her performance as Britain's first female PM Margaret Thatcher reminded all why she's one of the great actors of our generation. And in the other corner: 2-time Oscar nominee Viola Davis. her captivating role as a maid in Jackson, Mississippi in The Help, has to be the strongest performance to dare from her. Meryl's got the Globes and BAFTA, Davis has the SAG for best Actress and critical support behind her. In this battle of acting heavyweights, it's anyone's game.
The Winner Is...Meryl Streep. Sorry Viola, but Meryl's got the upper hand here in being an Oscar favorite, and it's been too long since we seen her onstage.
The Winner Should Be...Rooney Mara. She delivered the best performance this year as troubled hacker Lisbeth Salander, lacing sorrow and menace and brief moments of happiness to a dark, tormented character.
Kenneth Branagh; My Week with Marilyn
Jonah Hill; Moneyball
Nick Nolte; Warrior
Christopher Plummer; Beginners
Max Von Sydow; Extremely Loud, & Incredibly Close
The Lowdown: I can easily sum up, in a few sentences, the state of this race: You could get most of your picks wrong, you'll still have at least one right: Plummer winning Best Supporting Actor for his role as a man coming out after his wife died in Beginners. He's won all the big awards this year, and there's no one who's even a threat of challenging him.
The Winner Is...see above.
The Winner Should Be...Albert Brooks or Alan Rickman...wait, they're not nominated, and it's a damn shame as well. Brooks ditches the deadpan humor and goes into tough, frighting mode as a L.A.'s mob boss in Drive, and Rickman steals the show as Snape, as he reveals his true nature, and his tortured, grieving heart in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part II. Two excellent performances that got shortchanged by the Academy.
Best Supporting Actress:
Bérénice Bejo; The Artist
Jessica Chastain; The Help
Melissa McCarthy; Bridesmaids
Janet McTeer; Albert Nobbs
Octavia Spencer; The Help
The Lowdown: Again, not really a lowdown since Spencer has won all the major Awards during the lead up to tonight. The only reason this isn't over, IMO, is that The Artist is in this category, and if i've learned anything, it's to never underestimate Bob and Harvey Weinstein.
The Winner Is...Bejo as my wildcard pick of the night, because of the weight behind her.
The Winner Should Be...Octavia Spencer. Easily the best job of the five nominated this year as the sassy Minny Jackson.
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Feminism...the Radical Notion that Women are People
(title attribution to Cheris Kramarae and Paula Treichler)
OK, I know it's not an oft-discussed topic here at BAD, but I have to take advantage of the Count's generosity in sharing this soapbox to simply say it very directly, during this silliest of silly seasons in US politics. What about 51% of the population (for you businesspeople, that's a controlling interest) is not understood? From which backward and unholy cesspool has this War On Women bubbled up to the surface of the GOP dialogue?
Mandatory transvaginal ultrasounds - what we used to call non-consensual, forcible penetration; or, more colloquially, "rape" - positively embraced in principle, and backed away from only minutely and at the last minute, in Virginia. The marginalizing of women's health issues in the form of a fresh assault on birth control, coupled with the utter travesty of a panel of men testifying largely to other men on the issue (and the GOP-controlled House is refusing, with blatant hypocrisy and in unprecedented style, to broadcast footage of a Democratic hearing finally giving Sandra Fluke her day at the microphone - I suppose it will be a wonder if they don't cut the electrical power entirely). It's a laughable picture tantamount to a bunch of non-driving pedestrians holding forth on matters of automobile maintenance. Continuing efforts to abrogate women's ability to control their own reproductive destinies in multiple states. The looming danger that contraception apparently represents by its mere existence, in the form that sexual intercourse might - gasp! - be engaged in just because, you know, it's enjoyable. All capped by the bizarre spectacle of an Indiana legislator refusing to commemorate the Girl Scouts' 100th anniversary, for crap's sake, on the grounds that he thinks those adorable cookie-wielding Daisies and Brownies are closeted radicals intent on emasculating American manhood and unleashing the gay agenda. Because he read it on teh Innertubes, and everyone knows how completely authoritative and accurate whatever you encounter on the Internet is. (Consider the sad case of that Nigerian Prince, for instance...)
Are these candidates - Santorum in particular, who seemingly would like to return us to the 17th century and witch hunts for anybody who, you know, might think that preserving the Earth for future generations is a good idea - really going there? To points of view that marginalize the privileges of basic citizenship and human rights for more than half the population? Or, more to the point of their own self-interest, to alienate as much as half of their potential voting base?
Not only does this seem to me to be a stupid strategy overall, but creeping every day so much further and further to the most remote right-wing fringes as to be completely untenable for anybody with half a brain cell to spare.
Go re-read Margaret Atwood's depressingly prescient novel The Handmaid's Tale, everyone. And then tell me it can't happen in the US. The signage is on the roads already being trod.
In the meantime, I thank my lucky stars my daughter and I are here in Canada, where she has the right to protect her health as she sees fit; love and marry whom she wants, if she wants; and where her freedom of conscience guarantees that she need never submit to anyone else's set of beliefs and strictures. Because the way the dialogue is going down there in the lower 48, I wouldn't want her there for an instant.
OK, I know it's not an oft-discussed topic here at BAD, but I have to take advantage of the Count's generosity in sharing this soapbox to simply say it very directly, during this silliest of silly seasons in US politics. What about 51% of the population (for you businesspeople, that's a controlling interest) is not understood? From which backward and unholy cesspool has this War On Women bubbled up to the surface of the GOP dialogue?
Mandatory transvaginal ultrasounds - what we used to call non-consensual, forcible penetration; or, more colloquially, "rape" - positively embraced in principle, and backed away from only minutely and at the last minute, in Virginia. The marginalizing of women's health issues in the form of a fresh assault on birth control, coupled with the utter travesty of a panel of men testifying largely to other men on the issue (and the GOP-controlled House is refusing, with blatant hypocrisy and in unprecedented style, to broadcast footage of a Democratic hearing finally giving Sandra Fluke her day at the microphone - I suppose it will be a wonder if they don't cut the electrical power entirely). It's a laughable picture tantamount to a bunch of non-driving pedestrians holding forth on matters of automobile maintenance. Continuing efforts to abrogate women's ability to control their own reproductive destinies in multiple states. The looming danger that contraception apparently represents by its mere existence, in the form that sexual intercourse might - gasp! - be engaged in just because, you know, it's enjoyable. All capped by the bizarre spectacle of an Indiana legislator refusing to commemorate the Girl Scouts' 100th anniversary, for crap's sake, on the grounds that he thinks those adorable cookie-wielding Daisies and Brownies are closeted radicals intent on emasculating American manhood and unleashing the gay agenda. Because he read it on teh Innertubes, and everyone knows how completely authoritative and accurate whatever you encounter on the Internet is. (Consider the sad case of that Nigerian Prince, for instance...)
Are these candidates - Santorum in particular, who seemingly would like to return us to the 17th century and witch hunts for anybody who, you know, might think that preserving the Earth for future generations is a good idea - really going there? To points of view that marginalize the privileges of basic citizenship and human rights for more than half the population? Or, more to the point of their own self-interest, to alienate as much as half of their potential voting base?
Not only does this seem to me to be a stupid strategy overall, but creeping every day so much further and further to the most remote right-wing fringes as to be completely untenable for anybody with half a brain cell to spare.
Go re-read Margaret Atwood's depressingly prescient novel The Handmaid's Tale, everyone. And then tell me it can't happen in the US. The signage is on the roads already being trod.
In the meantime, I thank my lucky stars my daughter and I are here in Canada, where she has the right to protect her health as she sees fit; love and marry whom she wants, if she wants; and where her freedom of conscience guarantees that she need never submit to anyone else's set of beliefs and strictures. Because the way the dialogue is going down there in the lower 48, I wouldn't want her there for an instant.
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Republican Debate Thread
You can knock twitter all you want to but it's never better than when Republicans are debating. Others watch these train wrecks so you don't have to. Anyway any thoughts at all on this mess go here.
Monday, February 20, 2012
Saturday, February 18, 2012
Well It's Time For The Count To Announce His 2012 Presidential Endorsement...
