nancynall.com » A little levity.

A little levity.

“Homo­sex­ual eases into 100 final at Olympic trials” — and all is explained.

Also, some­one at IU needs to catch up with Jack Shafer’s excel­lent urban-legend debunk­ing on so-called “pharm par­ties” at Slate. Actu­ally, that par­tic­u­lar IU some­one needs to catch up with a lot of things. In a new study on sub­stance abuse, a task force rec­om­mends: “Raise prices for alco­hol and other drugs.” Your alco­hol, maybe! Leave mine alone!

27 responses to
“A little levity.”

  1. brian stouder said on June 30th, 2008 at 3:17 pm

    Homo­sex­ual didn’t get off to a par­tic­u­larly strong start in the first semi­fi­nal, but by the halfway mark he had estab­lished a com­fort­able lead. He slowed some­what over the final 10 meters-nothing like the way-too-soon com­plete shut­down that almost cost him Sat­ur­day. Asked how he felt, Homo­sex­ual said: “A lit­tle fatigued.”

    Haha­ha­ha­ha­ha­ha­haha!!!!

    And if the AP head­line had been “Gay fin­ishes strong in come-from-behind win” the auto­cor­rected ver­sion might have been banned in Boston

  2. coozledad said on June 30th, 2008 at 3:19 pm

    I think I have a new name for one of my chickens.

  3. beb said on June 30th, 2008 at 3:49 pm

    brian stouder quip about ‘homo­sex­u­akl makes come-from –behind vic­tory reminds me of an eip­sode of “My Name is Earl” where, over the years, the motto of the boys reform camp has con­stantly in an attempt to avoid ped­er­sti­cal innuendos.

    How does one raise taxes on ille­gal drugs?

    Actu­ally there is an answer. You sell excise taxs which must be affixed to all illicit drugs. When some­one gets busts for mar­i­juana, for exam­ple. Not only are they in pos­ses­sion of an ille­gal sus­tance but would be guilty of tax evasion

    Rais­ing taxes on tobacco and alco­hol is a dumb idea because once you raise the taxes high enough peo­ple won’t stop using tobacco and alco­hol, they’ll look for ways to smug­gle them in from lower tax states.

  4. Jeff (the mild-mannered one) said on June 30th, 2008 at 3:51 pm

    Increase the cost? has any­one priced a bot­tle of Maker’s Mark recently? and Loretto KY isn’t even that far away, so it isn’t all diesel costs …

  5. Jen said on June 30th, 2008 at 4:24 pm

    Rais­ing the cost of alco­hol isn’t going to work, at least not much, at IU (and prob­a­bly most other col­leges). The kids that are abus­ing drugs and alco­hol seemed to be the rich fraternity/sorority kids who are using daddy’s credit card to buy booze and pills. When I was down there, we’d usu­ally make a trip up to Trader Joe’s in Indy to buy some Two-Buck Chuck, or just get a few bot­tles of Boone’s Farm and make due. But the rich kids would always come into class every day and talk about how they’d got­ten smashed the night before.

    Also, now that I’m out of col­lege, I’ll be sad if they raise the price of my occa­sional bot­tles of Oliver Win­ery black cherry honey-wine. It’s one of our few indul­gences, and we don’t even get it that often!

  6. caliban said on June 30th, 2008 at 5:33 pm

    Why does some media whore like Huf­fen­puff con­tinue to rag on Kerry? The deal is pretty obvi­ous, Kerry risked his life and served, W snuck out the back door. Shit­heads rais­ing this crap are a bunch of Cheney’s that had other pri­or­i­ties. You can lie your ass off, Kerry’s a hero Baracjk never imagined.

    Ray­gu­nistas hated Kerry because he exposed them. If you don’t under­stand this, you’re a moron.

  7. James said on June 30th, 2008 at 6:31 pm

    Asked how he felt, Homo­sex­ual said: “A lit­tle fatigued.”

    Hmmm… I’m won­der­ing if the “gay-check” also changed that.

    Shouldn’t that be “A lit­tle fagged out?”

  8. caliban said on June 30th, 2008 at 6:44 pm

    So-called pro­gres­sives that japped on Kerry, how do you feel when barack starts back­track­ing? Here’s the real deal. Kerry couldn;t believe a pres­i­dent would flat out lie his ass off

    Kerry is a hero. Get­ting shot down doesn;t make you a hero. Avoid­ing the draft on Daddy.s dime. The entire idea that bail­ing makes you a hero is repugnant.Blavkwell’s obscene inter­cention in Ohio is enough to con­vict the ass­hole of treason.Anybody that voted for ralpmh is a moron. and elected a war crim​i​nal​.So much for progressive.

