Introducing the new Trojan XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXL, for the painfully gifted man in your love life!
Oh, so THAT’S why Aisans marriages are reported to be among the happiest in the world!
Yep, in high school, that’s how all my condoms ended up too!
Caption That | Sonicfrog January 28, 2012 | 
Comments (5)
Trying to atone for the administration’s failure to support SOPA, in order to appease the tin-eared Tinsel Town transplants, Murdoch media paymasters, and restore the flow of money Hollywood moguls and their families and friends and neighbors and housemaids, etc. to his campaign, Obama must have hired Hollywood writers to create last nights SOTU address… Because MAN! There sure are a lot of remakes and sequels in this thing!!!!!
——————————————————————–
PS. I still can’t believe no one else has made an issue of the admission within the last article that these guys funnel their money to the candidates of their choice though family members and friends. That is pretty close to breaking the law, isn’t it?
Quote:
The boycott even extends to many of the moguls’ families who also are big Obama and Democratic Party donors. The situation is serious because many moguls and/or their families comprise Obama’s top bundlers in the TV/movie/music biz. Bundlers as defined by opensecrets.org are “people with friends in high places who, after bumping against personal contribution limits, turn to those friends, associates, and, well, anyone who’s willing to give, and deliver the checks to the candidate in one big ‘bundle’.” These donors direct more money to the candidates than anyone else. As of September 2011 these 357 elite bundlers were directing at least $55,900,000 for Obama’s re-election efforts — money that has gone into the coffers of his campaign as well as the Democratic National Committee, according to opensecrets.org. That figure by now has significantly increased and will continue to do so.
Fun Bits!, News Critique, Politics / Law Stuff | Sonicfrog January 25, 2012 |
Comments (0)
Well… Been a fun day. The car failed smog… miserably! And the dogs cornered a cat, who tried its best to turn my doggies faces into hamburger! But Elsa had it pinned down and that cat couldn’t do much. Man my dogs have tough muzzles!!!
When I was a kid, I had a dog that lost its eye to a cat, so I’m still kind of mad! But I’m also mad that it wasn’t the cat that keeps using out front yard bushes as a litter box!!! You guys got the wrong cat!!!!!
Now, on to the other cats…
The catalytic converters (called cats in the automotive world) on Murphy, the $500 87 Turbo Wagon, we’re both clogged and were just replaced. This problem reared it’s head this summer, and though I still drove it some, it was running so bad, I simply stopped driving it in October of last year. The reg was up anyway, and i put a non-op on it.
So here we are today. This last week I had both cats replaced. After driving it around a bit to warm it up, I took it to the smog test station…. Where it failed miserably!
Here are the results.
At idle:
RPM – 846 // CO2 – 10.3 // O2 – 0 // HC- 513 (MAX – 12O) // CO – 7.15. (MAX – 1)
High RPM
RPM – 2686 // CO2 – 12.8 // O2 – 0 // HC – 284 (MAX – 14O) // CO – 3.33. (MAX – 1)
When I got home, I checked for trouble codes…. None.
Checked the timing. At 20 BTDC w/ green terminals connected.
The Ox sensor was not quite tight. It wasn’t loose, but I was able to cinch it down maybe 1/4 of a turn.
At this point, I can’t see much else that is wrong with it. Now, I did run for a while with the clogged cats. It’s possible I may have damaged the OX sensor during that time(they are sometimes sensitive little buggers), and though I can’t recall exactly when I replace the cap, rotor, wires and plugs, it doesn’t seen like it was all that long ago – maybe a year or so.
PS. This spring / summer, when the cat problem started to rear its ugly head, I had thought about just ditching the car. Well, of course, I had recently put new tires on the thing, so I was already out a good chunk of money, so junking the thing was not an option. Plus…. For all the head-aches the EA82T can be…. I love that car!!!
Car Stuff, Doggies, Life | Sonicfrog January 24, 2012 |
Comments (0)
From this article making the rounds today:
“Broadly speaking, this seems typical for Gingrich’s career: His ideas on the big issues are standard-issue conservatism, and they’re mixed in with occasional flights of fancy (illuminate highways using orbiting mirrors that reflect moonlight),”….
Speaker Moonbeam!!!! 🙂
Uncategorized | Sonicfrog January 23, 2012 |
Comments (0)
Man, this is turning into a really fun election year. First, we all pretty much figured this would be a race to see how quickly we would coronate Mitt Romney as the GOP Presidential candidate. Romney did after all have the steadiest support of all the candidates – nine at one time.