Drum-roll please....
Morris 2012!
Morris 2012!
Friday, February 17, 2012
Wingnut "Art"
Found this tonight and had to post it. More commentary later, perchance, but for now browse the gallery and come to your own conclusions...
Edit by Jonathan: Disagree with this man's politics, but he is a hell of a painter.
Another edit by Jonathan: There are a few things i'd like to review in his paintings:
First - in "The Forgotten Man", the are many bills on the floor, one of them being the Social Security Act of 1935, in which the artists says that SS was "a pyramid scheme from the start" taking away money from the younger, working generation to the older generation. OMG! Why are we giving money to seniors who are way past their prime to work? We shouldn't be giving them a dime...we should be telling these lazy, old bastards to keep working, or be prepared to send them off on a block of ice to starve and die! From the same painting, the man talks about Reagan as if he were the 2nd coming of Christ himself. Nevermind the man's economic policies set in motion 30 years of handing out tax breaks to the very rich helped create a widening gap between rich and poor, ignored the AIDS epidemic, and aided "freedom fighters" like the Contras and the mujaheddin that eventually came back to bite us in the ass. Nope, the man was a saint!
Now, onto "One Nation Under God". The symbol is showing the Messiah holding the U.S. Constitution; the symbolism highlighted on the page states the following, "Inspired of God, and created by God-fearing, patriotic Americans." I don't know how many times I have to spell this out, but i'll say it again: These men may have been "God-fearing" patriots, but they also had the sense to realize that their religious beliefs should not be shoved down the throats of others, fearing that they would trade one oppressive state religion for another. It's the reason why the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the 1st Amendment were written.
Oh, and I found this as well: make of this what you will.
Edit by Jonathan: Disagree with this man's politics, but he is a hell of a painter.
Another edit by Jonathan: There are a few things i'd like to review in his paintings:
First - in "The Forgotten Man", the are many bills on the floor, one of them being the Social Security Act of 1935, in which the artists says that SS was "a pyramid scheme from the start" taking away money from the younger, working generation to the older generation. OMG! Why are we giving money to seniors who are way past their prime to work? We shouldn't be giving them a dime...we should be telling these lazy, old bastards to keep working, or be prepared to send them off on a block of ice to starve and die! From the same painting, the man talks about Reagan as if he were the 2nd coming of Christ himself. Nevermind the man's economic policies set in motion 30 years of handing out tax breaks to the very rich helped create a widening gap between rich and poor, ignored the AIDS epidemic, and aided "freedom fighters" like the Contras and the mujaheddin that eventually came back to bite us in the ass. Nope, the man was a saint!
Now, onto "One Nation Under God". The symbol is showing the Messiah holding the U.S. Constitution; the symbolism highlighted on the page states the following, "Inspired of God, and created by God-fearing, patriotic Americans." I don't know how many times I have to spell this out, but i'll say it again: These men may have been "God-fearing" patriots, but they also had the sense to realize that their religious beliefs should not be shoved down the throats of others, fearing that they would trade one oppressive state religion for another. It's the reason why the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the 1st Amendment were written.
Oh, and I found this as well: make of this what you will.
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Jonathan Goes To the Movies: V-Day Edition
Since today is Valentine's Day and I haven't done a movie review in a month, here's a special V-Day edition of Jonathan Goes To the Movies.
Something Borrowed came out last year, but I decided not to watch it because it looked like a generic rom-com. That, and I already watched Bridesmaids at the time, a funnier and much more savy comedy about the bonds of female friendships. You know you're in chick-flick hell when 10 minutes in, you're already hating both the main characters in this mess: Rachel (Ginnifer Goodwin from HBO's polygamy family drama Big Love) is in love with the dreamy Dex (Colin Egglesfield, standing there as eye candy for the female audience), her friend from law school, but he's currently engaged to her vapid and obnoxious BFF, Darcy (Kate Hudson, what happened to you?). Rachel and Dex have one drink too many one night after her b-day bash and wham!, they end up back at her place, and without clothing. I'm not even going to explain what happens from here, because you can probably guess what's going to happen from here and reliving the terrible jokes (complete with the predictable besties grinding on the fiancee on the dance floor, tasteless gay jokes, and creepy masturbation humor!) makes my head hurt. Hudson, who bust out onto the scene with her heartbreaking performance as Penny Lane in Almost Famous, hasn't made anything that good since her Oscar-nominated turn as the Band-Aid for Stillwater, and it's a shame to watch Hudson star in these types of roles. Even worse, the script has all these characters - with the exception of one - doing all these shallow, despicable things because the plot tells them to. The exception to this rule is John Krasinski, the film's comic relief, Rachel's trusted male confidant, and the only redeemable feature about this piece of shit.
1/2 stars out ****
1/2 stars out ****
Deep S^*t for Mitt?
Mitt Romney has the deep pockets to win the nomination and the fact he's the GOP establishment's guy to take on President Obama in the General Election is a huge bonus. The one thing Mitt doesn't have - and frankly, has never had in his quest for the presidency, was the support of his base. Try as he might to say that he's a Reagan conservative-Republican, the heart of the matter is that the conservative base just doesn't like him, or trust him to carry out conservative policies. Today's polling numbers in his home state of Michigan all point to one very surprising outcome: he may actually lose this race.
Santorum's gain is striking, but eerily reminiscent of similar surges by former House Speaker Newt Gingrich that failed to persist, most recently in Florida in the aftermath of his South Carolina victory. The movement to Santorum in Michigan is consistent with the trend in national polling, but the recent volatility in the Republican race is a warning that Monday's polling snapshot may not persist.
The two new surveys were conducted using different methods and produced different estimates, but both show Santorum surging into the lead. A live interviewer poll conducted by the American Research Group (ARG) from Feb. 11 to 12 shows Santorum leading Romney by just 7 percentage points (33 to 27 percent), followed by Gingrich (21 percent) and Texas Rep. Ron Paul (12 percent).
An automated, recorded voice survey conducted by the Democratic Party-affiliated firm Public Policy Polling (PPP) gives Santorum a much larger, 15 percentage point lead over Romney (39 to 24 percent), and shows roughly half as much support for Gingrich (11 percent) as the ARG poll but exactly the same support for Paul (12 percent).Adding insult to injury, he's trailing behind Santorum now in the national polls. So, is this the final ditch effort by the conservative base to rally behind someone who's name isn't Willard Mitt Romney, or will this end up becoming the bubblegum hit of the week before they realize they have no alternative but stand behind Romney? Stay tuned...
Celebrate! Celebrate!
Monday, February 13, 2012
Madonna Wasn't This bad
Or hell maybe she was I don't know I didn't watch her. If you know me you know that I am not a fan of Super Bowl halftime. For me it's usually time to take a bathroom break and pick up a pizza. The year of the famous tit gate I was playing a game of Super Techmo Bowl on the original Nintendo. Damn I have to get another Nintendo system with that game, Mike Tyson's punch out and Super Mario Brothers...But I digress.
Anyway take a look and be amazed at ending of the halftime show for Super Bowl XXIII called Be Bop Bamboozled.
If you just have to watch more of it... Here is the intro.
Yes it were up to me there would be no fading rock act gracing the halftime stage of a Super Bowl. But this shit was beyond embarrassing.
The best Superbowl halftime show ever? Super Bowl I. The Michigan and Arizona bands. And I bet they didn't cost what Madonna cost either. Maybe that was why a ticket to the first Super Bowl was $10.
Anyway take a look and be amazed at ending of the halftime show for Super Bowl XXIII called Be Bop Bamboozled.
If you just have to watch more of it... Here is the intro.
Yes it were up to me there would be no fading rock act gracing the halftime stage of a Super Bowl. But this shit was beyond embarrassing.
The best Superbowl halftime show ever? Super Bowl I. The Michigan and Arizona bands. And I bet they didn't cost what Madonna cost either. Maybe that was why a ticket to the first Super Bowl was $10.
