Friday, September 19, 2008
Palin Drone
Sarah Palin and the McCain Palin campaign have gone to great lengths to present Gov. Palin as a reformer and as a fiscal conservative. She was elected Governor in part by promising to cut wasteful spending. In her speeches, she's often tooting the horn of "I sold the jet, I fired the chef" but then there's this stuff about how she charged a per diem for the times she spent at home.
I take offense to this. The citizens of Alaska have hired Sarah Palin and have agreed to pay her about $150,000/year. They've also given her a house in their capital city. Governor Palin apparently prefers her private residence and I don't begrudge her that choice. However, that residence is in Wasilla, not in Juneau. She's charged the tax-payers of Alaska $60/day for the time she spent in her own home when they've provided her a home in Juneau. In effect, the tax-payers are being held responsible for two houses. Furthermore, a per diem is appropriate when an employee travels to do work for their employer. She had no work to do in Wasilla, it was just that she wanted to be there. All this from a woman who touts the ways she has cut wasteful spending. When it's all said and done, I'd like to see how much those per diems and unnecessary travel expenses add up to. Why should the people of Alaska have to pay for Sarah Palin to commute between Juneau and Wasilla when they've provided her a residence in Juneau?
Beyond that, I take umbridge with the claim that she "fired the chef." Lets say that the per diem she's been charging is not for lodging but is instead to cover meal expenses that the governor has incurred. Has firing the governor's chef really had an effect then? Has she done anything except transfer the money that would have been paid to a chef to herself?
I think this is completely outrageous and could so easily seem trivial to many people. Check her out, America! This is the woman John McCain has chosen for his ticket; a woman who promises to clean up Washington and cut fiscal waste. If she cuts fiscal waste like she has in the past, we'll all be paying more and Sarah Palin will continue to pocket the difference.
Friday, June 06, 2008
Umm...nice to meet you...
...
Pleasure to meet you.
Monday, March 17, 2008
Tuesday, February 05, 2008
Saturday, September 29, 2007
overheardinmadison
-State Street
Wednesday, August 08, 2007
WUT
Saturday, June 23, 2007
overheardinmadison (at Battle of the Bands)
Old Guy: [speaking about a punk, i-want-to-be-Blink-182 band] Oooh, this band's real good.
Me: Compared to what?!
Sound Engineer: [on PA mike] Is that how you want it to sound?
Guitarist: Yeah!
Sound Engineer: [obviously confused] Umm....ok.
-Battle of the Bands!
Thursday, June 21, 2007
Thursday, June 14, 2007
overheardinmadison
-gay softball
Monday, June 11, 2007
overheardinmadison
Exasperated woman to screaming toddler: What do you want for lunch besides a smack in the face?
-State Street
Saturday, June 02, 2007
Ultra-Condensed Historical Event 1 - The American Revolution
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[It is 18th Century NORTH AMERICA]
America
England
America
John Adams: We should declare independence!
Continental Congress: Sit down, John!
John Adams: But!
Congress: Ok, fine. TJ, you write it.
Thomas Jefferson: But, I don’t…ok…umm…When in the Course of human Events it becomes necessary for one People to…*
England
Congress: Hey,
Washington
[
People of
British Soldiers: We see you too.
A gun: BANG
The World: Did you hear that?
[
Benjamin Franklin: I have a wit and I wish to meet with you, Louis XVI.
Louis XVI: I cannot – not until these upstarts prove their metal.
France
Thomas Paine: These are the times that try men’s souls.*
America
[
America
Louis XVI: Ok, Franklin.
Abigail Adams: Don’t forget about the ladies, John. And, oh yeah, pins.
A Soldier: I am a soldier. Sleeping on the wet forest floor sucks.
England
America
England
America
England
America
George Washington: Congress, tho you are still an illegitimate body, I hereby forfeit my sword to you in an act of extreme humility that shall shock the world. I am also forthwith cementing my legendary status as a man of truly heroic stature.
America
Articles of Confederation: Ummm….we’re kinda together but not really, guys.
Constitutional Convention: Oy, we need to do something, and how…
[They DELIBERATE and it is HOT.]
Constitutional Convention: By Jove – We the People of the
America
Some people and James Madison: Umm…ok – here’s the bill of rights. :)
America
* = Actual line
Sunday, January 07, 2007
Kill the Yanks!