    Kerry won, if this scum­bag didn;t cheat in Cuhahroga county,.

  9. Gasman said on June 30th, 2008 at 6:48 pm

    Why pun­ish those who use alco­hol respon­si­bly by rais­ing taxes? By that logic, we should raise the price on cars to stop drunk dri­ving, or com­put­ers to stop inter­net crimes.

    If the kids are under­age, throw their drunken butts in jail, or bet­ter yet, jail the adults (or par­ents) that buy them booze. Down here in Albu­querque they seize and sell the cars of those arrested for DWI, even before con­vic­tion. So far, the courts are let­ting it fly. But, we need rad­i­cal solu­tions to the DWI prob­lem here as New Mex­ico rou­tinely has peo­ple with mul­ti­ple arrests ( I heard of one with as many as 22 pre­vi­ous DWI charges) who get back out and com­mit more offenses.

    Here is an exam­ple of one of the more tragic recent cases:
    http://​www​.abqjour​nal​.com/​p​i​x​/​s​o​u​n​d​s​l​i​d​e​s​/​d​a​n​a​p​a​b​stdwi/

  10. caliban said on June 30th, 2008 at 9:07 pm

    Peace. Take a kook at this website,

    As I’ve said. So-called prgroessieves are turn­ing on Barack. Holier than tho.

    Kerry was a spetac­u­lar patriot, run­ning a Swift Boat and tes­ti­fy­ing as a Win­ter Patriot. Swift Boat aholes seem to believe W’s non involve­ment was excus­able.. Well, object­ing and turn­ing up as tor­turer in chief are two entirely dif­fer­ent things. How do lying to Con­gress and lying about Texas national Guard equal any­thing but mendacity?

    Employ com­mon sense. Kerry fore­saw a polit­i­cal career, or Nixon’s pet slan­ders Kerry. The inter­net is sup­posed to turn out the whole truth. Who’s a liar about what what he did dur­ing Viet­Nam? That would be W., and McCain has jumped on the lying band­wagon. How does get­ting shot down make any­body a hero> It doesn’t. Wes­ley Clark left Viet­Nam on a stretcher. W exited Viet­nam with a tequila shot.

    Poppy left WWII a scared teenager that bailed out. W avoided Viet­mam coked to the bills while Kerry served and W’s sur­ro­gates maligned him. This is quin­tes­sen­tially Republican.

    Party of Dick­less Cheney and other pri­or­i­ties. Party of Jack Bauer when you’ve got noth­ing to lose. Party of tor­tur­ing the fam­ily of Sheik Khalid Mohammed when you couldn’t prove he had any­thing to do with any­thing but being an ass kisser to the same Saudis whose ass you were kissing.

    Weley Clark s a trai­tor? Colin Pow­ell is a trai­tor for cov­er­ing up war crimes, and fur­ther­ing the Shock and Awe agenda of the midget that ben­e­fit­ted from Amer­i­can stu­pid­ity. Does any­body still think Rudi is an Amer­i­can hero? No, he’s a piece of dreck. W? Jesus. Piece of shit that jaw­boned tax cuts that screwed over tax­pay­ers. Any­body stick­ing with this ahole is some bizarre shit that still belirves he’s Cheney..

    Randy New­man had words for this. Jesus, what a jerk.

  11. brian stouder said on June 30th, 2008 at 9:35 pm

    Cal­iban, I agree with some of what you say. Kerry was a hero and brave leader, and a man who did his duty. He was a leader of men who could be counted on when the chips were down and things were tight, and the out­come was in doubt. And when he came home from the war, he proved to be a man of con­science and a truth-teller, as he under­stood the truth. He told an unpop­u­lar truth in a try­ing time in our his­tory, and that is a gen­uine reflec­tion of his moral courage.

    I’ll abstain from the remarks about W, other than to agree that he cer­tainly did get out of going to the war — but fly­ing that hurtling piece of machin­ery through Texas skies was cer­tainly not with­out risk; a risk of a fiery death no less ter­ri­ble than he could have suf­fered in the war.