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Your Grammy Winners
Record of the Year“A Taste of Honey,” Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass
Album of the YearSeptember of My Years, Frank Sinatra (Reprise)
Song of the Year“The Shadow of Your Smile” (Love Theme From The Sandpiper), Paul Francis Webster and Johnny Mandel, songwriters
Best New ArtistTom Jones
Most Promising New Recording ArtistPeter Serkin, pianistBest
Vocal Performance, Male“It Was a Very Good Year,” Frank Sinatra
Best Vocal Performance, Female My Name Is Barbra, Barbra Streisand
Best Performance By a Vocal Group We Dig Mancini, Anita Kerr Singers
Best Performance By a ChorusAnyone for Mozart?, Swingle Singers
Best Contemporary (Rock and Roll) Single“King of the Road,” Roger Miller
Best Contemporary (Rock and Roll) Vocal Performance, Male“King of the Road,” Roger MillerBest Contemporary (Rock and Roll) Vocal Performance,
Female“I Know a Place,” Petula Clark
Best Contemporary (Rock and Roll) Performance Group (Vocal or Instrumental)“Flowers on the Wall,” Statler Brothers
Best Rhythm and Blues Recording“Papa's Got a Brand New Bag,” James Brown (King)
Best Instrumental Jazz Performance, Small Group or Soloist With Small GroupThe “In” Crowd, Ramsey Lewis Trio
Best Instrumental Jazz Performance, Large Group or Soloist With Large GroupEllington '66, Duke Ellington Orchestra
Best Original Jazz CompositionJazz Suite on the Mass Texts, Lalo Shifrin, composer
Best Country and Western Single“King of the Road,” Roger Miller
Best Country and Western AlbumThe Return of Roger Miller, Roger Miller (Smash)
Best Country and Western Song“King of the Road,” Roger Miller, songwriter
Best Country and Western Vocal Performance, Male“King of the Road,” Roger Miller
Best Country and Western Vocal Performance, Female“Queen of the House,” Jody Miller
Best New Country and Western ArtistStatler Brothers
Best Gospel or Other Religious Recording (Musical)Southland Favorites, George Beverly Shea and the Anita Kerr Quartet (RCA)
Best Folk RecordingAn Evening With Belafonte/Makeba, Harry Belafonte and Miriam Makeba (RCA)
Best Instrumental Arrangement“A Taste of Honey,” Herb Alpert, arranger
Best Arrangement Accompanying a Vocalist or Instrumentalist“It Was a Very Good Year,” Gordon Jenkins, arranger
Best Instrumental Performance, Non-Jazz“A Taste of Honey,” Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass
Best Score From an Original Show AlbumOn a Clear Day, Alan Lerner and Burton Lane (RCA)
Best Original Score Written for a Motion Picture or Television ShowThe Sandpiper, Johnny Mandel, composer (Mercury)
Album of the Year, ClassicalHorowitz at Carnegie Hall, An Historic Return, Vladimir Horowitz (Columbia)
Best Classical Performance, OrchestraIves, Symphony No. 4, Leopold Stokowski conducting American Symphony Orchestra
Best Classical Chamber Music Performance, Instrumental or VocalBartók, The Six String Quartets, Juilliard String Quartet
Best Classical Performance, Instrumental Soloist(s) (With Orchestra)Beethoven, Concerto No. 4 in G Major for Piano and Orchestra, Artur Rubinstein; Erich Leinsdorf conducting Boston Symphony
Best Classical Performance, Instrumental Soloist (Without Orchestra)Horowitz at Carnegie Hall, An Historic Return, Vladimir Horowitz\
Best Opera RecordingBerg, Wozzeck, Karl Bohm conducting Orchestra of German Opera, Berlin; solos: Fisher-Dieskau, Lear and Wunderlich (Deutsche Grammophon)
Best Classical Choral Performance (Other Than Opera)Stravinsky, Symphony of Psalms; Poulenc, Gloria, Robert Shaw conducting Robert Shaw Chorale and RCA Victor Symphony Orchestra
Best Classical Vocal Performance, With or Without OrchestraStrauss, Salome (“Dance of the Seven Veils,” Interlude, Final Scene); The Egyptian Helen (Awakening Scene), Leontyne Price
Best Composition By a Contemporary Classical ComposerSymphony No. 4, Charles Ives, composer
Best Comedy PerformanceWhy Is There Air?, Bill Cosby
Best Spoken Word or Drama RecordingJohn F. Kennedy: As We Remember Him (Columbia)
Best Recording for ChildrenDr. Seuss Presents “Fox in Sox” and “Green Eggs and Ham,” Marvin Miller (RCA)
Best Album Cover, Graphic ArtsBartók, Concerto No. 2 for Violin; Stravinsky, Concerto for Violin, James Alexander, graphic artist; George Estes, art director (RCA)
Best Album Cover, PhotographyJazz Suite on the Mass Texts, Ken Whitmore, photographer; Bob Jones, art director (RCA)
Best Album NotesSeptember of My Years, Stan Cornyn, annotator (Reprise)
Album of the YearSeptember of My Years, Frank Sinatra (Reprise)
Song of the Year“The Shadow of Your Smile” (Love Theme From The Sandpiper), Paul Francis Webster and Johnny Mandel, songwriters
Best New ArtistTom Jones
Most Promising New Recording ArtistPeter Serkin, pianistBest
Vocal Performance, Male“It Was a Very Good Year,” Frank Sinatra
Best Performance By a Vocal Group We Dig Mancini, Anita Kerr Singers
Best Performance By a ChorusAnyone for Mozart?, Swingle Singers
Best Contemporary (Rock and Roll) Single“King of the Road,” Roger Miller
Best Contemporary (Rock and Roll) Vocal Performance, Male“King of the Road,” Roger MillerBest Contemporary (Rock and Roll) Vocal Performance,
Female“I Know a Place,” Petula Clark
Best Contemporary (Rock and Roll) Performance Group (Vocal or Instrumental)“Flowers on the Wall,” Statler Brothers
Best Rhythm and Blues Recording“Papa's Got a Brand New Bag,” James Brown (King)
Best Instrumental Jazz Performance, Small Group or Soloist With Small GroupThe “In” Crowd, Ramsey Lewis Trio
Best Instrumental Jazz Performance, Large Group or Soloist With Large GroupEllington '66, Duke Ellington Orchestra
Best Original Jazz CompositionJazz Suite on the Mass Texts, Lalo Shifrin, composer
Best Country and Western Single“King of the Road,” Roger Miller
Best Country and Western AlbumThe Return of Roger Miller, Roger Miller (Smash)
Best Country and Western Song“King of the Road,” Roger Miller, songwriter
Best Country and Western Vocal Performance, Male“King of the Road,” Roger Miller
Best Country and Western Vocal Performance, Female“Queen of the House,” Jody Miller
Best New Country and Western ArtistStatler Brothers
Best Gospel or Other Religious Recording (Musical)Southland Favorites, George Beverly Shea and the Anita Kerr Quartet (RCA)
Best Folk RecordingAn Evening With Belafonte/Makeba, Harry Belafonte and Miriam Makeba (RCA)
Best Instrumental Arrangement“A Taste of Honey,” Herb Alpert, arranger
Best Arrangement Accompanying a Vocalist or Instrumentalist“It Was a Very Good Year,” Gordon Jenkins, arranger
Best Instrumental Performance, Non-Jazz“A Taste of Honey,” Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass
Best Score From an Original Show AlbumOn a Clear Day, Alan Lerner and Burton Lane (RCA)
Best Original Score Written for a Motion Picture or Television ShowThe Sandpiper, Johnny Mandel, composer (Mercury)
Album of the Year, ClassicalHorowitz at Carnegie Hall, An Historic Return, Vladimir Horowitz (Columbia)
Best Classical Performance, OrchestraIves, Symphony No. 4, Leopold Stokowski conducting American Symphony Orchestra
Best Classical Chamber Music Performance, Instrumental or VocalBartók, The Six String Quartets, Juilliard String Quartet
Best Classical Performance, Instrumental Soloist(s) (With Orchestra)Beethoven, Concerto No. 4 in G Major for Piano and Orchestra, Artur Rubinstein; Erich Leinsdorf conducting Boston Symphony
Best Classical Performance, Instrumental Soloist (Without Orchestra)Horowitz at Carnegie Hall, An Historic Return, Vladimir Horowitz\
Best Opera RecordingBerg, Wozzeck, Karl Bohm conducting Orchestra of German Opera, Berlin; solos: Fisher-Dieskau, Lear and Wunderlich (Deutsche Grammophon)
Best Classical Choral Performance (Other Than Opera)Stravinsky, Symphony of Psalms; Poulenc, Gloria, Robert Shaw conducting Robert Shaw Chorale and RCA Victor Symphony Orchestra
Best Classical Vocal Performance, With or Without OrchestraStrauss, Salome (“Dance of the Seven Veils,” Interlude, Final Scene); The Egyptian Helen (Awakening Scene), Leontyne Price
Best Composition By a Contemporary Classical ComposerSymphony No. 4, Charles Ives, composer
Best Comedy PerformanceWhy Is There Air?, Bill Cosby
Best Spoken Word or Drama RecordingJohn F. Kennedy: As We Remember Him (Columbia)
Best Recording for ChildrenDr. Seuss Presents “Fox in Sox” and “Green Eggs and Ham,” Marvin Miller (RCA)
Best Album Cover, Graphic ArtsBartók, Concerto No. 2 for Violin; Stravinsky, Concerto for Violin, James Alexander, graphic artist; George Estes, art director (RCA)
Best Album Cover, PhotographyJazz Suite on the Mass Texts, Ken Whitmore, photographer; Bob Jones, art director (RCA)
Best Album NotesSeptember of My Years, Stan Cornyn, annotator (Reprise)
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Mark Noonan: Women shouldn't be in the military
This time, Mark Noonan's comments aren't found on Blogs For Victory, but rather on my Wall. Some backstory first: On Thrusday, while Presidential Candidate Rick Santorum was at the Conservative Political Action Conference (or CPAC for short), he gave an interview for CNN's John King, addressing the Pentagon's decision to give female soldiers more jobs in the front lines of the battlefield. Santorum's response? They should, but they shouldn't because of a stereotype.