Things I love about this:
1. Never encourage the confederacy.
2. "Every boy wants a Ramco toy! andsodogirls."
3. Theme music: We'll All be Gay when Johnny Comes Marching Home"
4. It's a toy CANNON! It shoots things.
5. NEVER have a confederate flag.
6. The ramrod.
Saturday, December 16, 2006
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Leslie Hall

There are many things that I have failed to let you all know about. I shall endeavor to catch you up over the next few weeks. Update #1 involves LESLIE HALL! You may remember the various odes to her that I posted a few months ago. She's some sort of performance art genius. I LUV her always. Anyway, she was in Madison for a show in October and I was there with bells (sadly sans sweater) on.
It all started with a vintage fashion show featuring items from a local resale shop. I don't know why but I wasn't expecting much. It turned out to be pretty cool. The fashions themselves rocked. It was a nice fusion of old clothes, newish styling. I dug it. All this was followed by a local band called, Screaming Cyn Cyn and the Pons (I think). It was kinda screamy but really funny and quite enjoyable. It was clearly not Rachel's cup-o-tea but Anna, Andy, and I were all over it. Check em out if you can. Support the local music scene.
OK, all the foreplay out of the way, it was time for the Gold-Panted-Goddess herself. She did not fail to amaze! For all of you unfamiliar, get on it! There are many reasons to like her/respect her:
- She has talent! She writes/sings/dances with amazing wit and irony.
- She's hilarious. Simple.
- She's made a real career for herself utilizing the internet. Myspace particularly. I think that's pretty impressive. She has harnessed a new media and has used it to connect to a semi-hidden audience.
- She wears GOLD pants.
- She is the curator of the world's only traveling, gem-sweater museum.
Everyone together: "That's a ruff post!" Here's a similarly ruff pic:

.
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Muntjac!
The muntjac is a mammal. It is related to deer but it is smaller. It belongs to the family Muntiacinae within the order Cervidae. The muntjac comes from Asia and is the oldest kind of deer. Although is originally came from Asia, now it is found all over England. Muntjac are sometimes called "Barking Deer" because of the sound they make.
Muntjac are very small. They look like they have big back legs which makes them look funny. They look a little like they'll fall forward onto their face. When they run, they keep their head close to the ground and they put their butts in the air. When they are full-grown, they usually are only about 43-46 cm tall at their shoulders. That's about the size of a medium dog! Muntjac are mostly brown-red in summer and dark brown in winter. They have white bellies.
Boy and girl muntjac have special holes on their faces. They make stuff in these holes to leave their smell on stuff. It is kinda creamy and whiteish. Boys grow antlers. They usually only have 2 and these horns end in a hook. They are pretty short and are mostly just one spike, not like our deers. Both boys and girls have "canine" teeth which are sometimes called "tusks". These teeth can move to make eating easier!
They eat plants. Sometimes muntjacs can break little trees so they can eat the stuff on the top. I think they also climb trees sometimes. It's okay to be short when you can still eat the high up stuff.
I think muntjac are cool and I'm glad I wrote a report about them. Here's a picture of a muntjac.

This question also came up: If 'muntjac' were a verb, what would it mean? Here I use it in a sentence:
The challenge to you, dear reader, is to come up with the best definition for 'muntjac' the verb and post it in the comments.
- I was just sittin there when Bobby muntjac'd me.
- I'm gonna go out tonight and jac some munt.
- One, two, muntjac to my loo.
.