    But you sim­ply go too far when you impugn the brav­ery of George Her­bert Walker Bush, or John McCain. Wes Clark made such an incred­i­bly stu­pid remark about McCain Sun­day that I’m tempted to think he actu­ally WANTED to dam­age the Obama campaign.

    How does get­ting shot down make any­body a hero? It doesn’t.

    Agreed.

    But, Cal­iban, spend­ing the next 5 years in cap­tiv­ity, and with his com­rades, and draw­ing strength from them, and lend­ing strength to them, and refus­ing parole — owing to who his father was — and remain­ing in the Hanoi Hilton to the end, come what may.….…Jesus Christ, cal­iban — if that isn’t the def­i­n­i­tion of self­less hero­ism, than I know not what that word could pos­si­bly mean.

    John McCain can be crit­i­cized — and crit­i­cized roundly and full throat­edly — for any num­ber of things.….but not for any lack of moral courage, or false claims of heroism.

  12. moe99 said on June 30th, 2008 at 10:17 pm

    Who’s crit­i­ciz­ing McCain for lack of moral courage? the only thing that Clark said, after he said that McCain was a hero to him and mil­lions is that get­ting shot down and being a POW is not the kind of exec­u­tive mil­i­tary expe­ri­ence that one can draw on to be pres­i­dent.
    I would note that being tor­tured has not stopped McCain from endors­ing tor­ture. He also did not sup­port the ben­e­fits for vet­er­ans offered by Webb, but is now lying his ass off and say­ing that he did. Lying is not a good trait in my mind for our high­est office, although many have lied to get there and once in office.…
    But, ymmv.

  13. Jeff (the mild-mannered one) said on June 30th, 2008 at 10:19 pm

    McCain argued against tor­ture, includ­ing water­board­ing when many in his party dis­puted whether it should be con­sid­ered torture.

    What­ever else McCain’s got against him in the ledger, being for tor­ture ain’t on the list.

    Hey, i wanna hear more ideas on fix­ing health-care — what uniquely Amer­i­can spin on sin­gle payer can we come up with that will help it fly? The fund­ing mech­a­nism is going to be the hard­est part, since pri­vate med­i­cine will never “van­ish” in this coun­try, but what­ever mech­a­nism we come up with has to incor­po­rate how we do it now.

    The good news is (pound­ing his worn drum) it won’t be as big a jump as peo­ple think, because its less than 40% of Amer­i­cans who are on entirely pri­vate, employer based plans. Med­ic­aid, Medicare, VA, and free care through public/nfp ERs cov­ers with CHIP sup­port cov­ers more than 60, imperfectly.

    So, do we just expand Medicare, and tax pri­vate med­ical care at a higher rate, while still col­lect­ing pay­roll FICA the same way — or do we get rad­i­cal, and VAT the whole thing?

    [ps — Cyn­thia has some good ideas at the end of the pre­vi­ous “Si, se puede” thread …]

  14. MichaelG said on June 30th, 2008 at 10:47 pm

    What Moe says. The Dems need to get out there on the offen­sive and start attack­ing or Obama will go the way of Kerry. By the way, Kerry may have been a fine river boat leader but he was a shitty, mealy mouthed can­di­date who ran a lousy cam­paign. He wouldn’t take a posi­tion on whether the sun rose in the east or the west. He didn’t run to win, he ran not to lose. The Dems had bet­ter not make that mis­take again. Do not under­es­ti­mate McCain. I didn’t vote for Kerry, I voted against Bush. The Repub­li­can slime machine will say what it’s going to say regard­less of what Obama says or does, so he may as well speak his mind. As Olber­mann says, he’s paid the price so he may as well get the game. Or some­thing like that.

    Jack Shafer has been chas­ing the media on drug hys­te­ria for sev­eral years now. He’s doing an excel­lent job.

    “Oliver Win­ery black cherry honey-wine”. Gag. I can only assume that’s a joke, although I will admit to cer­tain des­per­ate pur­chases (not to be spec­i­fied) in my youth. OK, here’s a cou­ple. Ever hear of Gallo Spanada? Richard’s Wild Irish Rose? It’s amaz­ing that I’m as old as I am. And that’s old. And Maker’s Mark is so awfully expen­sive. Trader Joe has a pretty decent bour­bon in Evan Williams. I quit Jack Daniels when they diluted the prod­uct from 86 to 80 proof. That’s sim­ply water­ing down the booze. Do the math over X num­ber of cases.