"I want to create every opportunity for women to be able to serve this country, and they do so in an amazing and wonderful way and they're a great addition -- and they have been for a long time -- to the armed services of our country."Today, Mark Noonan echoed Santorum's thoughts, and went further.
Then came the big "but."
"But I do have concerns about women in front-line combat, I think that could be a very compromising situation, where people naturally may do things that may not be in the interest of the mission, because of other types of emotions that are involved," Santorum continued. "It already happens, of course, with the camaraderie of men in combat, but I think it would be even more unique if women were in combat, and I think that's probably not in the best interest of men, women or the mission."
Combat is no place for a woman, and no man of honor would ever contemplate sending a woman in to combat. Start to realize what we have forced ourselves to forget: men and women are different.I asked him later why, if a woman wanted to serve her country, why he felt that she shouldn't. The answer, and I wish I wasn't joking about this:
Jonathan - men and women have different roles to play in society. Each is vital to the other within their own sphere. To say that men and women are interchangeable in life's course is folly...a direct denial of self-evident truth. If women are to fight we might as well say that men are to give birth.Mark: First, it is biologically impossible for men to give birth, and I know what you're going to say next: "Because it is a fallacy that men can get pregnant, so to should this idea that women should serve in the U.S. Military, for it goes against the very gender roles of men and women and their place in it as nature dictates it." Mark, this isn't the 1950's anymore, where the man was the bread-winner and the woman stayed home and did the household chores. We as a society have moved on from this outdated stereotype.Try joining us when you get the chance.
Whitney Houston 1963-2012
Obviously always tragic news when somebody so young passes. Rest In peace Whitney.
We're Going To Hell Hurray... Hurray We're Going To Hell Today... Today
If you have read this blog long enough you know it's normally the sweet, lovable Count who pisses people off. Well one thread has proven the definite excepion to the rule...
On Thursday August 7th, 2008 Jonathan Holmes wrote a blog entry about Lee Stoneking
We are still getting hate posts. The last two left today...or I saw them today...
Anonymous said...
wow,,,hell already has your names,,,sad
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have heard Lee Stoneking preach many times. He is not a televangelist. He is a very humble and spiritual man of God. He has given much of his life to the ministry, not for the intent of becoming famous or wealthy, but because of his true desire to spread the gospel and reach others. I would suggest that the next time that you choose to mock and blaspheme a speaker of any sort, you would do better to get your facts straight. That is just shoddy journalism, irresponsible blogging, and slanderous. But chalk one up for freedom of speech. I agree with Mark, contact Mr. Stoneking and allow him the opportunity to respond to your accusations and judgements. I am sure that you won't do that, you would much rather take a cowards way out and publically trash someone who is not given an opportunity to share their side of the story. If in fact, you do, I pray that you can become a little more open minded and recognize that not only is Mr. Stoneking a phenomenal person, but one of the most spiritual men I have had the privilege of hearing speak. I regards to the comments about the congregation, my own pastor was there, and although I cannot speak on behalf of all of those attending, I do know several, and they do not deserve this kind of attack either.
On Thursday August 7th, 2008 Jonathan Holmes wrote a blog entry about Lee Stoneking
We are still getting hate posts. The last two left today...or I saw them today...
Anonymous said...
wow,,,hell already has your names,,,sad
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have heard Lee Stoneking preach many times. He is not a televangelist. He is a very humble and spiritual man of God. He has given much of his life to the ministry, not for the intent of becoming famous or wealthy, but because of his true desire to spread the gospel and reach others. I would suggest that the next time that you choose to mock and blaspheme a speaker of any sort, you would do better to get your facts straight. That is just shoddy journalism, irresponsible blogging, and slanderous. But chalk one up for freedom of speech. I agree with Mark, contact Mr. Stoneking and allow him the opportunity to respond to your accusations and judgements. I am sure that you won't do that, you would much rather take a cowards way out and publically trash someone who is not given an opportunity to share their side of the story. If in fact, you do, I pray that you can become a little more open minded and recognize that not only is Mr. Stoneking a phenomenal person, but one of the most spiritual men I have had the privilege of hearing speak. I regards to the comments about the congregation, my own pastor was there, and although I cannot speak on behalf of all of those attending, I do know several, and they do not deserve this kind of attack either.
Nebraska Vs Penn State
Friday, February 10, 2012
Pilling The Boehner
OK, this piece over at The Smirking Chimp - a site almost as good for rant-a-thons as BAD - all but completely encapsulates my feelings about the GOP latching with leech-like desperation onto the ready availability of contraception as the issue that will topple Colossus Obama, presumably installing President Mormon, Moonbase or possibly even Man-on-Dog instead.
You've probably been following the issue already - the ginned-up outrage on the farthest fringes of the right that legislation establishing ready access to health care (something they already don't much like) would include, horror of all horrors, a requirement that a common, widely-used and publicly-approved-of medication be a mandatory part of any employer's health care package. Specifically, The Pill. And House Cryer-in-Chief Boehner's threat, this week, that Congress will legislatively overturn any such mandate in the name of "religious freedom."
News flash, John of Orange. Here are a few salient points.
First, this isn't a free speech issue. Yes, we know that your camp has done everything in its power to cast it as such, when it came to Bush-era policies allowing, say, pharmacists to refuse to dispense the morning-after pill on grounds that doing so would violate their personal religious convictions. (Here's where I could elaborate on the theme of, "You think pork is unclean, don't work at Der Wienerschnitzel," but that would be a distraction...and I think everyone here gets the point, anyway.) And, yes, we expect you to predictably trot out the "corporations are people" mantra, in this case, to insist that it is a blow to the very foundations of the Union to insist that contraceptive coverage be part of any organization's health plan, because all those incorporate "people" should be allowed the freedom to choose for all their myriads of employees.
But it's not really a speech issue at all, free or not. Nobody but Congress, lobbyists and pundits comb through the minutiae of anybody's health care plan to argue free speech protections. The Average American (Remember us? We employ you.) is much more grateful for having a job with benefits, hoping for a reasonable per-paycheck contribution, and having the ability to look askance at that scary co-pay number...because I can promise you it is better than the cost of sourcing coverage for even a small family on your own. Been there.