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
Saturday, November 04, 2006
Just because
Just because
Be sure to vote on Tuesday
Mr. Right on Thursday 11/02/2006,
Because they’re here. Because they’re queer. Because they’ve always been here. Because they’ve always been queer. Because they’ll always be here. Because they’ll always be queer. Because we’re all queer, one way or another. Because the way they’re queer isn’t all that different from the way we’re queer, when you think about it. Because they love each other, and what’s so queer about that? Because they’ve always been there for each other. Because they’ve always been there for us. Because we haven’t always been there for them, and we should have been. Because they’re our sons, our daughters, our sisters, our brothers, our uncles, our aunts, our nephews, our nieces, our fathers, our mothers, our teachers, our preachers, our doctors, our nurses, our soldiers in Iraq. Because, if asked, they’re not supposed to tell, and what kind of nonsense is that? Because if they’re willing to lay down their lives for their country, why shouldn’t their country lay down something for them? Because it says, right there in the U.S. Constitution, “We the people, in order to form a more perfect Union,” and aren’t they people, and don’t they deserve a more perfect Union? Because it says, right there in the Declaration of Independence, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these rights are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Because, I repeat, all men are created equal. Because all women are created equal too, but it took us over 100 years to figure that out. Because we’re sometimes a little slow on the uptake. Because we’re fallible, we’re human, which is why, over 200 years later, we’re still trying to form a more perfect Union, not a perfect Union. Because that would be tempting the gods. Because there are no perfect unions, as most married people would be the first to admit. Because, otherwise, why would there be so many divorces, so many broken homes, so many broken children? Because marriage, as we all know, can be quite hard. Because it’s an institution, and who wants to be in an institution? Because it’s not just an institution, it’s a sacred institution — too sacred, perhaps, to be left to heterosexuals. Because it has been left to heterosexuals, for the most part, and let’s face it, they’ve largely screwed it up. Because marriage, ultimately, isn’t about a piece of paper, a certificate, a blood test, a joint filing statement. Because when the marriage dissolves, the piece of paper gets torn up and thrown in the trash can. But just because heterosexuals have screwed it up doesn’t mean homosexuals shouldn’t be allowed to screw it up as well. Just because heterosexuals don’t always cherish that piece of paper doesn’t mean homosexuals won’t clasp it to their bosoms, worship at the altar of marriage while their heterosexual brothers and sisters are out playing golf. Because homosexuals know what it’s like to be denied their rights under the U.S. Constitution. Because they’ve been wrestling with these issues since the day they were born. Because it’s not something you choose, like a change of clothes. Because if it were, few would have chosen it. Because the rest of us have made it so hard for them, which isn’t right. Because they’re just like us. Because we’re just like them. Because there is no us and them. Because we’re here. Because we’re queer. Because it’s high time we all got used to it.
Send all marriage proposals to: MR. RIGHT, ISTHMUS, 101 KING ST., MADISON, WI 53703. OR CALL 251-1206, EXT. 152. OR E-MAIL MRRIGHT@ISTHMUS.COM.
Wednesday, November 01, 2006
"NO!"
Marriage. Shall section 13 of article XIII of the constitution be created to provide that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state and that a legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state?
Right now, the law in Wisconsin defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman. The amendment would prevent a court in the future from deciding that the law as it currently stands is discriminatory and, in effect, an illegal law. By voting "NO" on the referendum, we will be helping to keep discrimination from being codified in our state's guiding document. It is patently unacceptable to tamper with the constitution of our state to satisfy the whims of bigots and homophobes. The supporters of this proposal have painted the issue as a way of "protecting" marriage. However, even if gay people were allowed to marry, there is nothing in that to undermine the marriage bond of a straight couple. If marriage is so perilous that allowing more loving couples to enter into it would undermine it's foundation, perhaps we should rethink that foundation.
We like to think that marriage is about love and on one level it sure is but, marriage is also a contract that confers a shit-load of rights and responsibilities on those people signing on. There are over 1,000 of these rights, benefits and responsibilities bestowed on the federal level and a bunch more on the state level. You can find a partial list here.
In addition to the audacity of writing discrimination into the constitution, the amendment also fails to make practical economic sense. Most legitimate business organizations have come out on the 'no' side for solid business reasons such as revenue loss and difficulty in recruitment. The UW system is also solidly opposed to the amendment for practical reasons. At the moment, the UW is the only Big 10 school that does not provide full domestic partner benefits. This is a very real concern when it comes to recruiting the best minds available. The competitive edge needed to get the best scientists, writers, lecturers, artists, etc. is missing at the moment and the effect has been noticed.
Most readers of this blog are well aware of all these issues. In case you weren't, I hope I've shed some light. Please visit the Fair Wisconsin website and talk, talk, talk. There's less than a week to go until voting day. Get talking with your friends and coworkers. You know gay people whether you're aware of it or not. Think about what it'd mean for this state to say these people are not worthy of the same rights as everyone else.
On a personal note I want to express how inspiring it is to see my friends rally behind this issue. I have many straight friends who are much more involved in this issue than I am and I think it's really amazing and it shames me a bit. I've always known you were a smart group (you do have me as a friend after all) but the aggressiveness shown around this issue is really something to celebrate and so, I do.
***Update from Debbie***
go to www.fairwisconsin.com for more info, to donate, or to find out how to volunteer in your area of the state.