  15. Jeff (the mild-mannered one) said on June 30th, 2008 at 10:56 pm

    Is Evan Williams good? Say more about “pretty decent.” How does it stand up at room temp w/o ice?

    (Now THAT’S health care — men­tal health care, that is.)

  16. Joe K said on July 1st, 2008 at 12:35 am

    Night Train, Nuff said’
    Joe

  17. Gasman said on July 1st, 2008 at 1:15 am

    MichaelG, I too remem­ber — and not fondly — Richard’s Wild Irish Rose wine. It fueled at least one teen pukeathon of mine. Truly awful high octane “wine”, and I use that term loosely. As I remem­ber it was sick­en­ingly sweet despite being about 18% alco­hol. I think antifreeze may have been bet­ter. My tastes have def­i­nitely improved.

  18. moe99 said on July 1st, 2008 at 2:22 am

  19. Terry WAlter said on July 1st, 2008 at 5:23 am

    OK, Nancy cor­rect me if I’m wrong. I would guess that you sup­port at some level, the dra­con­ian anti-smoking laws and high taxes on tobacco. But when they come for your alcohol.…..

  20. Jeff (the mild-mannered one) said on July 1st, 2008 at 7:17 am

    Moe, i read the link — thanks! — which says, in the SFGate, at the out­set that McCain is “the most out­spo­ken of any pres­i­den­tial can­di­date in his oppo­si­tion to tor­ture.” Who doesn’t want to make inter­ro­ga­tion a process man­aged step-by-step by leg­is­la­tion, open to lit­i­ga­tion, so he sup­ported a veto of a bill that would do that.

    Doesn’t make him pro-torture, does make your argu­ment tor­tured. Tell me you’re vot­ing against him for his energy pol­icy, health care pro­pos­als, or even his Iraq inten­tions, and we can talk, but say­ing McCain is pro-torture is like say­ing your mid­dle name is Hus­sein — it makes you feel bet­ter, but it still isn’t true, and doesn’t help us fig­ure out what to do next.

    John Hus­sein McCain … it does have a ring to it, doesn’t it?

  21. coozledad said on July 1st, 2008 at 7:48 am

    Clark knows what he’s talk­ing about. He’s a suc­cess story. I hear pre­cious lit­tle hand­wring­ing and hair­pulling over the treat­ment he’s get­ting from our right wing press.
    McCain, how­ever stars in a Navy film shown to car­rier crews demon­strat­ing why you shouldn’t behave like a self-absorbed frat­boy when you stand a good chance of torch­ing your crew­mates.
    Clark made the grade and kept mak­ing it. McCain had to be trans­ferred repeat­edly because of his ten­dency to fail, and fail spec­tac­u­larly.
    Then there’s the small mat­ter of Char­lie Keat­ing. I sup­pose “Golfin” Bob Schi­ef­fer would refer to that hal­cyon period as McCain’s Sen­ti­men­tal Edu­ca­tion, and how engag­ing in graft gives McCain a more nuanced take on the cur­rent eco­nomic shit­storm– either that, or his habit metic­u­lously bal­anc­ing his campaign’s books with his cur­rent trollop’s for­tune and a strong com­mit­ment to pub­lic financ­ing (at least as strong as his com­mit­ment to his ex trol­lop).
    We’ve had enough fail upward enabled by shit-flinging tele­vi­sion journos. I think it’s time some of them were jailed.

  22. John said on July 1st, 2008 at 7:54 am

    Mad Dog 20/20 or Thun­der­bird (“What’s the word?”).

    Jesus, I don’t know how I remem­ber my col­lege days.

  23. Jeff (the mild-mannered one) said on July 1st, 2008 at 8:12 am

    Like Obama, love him, or feel cheer­ful indif­fer­ence to the phe­nom­e­non — you’ll all love this: http://​send​barack​y​ourbaby​.com/

  24. brian stouder said on July 1st, 2008 at 8:39 am

    We’ve had enough fail upward enabled by shit-flinging tele­vi­sion journos. I think it’s time some of them were jailed.

    So, gimme a lit­tle help, cz. When you call for jail for “some of them” above, are the “them” tele­vi­sion jour­nal­ists? If you meant crooked sen­a­tors involved in finan­cial chi­canery (‘John Chi­cane’? hmmmm…the epi­thet needs a lit­tle more spin, but it could work) then I agree with you.