It's an insurance policy. Not a manifesto.
And I think the Average American also instinctively understands where the boundary between a corporation's "personhood" rights and his or her own individual rights lies. It's pretty clear that, if only for reasons of the doctor/patient confidentiality tradition, the pharmacy counter does not and should not get vetted by the boardroom first. One's medical condition should only become an employer's issue when it affects one's personal job performance; not in advance, and certainly not in a broad, company-wide sense.
Second, it's not a religious freedom issue because this is NOT - repeat, NOT - a policy that dictates any given religion's articles of faith, or mandates a state religion. Again, it's an insurance policy. Not a scripture. No employer short of holy orders is, I hope, going to say that by agreeing to employment with us you agree to the following rules of behavior, ascribe to the following beliefs, etc. That is, I think, still pretty much illegal.
Furthermore, nothing in this legislation compels any individual employee to hop right on out there and get on the Pill, now, this instant, should doing so violate that employee's individual beliefs. You are offering an option: one which is, as I noted above, widely available for generations, popular with the public, and effective, and safe. It preserves, rather than overturns, the conscience objection. And if you're that scared that your faithful are going to stray from your position (as, I might point out, plenty of Catholic women already do), then your issues are more in your own communications department and less in your employee benefits division.
It's an insurance policy. Not a sermon from the pulpit. Offering is not requiring or even endorsing, any more than having a vegetarian dish or two on the menu forces or urges everyone working OR eating in the restaurant to become vegan.
I could make the counter-argument, in fact, that efforts to oppose contraceptive coverage being a universal element of the health care legislation constitute a denial of equal protection under the law to women, whose health condition is the one most greatly affected by pregnancies, be they planned, accidental and/or unwanted. Yes, we know that Justice "Bite Me" Scalia apparently has no problem with discrimination against women.(Appalling, in and of itself.) And that nobody has reintroduced the ERA (Equal Rights Amendment, for those of you too young to remember how haltingly it limped its way to shameful failure), or legislation like it, in the past couple of decades is a perplexing tragedy.
But one thing you need to remember before you tread down this path, Boehner. Your constituency and those of all your GOP cronies isn't composed of Catholic bishops, Fox News pundits and right-wing ideologues alone. They also include a great many women. At least some of those women have been listening, especially in light of the recent (and ongoing) SGK/PP travesty. And when they step into the voting booth, in the primaries or the general election later this year, let's just consider. Will they march happily in lockstep with you and the other white men of privilege who are trying so hard to dictate to them what they are and are not "entitled" to when it comes to their health, simultaneously talking out of the other side of your mouths about how government needs to "stay out of" individuals' decision-making about their lives? Or will they turn to another candidate who seems to exhibit something like care or empathy for the issues that really matter to them, and genuine individual empowerment?
Stay tuned. Every day it looks more and more to me like the right-wingers have chosen the wrong horse to bet on in this race, by fixating on this issue. It's the modern-day burka of the Western world, and I believe waving it in the wind as Boehner is doing will prove to be the act of sheer foolishness that finally brings down their house of cards decisively.
One of my other favorite blogs, Library Grape, goes on to demonstrate how Boehner is making it both dumb and dumber.
You've probably been following the issue already - the ginned-up outrage on the farthest fringes of the right that legislation establishing ready access to health care (something they already don't much like) would include, horror of all horrors, a requirement that a common, widely-used and publicly-approved-of medication be a mandatory part of any employer's health care package. Specifically, The Pill. And House Cryer-in-Chief Boehner's threat, this week, that Congress will legislatively overturn any such mandate in the name of "religious freedom."
News flash, John of Orange. Here are a few salient points.
First, this isn't a free speech issue. Yes, we know that your camp has done everything in its power to cast it as such, when it came to Bush-era policies allowing, say, pharmacists to refuse to dispense the morning-after pill on grounds that doing so would violate their personal religious convictions. (Here's where I could elaborate on the theme of, "You think pork is unclean, don't work at Der Wienerschnitzel," but that would be a distraction...and I think everyone here gets the point, anyway.) And, yes, we expect you to predictably trot out the "corporations are people" mantra, in this case, to insist that it is a blow to the very foundations of the Union to insist that contraceptive coverage be part of any organization's health plan, because all those incorporate "people" should be allowed the freedom to choose for all their myriads of employees.
But it's not really a speech issue at all, free or not. Nobody but Congress, lobbyists and pundits comb through the minutiae of anybody's health care plan to argue free speech protections. The Average American (Remember us? We employ you.) is much more grateful for having a job with benefits, hoping for a reasonable per-paycheck contribution, and having the ability to look askance at that scary co-pay number...because I can promise you it is better than the cost of sourcing coverage for even a small family on your own. Been there.
It's an insurance policy. Not a manifesto.
And I think the Average American also instinctively understands where the boundary between a corporation's "personhood" rights and his or her own individual rights lies. It's pretty clear that, if only for reasons of the doctor/patient confidentiality tradition, the pharmacy counter does not and should not get vetted by the boardroom first. One's medical condition should only become an employer's issue when it affects one's personal job performance; not in advance, and certainly not in a broad, company-wide sense.
Second, it's not a religious freedom issue because this is NOT - repeat, NOT - a policy that dictates any given religion's articles of faith, or mandates a state religion. Again, it's an insurance policy. Not a scripture. No employer short of holy orders is, I hope, going to say that by agreeing to employment with us you agree to the following rules of behavior, ascribe to the following beliefs, etc. That is, I think, still pretty much illegal.
Furthermore, nothing in this legislation compels any individual employee to hop right on out there and get on the Pill, now, this instant, should doing so violate that employee's individual beliefs. You are offering an option: one which is, as I noted above, widely available for generations, popular with the public, and effective, and safe. It preserves, rather than overturns, the conscience objection. And if you're that scared that your faithful are going to stray from your position (as, I might point out, plenty of Catholic women already do), then your issues are more in your own communications department and less in your employee benefits division.
It's an insurance policy. Not a sermon from the pulpit. Offering is not requiring or even endorsing, any more than having a vegetarian dish or two on the menu forces or urges everyone working OR eating in the restaurant to become vegan.
I could make the counter-argument, in fact, that efforts to oppose contraceptive coverage being a universal element of the health care legislation constitute a denial of equal protection under the law to women, whose health condition is the one most greatly affected by pregnancies, be they planned, accidental and/or unwanted. Yes, we know that Justice "Bite Me" Scalia apparently has no problem with discrimination against women.(Appalling, in and of itself.) And that nobody has reintroduced the ERA (Equal Rights Amendment, for those of you too young to remember how haltingly it limped its way to shameful failure), or legislation like it, in the past couple of decades is a perplexing tragedy.
But one thing you need to remember before you tread down this path, Boehner. Your constituency and those of all your GOP cronies isn't composed of Catholic bishops, Fox News pundits and right-wing ideologues alone. They also include a great many women. At least some of those women have been listening, especially in light of the recent (and ongoing) SGK/PP travesty. And when they step into the voting booth, in the primaries or the general election later this year, let's just consider. Will they march happily in lockstep with you and the other white men of privilege who are trying so hard to dictate to them what they are and are not "entitled" to when it comes to their health, simultaneously talking out of the other side of your mouths about how government needs to "stay out of" individuals' decision-making about their lives? Or will they turn to another candidate who seems to exhibit something like care or empathy for the issues that really matter to them, and genuine individual empowerment?
Stay tuned. Every day it looks more and more to me like the right-wingers have chosen the wrong horse to bet on in this race, by fixating on this issue. It's the modern-day burka of the Western world, and I believe waving it in the wind as Boehner is doing will prove to be the act of sheer foolishness that finally brings down their house of cards decisively.
One of my other favorite blogs, Library Grape, goes on to demonstrate how Boehner is making it both dumb and dumber.
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Some things never change.
Today's nugget of right-wing insanity comes from Blogs for Victory.com. Yes, i'm going back to covering Noonan, Margolis, and the cesspool of deranged, foaming-at-the-mouth conservatives which make up the site. Mind you, this post and these comments are days old, as this hit piece was written last week, but since the latest character assassination spirited debate from the GOP has to do with birth control and whether or not Obama wants to wage a war on all faith, the post fits with what we're hearing on the cable news networks.
As most of the subject topics on B4V eventually veer into rambling conspiracy theories, bible-thumping, and the daily saloon brawl with moderate to liberal posters, I won't mention how Matt the Hack violates the 8th Commandment from Almighty God by saying the President's faith in Christ is not sincere in his eyes (that is another topic i'm going to tackle writing about over the weekend) and i'm going to cut to a debate on, what else - Obama's citizenship, or in the minds of "js03" and "neocon1" lack thereof.
js03
February 3, 2012 at 11:02 am
#
Obama’s behavior yesterday is even more disturbing than Nixon’s.
Nixon at least respected the judicial branch enough to have his
attorneys show up in court and follow procedure[.] … Nixon acknowledged
the authority of the judicial branch even while he fought it. Obama, on
the other hand, essentially said yesterday that the judicial branch has
no power over him. He ordered his attorneys to stay away from the
hearing. He didn’t petition a higher court in a legitimate attempt to
stay the hearing[.] … Rather than respecting the legal process, Obama
went around the courts and tried to put political pressure directly on
the Georgia Secretary of State. When that failed, he simply ignored the
judicial branch completely.
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/media_blackout_in_obama_georgia_ballot_eligibility_case.html#ixzz1lKauoaa0
As most of the subject topics on B4V eventually veer into rambling conspiracy theories, bible-thumping, and the daily saloon brawl with moderate to liberal posters, I won't mention how Matt the Hack violates the 8th Commandment from Almighty God by saying the President's faith in Christ is not sincere in his eyes (that is another topic i'm going to tackle writing about over the weekend) and i'm going to cut to a debate on, what else - Obama's citizenship, or in the minds of "js03" and "neocon1" lack thereof.
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/media_blackout_in_obama_georgia_ballot_eligibility_case.html#ixzz1lKauoaa0
at least nixon resigned before he was tossed on his arse…obie one should arrested and charged with treason against the US for usurping the office of POTUS…
the man may be sitting in the chair, but he isnt my president…the POTUS doesnt need to hide the truth…or commit fraud…or refuse to appear in court to prove he is eligible to be POTUS…the man himself is a fraud…not a president
-
How so? The President has in no way committed treason. Why can’t conservatives discuss policies instead of attacking the president with totally bogus accusations? You are not a true American with such a narrow minded attitude. He sure is my president, and I am hoping he will be my president for a second term. Those running in the GOP are jokes. Newt wants to go to the moon, and I wish he and his home wrecker wife would do just that; poor Mitt just cannot seem to get his foot out of his mouth. I think his wife is lovely – but she certainly looked embarrassed and uncomfortable yesterday in one of The Donald’s casino’s while Mitt was being crown the king by Trump. I guess Trump’s trophy wife was too busy selling her junk on QVC to show up. What a joke the GOP has become.
I'm sure if "js03" ever got a hold of the president's birth certificate, or even used the Wiki to look up a bio on the early life of President Obama, i'm sure he'd find some way to twist it and out-crazy Glenn Beck in flinging shit at the wall to see what sticks. Also: I may have despised many of the policies of the last administration, but at the end of the day, Bush 43 was still my President, and I would have addressed him as such. A pity you can't do the same.
scummy
he has committed treason and like js03 he is NOT my president either, he is a FRAUD, a lying thieving usurper illegally occupying this position.
the sooner he is gone the better, as well as the pigs the Klintoons.
Psalm 109:8
the truth;
Yep, you read that right: "js03" thinks that based on the President's supposed "illegibility" that the two Supreme Court justices he appointed to the bench, and that the Senate confirmed afterwords, are invalid; as well as every person in his Cabinet - from Vice President Biden and Secretary of State Clinton on down, who were sworn in and again, confirmed by the Senate (with the exclusion of the Vice President) are invalid; with "neocon1" going further off the deep end believing that the President of the United States should not be, as "js03" stated, should be thrown in prison for the rest of his life, but should be executed.
every law given to him by congress is invalid
every government official appointed by him, and every act they directed, are invalid
every ambasador, and every treaty, appointed and signed by him, are void
the damage done by the usurpation of the office of POTUS is immeasurable, and a life in prison sentence is wholly justified in this case…as it is treason to usurp the constitution by fraudulently obtaining the office of POTUS
I would prefer to see a gallows and a rope, send him along with the other Hussein (sadam) in the same manner for treason.
I hope the CIA, the FBI, and any other federal agencies are keeping tabs on these two. BTW: the bloggers "js03" and "neocon1" may freely come over and defend their comments on this thread if they so choose, along with any other blogger from the site.
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Wading in the Fundie Gene Pool
Gather 'round, boys and girls - while it's still that quiet lull between the War On Christmas and the War On Easter, it's time once again to dabble our toes in the pond of inexplicable nuttery that is the oeuvre at Fundies Say the Darndest Things. February 2012 is off to quite a start! Here are some of the more "special" nuggets.
Next, new for you from the department of Crazy Shit We Imagine Those Unlike Us Are Planning:
Number 2 is actually what the Fundie crowd does. That's part of the reason why it took decades for pagan servicepeople to gain the right for a pentacle to be displayed on their headstones.
Number 3. Really? Gingrichgrad? Santorumville? No, wait, better be just Torumville. Nuts.
Number 4. First of all, the military is not supposed to endorse religion, so it might be advantageous that it not appear to. And I actually think it's a good idea to provide a military chaplaincy for those so inclined. But it had better be Baskin-Robbins in nature. 31 flavors, not just plain vanilla.
Numbers 5, 7 and 9: just silly. Good luck selling #9 in the Southwest, BTW. All those Jesuses and Marias - ¡Ay de que!
Number 6. Would never happen. Anyone can do this now. The thing is, people like me can't be forced to hang around and listen or participate, which is the scenario this poster really wants.
Number 8. Interesting. Any business owned by a Christian is a religious one. I'm pretty sure there are plenty of believers who would be surprised to learn that their gas station, condo development or bowling trophy business has suddenly become a religious enterprise like the Salvation Army or the convent down the road. Rather than just, you know, a job.
But it's in number 10 that we finally come to the crux of this rant. Fear of Islam and its followers. Wake up, Fundie crowd! When we who are not faith-based point to you as extremists, you can be very quick to say "We're not all like that..." and to paint yourselves as moderate and reasonable. But perish the thought that the same standard should apply to any other faith...say, one that is as much based on Abrahamic lore as your own, but has been sadly tarred by the misguided acts of a few dozen fanatics with box cutters and a vicious agenda. Nice job turning the other cheek, there.
But, wait! More convoluted paranoia ahead!
That's all for now! Plenty more at the link if you're spoiling for a good laugh or facepalm...
Allah is not God but a sand monkey’s idol. It is called also the Kaaba, a so-called moonstone meteorite on display at the caboose or grand mosque…PURE IDOLATRY!!!SO much to enjoy here. The dehumanizing epithet "sand monkey," confusing the Kaaba not only with Allah but with the "caboose" (??), and speculating that miniature Kaaba souvenirs (Kaabae, maybe? If such exist.) are in regular use as toilet paper. Imagine how offended the writer would be if someone were to suggest to him that all Christians wipe their bottoms with a crucifix, or printouts of the Sistine Chapel ceiling! Truly, a post worth framing so that you too can indulge in some PURE IDOLATRY!
It can be speculated that these sub human desert rats use similar black stones to wipe themselves, and since they are all ardent sodomites, you can make the connexion as they use the same stone “tool” as tribal totem then idol that they imposed on the Middle East by massive genocides.
Next, new for you from the department of Crazy Shit We Imagine Those Unlike Us Are Planning:
It’s only a matter of time before atheists like Jessica Ahlquist demand:OK, number 1 is absurd. That's like saying that anything on a public road, from Starbuck's and McDonald's to the local no-tell motel is perceived as being state-endorsed. Nobody thinks that. At least, nobody who thinks does.