    Speak­ing of chi­canery, here’s a story I thought I under­stood — but which I did not. If you have cable tv (and not satel­lite), you should read it

    http://​red​tape​.msnbc​.com/​2​0​0​8​/​0​7​/​t​h​e​-​o​t​h​e​r​-​d​i​g​i​t​.​h​t​m​l​#posts

    an excerpt -

    D-day for the ana­log broad­cast sig­nal – a date some observers have labeled “Y2K for TV” – is com­ing on Feb. 17, 2009. That cut­off will be abrupt. But the death of cable ana­log tele­vi­sion is arriv­ing a bit more stealth­ily, and more piece­meal. While one has almost noth­ing to do with the other, their coin­ci­den­tal tim­ing and sim­i­lar nomen­cla­ture are sure to make an already con­fus­ing sit­u­a­tion worse. The prospect of mil­lions of TVs sud­denly los­ing their abil­ity to dis­play cable TV chan­nels at about the same time that antenna-connected TVs stop work­ing entirely is a recipe for chaos. Joel Kelsey, an ana­lyst at Con­sumers Union, sees it as some­thing even more nefar­i­ous than that. He said some cable indus­try adver­tise­ments around the issue have been “extremely mis­lead­ing.” “There’s a whole lot of con­fu­sion in the mar­ket­place and this is adding to it,” he said.

    and

    The Fed­eral Com­mu­ni­ca­tions Com­mis­sion has set a very low bar for pro­tect­ing ana­log cus­tomers. Cable providers need only con­tinue to trans­mit ana­log ver­sions of broad­cast chan­nels (gen­er­ally, the famil­iar chan­nels 2 – 13) for the next three years. When cable firms adver­tise that its cus­tomers won’t have to do any­thing to keep their tele­vi­sions work­ing after Feb­ru­ary 2009, they are promis­ing only to keep those few, local broad­cast chan­nels avail­able to all.

    Speak­ing of tele­vi­sion peo­ple who SHOULD BE JAILED…!

  25. MichaelG said on July 1st, 2008 at 8:48 am

    MMJ­eff, Evan Williams is about on a par with Jack Daniels. It isn’t as good as Maker’s Mark. It’s a bit sweeter. I like it over ice. I don’t know how it would fare warm. Alright, I’d guess, but again, it’s not Maker’s Mark. And for the price dif­fer­en­tial, MM had bet­ter be by far the supe­rior sip.

  26. coozledad said on July 1st, 2008 at 9:42 am

    Brian: This lat­est OMG Obama has friends who express an opin­ion! Flap has my head up my own ass deeper than usual.
    Maybe jail is too harsh for David Gre­gory doing his shit­sack lar­val white­boy dance with Emcee Rove, but a quiet retreat in a Bagh­dad sub­urb might just awaken him to the fact he’s a rot­ten corpse. And maybe Bob Schi­ef­fer should give up golf, at least with his close per­sonal friends Bush and Cheney, for the sake of appear­ances.
    Some­one else has men­tioned the lack of out­rage among our vig­i­lant DC press corps while Bush and Rove insin­u­ated that McCain fathered black babies and and was guilty of spilling mil­i­tary infor­ma­tion to the NVA in exchange for cook­ies and oranges. There was no out­rage because all their damned cov­er­age is a drool­ing infomer­cial. Bush was paving the way for an abso­lutist fundy state, cour­tesy the DOJ, and these peo­ple were teabag­ging him the whole time. They are deeply dis­ap­pointed in the fail­ure of the total­i­tar­ian enter­prise, and they’re vir­tu­ally break­ing out in stig­mata over it .
    They were thor­oughly vested in the end of the republic.

  27. moe99 said on July 1st, 2008 at 11:10 am

    Jeff: Vot­ing no on a tor­ture ban bill, makes one a sup­porter of tor­ture in my book. It may be sim­plis­tic, but so is tor­ture – you are either for it or agin it and McCain, as a con­se­quence, despite all the obfus­ca­tion thrown up by his freinds in the media, is vot­ing to allow tor­ture. If the press made it that clear and that sim­ple, then maybe peo­ple would suf­fer as a con­se­quence of their actions. It would be nice for a change.

    btw, coo­zledad, I am in awe of your rhetor­i­cal abilities.