- The state not allow Christian Churches on public roads throughout this country because it creates the illusion that the state endorses religion.
- Demand Churches remove their crosses and silence their bells so not to offend non-believers
- Cities like St Louis and San Diego change their names because the word Saint endorses a religion.
- The military remove all Christian Chaplains so not appear to endorse religion.
- Public College/high school sport programs remove the ‘Hail Mary’ pass from their playbook.
- Prayer in public will not be allowed anywhere because it might offend non-believers.
- Christians wear a giant C on the left side of their chest so they can be easily identified and thus publicly shunned.
- One will not be able to shop at a business owned by a Christian, in the name of FAIRNESS,because it gives the appearance of favoring a religious business over a secular one.
- Biblical Christian (Lucifer and Judas are exempt) names will no longer be accepted on birth certificates so it does not create the appearance of the state endorsing religion.
- Islam is exempt from All of the above rules in the name of diversity and as an expression of multiculturalism!
Number 2 is actually what the Fundie crowd does. That's part of the reason why it took decades for pagan servicepeople to gain the right for a pentacle to be displayed on their headstones.
Number 3. Really? Gingrichgrad? Santorumville? No, wait, better be just Torumville. Nuts.
Number 4. First of all, the military is not supposed to endorse religion, so it might be advantageous that it not appear to. And I actually think it's a good idea to provide a military chaplaincy for those so inclined. But it had better be Baskin-Robbins in nature. 31 flavors, not just plain vanilla.
Numbers 5, 7 and 9: just silly. Good luck selling #9 in the Southwest, BTW. All those Jesuses and Marias - ¡Ay de que!
Number 6. Would never happen. Anyone can do this now. The thing is, people like me can't be forced to hang around and listen or participate, which is the scenario this poster really wants.
Number 8. Interesting. Any business owned by a Christian is a religious one. I'm pretty sure there are plenty of believers who would be surprised to learn that their gas station, condo development or bowling trophy business has suddenly become a religious enterprise like the Salvation Army or the convent down the road. Rather than just, you know, a job.
But it's in number 10 that we finally come to the crux of this rant. Fear of Islam and its followers. Wake up, Fundie crowd! When we who are not faith-based point to you as extremists, you can be very quick to say "We're not all like that..." and to paint yourselves as moderate and reasonable. But perish the thought that the same standard should apply to any other faith...say, one that is as much based on Abrahamic lore as your own, but has been sadly tarred by the misguided acts of a few dozen fanatics with box cutters and a vicious agenda. Nice job turning the other cheek, there.
But, wait! More convoluted paranoia ahead!
Gay people...when I send my children to public school, I don't expect them to learn about being "black", [sic.] period. I send them to public school to learn there [sic.] place under "White supremacy", and to be grateful to "White people" for allowing them the priveledge [sic.] to learn, read a book, and think.OK, I have to confess, I don't even get what this one purports to mean! Is the suggestion that public schools are bastions of white supremacist thought? And this somehow results in gay advocacy as well? Because last time I looked at fringe movements, people, white supremacy and pro-gay agendas seemed to me about as far apart as Australia and Austria! Is this person even really a parent? Because I can't imagine any parent sending a child to school to "learn their place." And how does "black" fit in with any of this? But, it's the closing "peace be upon you" that really makes it...
The agenda behind homosexual instruction, in a "White Supremist" [sic.] operated public school is to effiminate [sic.] the males, and defeminate [sic.] the women to halt "birth production". [sic.]
And unless you have another educational agenda superior to the White Power establishment, (which I would like to hear, or see in writing), please tell me:
"How come straight teachers are teaching kids "how to be homosexual"? [sic.]
Peace be upon you
That's all for now! Plenty more at the link if you're spoiling for a good laugh or facepalm...
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
Final Thoughts on Super Bowl XLVI
Some final thoughts about Sunday's game:
1.) I had New England winning it all. I thought that Bill Belichick and Tom Brady wouldn't let Eli Manning do them in like they did in '08 when the Pats are one win away from 19-0. I thought despite a busted up Gronkowski and an atrocious defense, that Brady would carry them to their 4th title and march into the history books as the the 49ers of their time, and Brady being mentioned under the same breath as Joe Montana. I was wrong. Eli proved his championship run in SB XLII was no fluke, as he rallied his team late into the 4th quarter again vs. New England. A great game; not as legendary as XLII, but this one held its own. Congrats to the New York football Giants.
2.) Madonna? Meh. It wasn't the clusterfuck that last year's halftime performance was when the Black Eyed Peas stunk up the joint, but Madonna was lip-synching half of the time and she's really shown her age as she was limited in her dancing abilities, but that's not what you wanted to hear me talk about, so let me express the real story of that halftime show...
Who fucking cares!?!?!
The British rapper M.I.A. didn't whip out a tit, or drop an F-bomb. Yes, it was a publicity stunt to get her name out there, but let's not make this bigger than what it it is.
3.) The Super Bowl ads this year weren't that great. Go Daddy needs to stop with the 'sex sells' crap, as it's merely become one big tease that doesn't equal the payoff. The talking baby for E-Trade was adorable and funny to a point, but now its become tiresome and repetitive. And Audi? Really? Vampires? I mean, unless you were going to kill off the douchebags from Twilight with the new car you're promotion, then this was just a poor commercial overall. There were good ones, though, including Acura's ad with Jerry Seinfeld, the Doritos one with the slingshot baby, and the 30 second teaser spot for Marvel's The Avengers was all sorts of badass. Leave it to Clint Eastwood to deliver the best ad of the night with the "Halftime in America" commercial for Chrysler.
Also: a few words on Battleship, the latest Hasbro game to get the Hollywood treatment:
This looks like utter crap!
1.) I had New England winning it all. I thought that Bill Belichick and Tom Brady wouldn't let Eli Manning do them in like they did in '08 when the Pats are one win away from 19-0. I thought despite a busted up Gronkowski and an atrocious defense, that Brady would carry them to their 4th title and march into the history books as the the 49ers of their time, and Brady being mentioned under the same breath as Joe Montana. I was wrong. Eli proved his championship run in SB XLII was no fluke, as he rallied his team late into the 4th quarter again vs. New England. A great game; not as legendary as XLII, but this one held its own. Congrats to the New York football Giants.
2.) Madonna? Meh. It wasn't the clusterfuck that last year's halftime performance was when the Black Eyed Peas stunk up the joint, but Madonna was lip-synching half of the time and she's really shown her age as she was limited in her dancing abilities, but that's not what you wanted to hear me talk about, so let me express the real story of that halftime show...
Who fucking cares!?!?!
The British rapper M.I.A. didn't whip out a tit, or drop an F-bomb. Yes, it was a publicity stunt to get her name out there, but let's not make this bigger than what it it is.
3.) The Super Bowl ads this year weren't that great. Go Daddy needs to stop with the 'sex sells' crap, as it's merely become one big tease that doesn't equal the payoff. The talking baby for E-Trade was adorable and funny to a point, but now its become tiresome and repetitive. And Audi? Really? Vampires? I mean, unless you were going to kill off the douchebags from Twilight with the new car you're promotion, then this was just a poor commercial overall. There were good ones, though, including Acura's ad with Jerry Seinfeld, the Doritos one with the slingshot baby, and the 30 second teaser spot for Marvel's The Avengers was all sorts of badass. Leave it to Clint Eastwood to deliver the best ad of the night with the "Halftime in America" commercial for Chrysler.
Also: a few words on Battleship, the latest Hasbro game to get the Hollywood treatment:
This looks like utter crap!
Colorado, Minnesota, and Missouri Tonight
 |
| Will any of these three fine gentlemen be gone from the race after tonight? |
Rating The Super Bowls XXX-XXXIX
I have already commented on how I feel the Super Bowl is on a roll with 7 competitive games is a row and 6 of those being good to great games. A quick glance at Super Bowls 30-39 shows that the trend has been happening for sometime.
Superbowl XXX Dallas 27 Pittsburgh 17. Good to very good Superbowl. Difference in game 2 bad Neil O'Donnell interceptions. Pittsburgh considerably out yards Dallas and both teams have huge plays.
Superbowl XXXI Green Bay 35 New England 21. Brett Favre's only Superbowl win was a solid Superbowl that again featured many big plays. Game started out as rout but became very competitive. Game was put away with Desmond Howard kickoff return.
Superbowl XXXII Denver 31 Green Bay 24. One of the greatest Superbowls ever and exhibit a in the case that Brett Favre was massively overrated. John Elway's defining game.
Superbowl XXXIII Denver 34 Atlanta 19. Crap Superbowl. If Atlanta had a chance, and I believe they didn't, it was taken away the week of the game when on the same night he was given an award for his high moral character Eugine Robinson (the DB not the journalist) gave an undercover cop $40 for a blowjob.
Superbowl XXXIV St. Louis 23 Tennessee 16. This Superbowl gets a great rating simply because the difference between the winning team and the losing team was 1 yard. However for 3 quarters St. Louis dominated and held a 16-0 lead. But oh that 4th quarter was maybe the most exciting quarter in Superbowl history and then there was the finish.
Superbowl XXXV Baltimore 34 New England 7. Unless you liked watching one half of one of Fox News favorite couples Jason Sehorn get sodomized this was one of the real stinkers of Superbowl history. Only a quick 3 play 3TD spurt in the third quarter (an INT and a kickoff return for Baltimore, a Kickoff return for NY Giants) brought any excitement. Kerry Collins has one of the worst games in Superbowl history.
Superbowl XXXVI New England 20 St. Louis 17. The game that made Tom Brady. St. Louis was a 14 point favorite but fell behind 14-3 at half. Game was tied 17-17 when New England got the ball and John Madden said play for overtime. Brady took team down and got into position for 48 yard Field Goal to win game which Adam Nougatieri split down the uprights. Great Superbowl.
Superbowl XXXVII Tampa Bay 48 Oakland 21 Shit Superbowl. The brilliant Bill Callahan didn't change up his play calls so the Bucs new what Tampa was running. Plus he wouldn't run the football and Callahan would put poor Rich Gannon in a spot to throw 5 interceptions 3 of which were returned for scores. Callahan would be fired the next year and end up at Nebraska where he would destroy the program.
Superbowl XXXVIII New England 32 Carolina 29. Maybe the strangest Superbowl ever. Very low scoring until a 24 point explosion in last 2 minutes made score 14-10 New England at half. Then of course you had the tit and the streaker. There would again be no points in the third quarter but the 4th was wild. after Carolina tied the game at 29-29 his kickoff went out of bounds which gave New England the ball at the 40 yard line. Adam Nougatieri kicked a 41 yard field goal to win the game. Great Superbowl sadly remembered more for Janet's tit than a great game.
Superbowl XXXIX New England 24 Philadelphia 21. unlike New England's other 3 point wins this one was somewhat decisive.Down 24-14 Philadelphia went on a 4 minute drive that made the score 24-21 but left them little time remaining. When New England recovered the onside kick the game was all but over.
So there you go. The phenomenon of the exciting Superbowl has been going on for awhile. 7 of the 10 games played between Superbowl XXX and XXXIX were good to great games. Which means since Superbowl XXX there have been 17 Superbowls and 13 of them have been at least good games and many of the games have been great. That is a pretty good %.
Superbowl XXX Dallas 27 Pittsburgh 17. Good to very good Superbowl. Difference in game 2 bad Neil O'Donnell interceptions. Pittsburgh considerably out yards Dallas and both teams have huge plays.
Superbowl XXXI Green Bay 35 New England 21. Brett Favre's only Superbowl win was a solid Superbowl that again featured many big plays. Game started out as rout but became very competitive. Game was put away with Desmond Howard kickoff return.
Superbowl XXXII Denver 31 Green Bay 24. One of the greatest Superbowls ever and exhibit a in the case that Brett Favre was massively overrated. John Elway's defining game.
Superbowl XXXIII Denver 34 Atlanta 19. Crap Superbowl. If Atlanta had a chance, and I believe they didn't, it was taken away the week of the game when on the same night he was given an award for his high moral character Eugine Robinson (the DB not the journalist) gave an undercover cop $40 for a blowjob.
Superbowl XXXIV St. Louis 23 Tennessee 16. This Superbowl gets a great rating simply because the difference between the winning team and the losing team was 1 yard. However for 3 quarters St. Louis dominated and held a 16-0 lead. But oh that 4th quarter was maybe the most exciting quarter in Superbowl history and then there was the finish.
Superbowl XXXV Baltimore 34 New England 7. Unless you liked watching one half of one of Fox News favorite couples Jason Sehorn get sodomized this was one of the real stinkers of Superbowl history. Only a quick 3 play 3TD spurt in the third quarter (an INT and a kickoff return for Baltimore, a Kickoff return for NY Giants) brought any excitement. Kerry Collins has one of the worst games in Superbowl history.
Superbowl XXXVI New England 20 St. Louis 17. The game that made Tom Brady. St. Louis was a 14 point favorite but fell behind 14-3 at half. Game was tied 17-17 when New England got the ball and John Madden said play for overtime. Brady took team down and got into position for 48 yard Field Goal to win game which Adam Nougatieri split down the uprights. Great Superbowl.
Superbowl XXXVII Tampa Bay 48 Oakland 21 Shit Superbowl. The brilliant Bill Callahan didn't change up his play calls so the Bucs new what Tampa was running. Plus he wouldn't run the football and Callahan would put poor Rich Gannon in a spot to throw 5 interceptions 3 of which were returned for scores. Callahan would be fired the next year and end up at Nebraska where he would destroy the program.
Superbowl XXXVIII New England 32 Carolina 29. Maybe the strangest Superbowl ever. Very low scoring until a 24 point explosion in last 2 minutes made score 14-10 New England at half. Then of course you had the tit and the streaker. There would again be no points in the third quarter but the 4th was wild. after Carolina tied the game at 29-29 his kickoff went out of bounds which gave New England the ball at the 40 yard line. Adam Nougatieri kicked a 41 yard field goal to win the game. Great Superbowl sadly remembered more for Janet's tit than a great game.
Superbowl XXXIX New England 24 Philadelphia 21. unlike New England's other 3 point wins this one was somewhat decisive.Down 24-14 Philadelphia went on a 4 minute drive that made the score 24-21 but left them little time remaining. When New England recovered the onside kick the game was all but over.
So there you go. The phenomenon of the exciting Superbowl has been going on for awhile. 7 of the 10 games played between Superbowl XXX and XXXIX were good to great games. Which means since Superbowl XXX there have been 17 Superbowls and 13 of them have been at least good games and many of the games have been great. That is a pretty good %.
Monday, February 6, 2012
Happy Birthday, Ronald Reagan!
Today is the ol' Gipper's birthday, and to celebrate the historic occasion, i'm going to ignore the AIDS epidemic.
Sunday, February 5, 2012
Super Bowl XLVI Sunday
21-17
Any thoughts on the game, the entertainment, the commercials, hell the puppy bowl go here. And GO GIANTS!
Another Classic!
 |
| Welcome To The Hall Of Fame Eli! |
 |
| Classy Rush! |
Take a look at the Superbowl Since XL
XL Pittsburgh 21 Seattle 10. Competitive but shitty game. bad football, bad officiating, bad Superbowl.
XLI Indianapolis 29 Chicago 17. Minus Rex Grossman this was a fun, entertaining game. I would rate this a good Superbowl.
XLII New York 17 New England 14. Still to me the greatest Superbowl ever.
XLIII Pittsburgh 27 Arizona 23. Great Superbowl with last minute finish. Much of the middle part of the game dominated by Pittsburgh.
XLIV New Orleans 31 Indianapolis 17. Another very good to great Superbowl. Score misleading. Game very competitive. Great QB play.
XLV. Green Bay 31 Pittsburgh. 25. Big early lead by Green Bay but Pittsburgh rallies. Very Good to great Superbowl.
XLVI New York 21 New England 17. Great sequel not decided until last play. maybe not quiet as good as first game played by 2 teams but still great game.
The Superbowl is on a helluva a roll right bow. 6 Good to great games in a row.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