Then, you started to see some interesting rumblings within the party. You started to see the third tier candidates get some love – first Bachmann, then Perry, then Cain, then Newt, then Santorum. The GOP was like kids in a candy store that mostly sold white chocolate – Romney – but the GOP customers desperately wanted to have a taste for the other flavors stocked in the store. But, thing is, the store only markets one flavor, it only makes its money from one product, and that flavor is Mitt Chocolate. So they’re not too keen on having too many customers choosing one of the other flavors, because the mark-up isn’t nearly as profitable. Well, it turns out, most of the other candies in the store were bitter-sweets, tasted good at first, but left a bad after-taste in the mouth. But, it turns out, one of the candies had a tootsie-roll center, and once you got to it… Mmmmmmmmmmmm.
Introducing Newt – Chocolate! It’s actually more of a giant gob-stopper than regular chocolate, with multiple layer, made of stuff you probably don’t want to know! It’s not really very sweet. Some of the flavor layers are so tart, you find you want to spit it out… In fact that was done once already! But there is something about this candy… It’s just so BOLD… And a heck of a lot more interesting than Mitt-Chocolate!
———————————————————————————————-
OK, enough of that.
I’ve been reading a lot about the GOP race this week-end, and had a few thoughts about the recent turn of events, and exactly why Newt has made the comeback, and just how he appeals to elements within the GOP. Granted, he’s not going to curry much favor with the evangelical set, but they already had their candidate, George W Bush, and we saw how that turned out; so they will just have to suck it up for a few election cycles. Newt trying to paint himself as an outsider is just about the most ridiculous strategy out there, maybe with the exception of Santorum trying to brand himself as “The” Tea Party candidate.
That said, Newt brings something to the table that no one else can… Well, almost no one else, but we’ll get to that exception in a moment.
** Note – My filter is off, and I’m going to make a few hints and allusions to things some readers might find offensive. I thought about editing it out after I was done typing this post, but… What The Hell! It’s My Blog! **
Point # 1 – For all his flaws, Newt is a well known public figure. He speaks a lot, A LOT!, and doesn’t have much of a PC filter to speak of (which may not be a bad thing). He’ll say what he wants, reflect on things at length, and if he’s contradicted himself from something he’s said even a few minutes earlier… Well… That’s Newt! It’s kind of like multiple marriages to this crowd… This time, I’m serious! OK, that was kind of mean, but it’s relevant.
Point # 2 – Newt is loud, bombastic, which in the minds of many, means he really really believes what he’s saying! Hey, it works with the talk radio set, so why shouldn’t it work in a campaign!. Newt maybe has figured out the old meme that no publicity is bad publicity! Romney, on the other hand, seem just too damned meek and polite and couldn’t assert himself if he tried. Which brings us to:
Point # 3 – Unlike any other candidate I’ve seen in a long time, Newt has figured out how to deflect an answer and gin up the base at the same time – Shoot the messenger! Even as Newt was floundering, he had already laid down the roots of his comeback with the use of a time worn Conservative strategy – blame the Main Stream Media! Though the other guys wanted to, only Newt had “the guts” to actually come right out, right there on the debate floor, and chastise one of the debate moderators for asking a question! Now, I don’t remember exactly what the question was, and I don’t think it was anything that was particularly out of line, but it doesn’t matter what the question was anyway. It could be somethnig like this:
George Stepha-what’s-his-face: “Let me start by asking you a personal question. Newt, we’ve heard recently that you’re allergic to cats…”
Newt: “Well, first of all, Juan, the fact is, that is just an outlandish question to ask, many folks are allergic to cats!!!!”
Mission accomplished.
Nobody remembers the question. All they remember is the “Oh Right On” and “Yeah Baby!” moment it produced. It’s an opiate for the “True Conservative” set – addictive even! The beauty of it is, Newt is probably the only one on stage who can pull it of, almost as if it were a “gift from GOD!“.
Why will Newt be the likely winner of the GOP nomination? Because he’s a perfect stand-in for one of the most popular Conservatives out there. Newt can “articulate the message of Conservatism” like almost no other… Almost no other, except one…
Rush Limbaugh!
Newt has indeed become the proxy candidate for Rush Limbaugh. That is the true power source of the Newt Gingrich appeal. He has with the last couple of debates finally accomplished the task of tapping into the psyche of Rush’s audience. Romney doesn’t have a chance in hell of appealing to Rush’s audience. He’s a “squish”! As much as Santorum’s social views might line up with those of Mr. Limbaugh, he just doesn’t have that rhetorical fire on a wide variety of issues and interests that both Rush and Newt share. I know his detractors will take issue with this next statement, but Rush Limbaugh is a very smart guy! Not smart as in scientific smart, but he does have knowledge on a wide variety of subjects.
Newt and Rush are so much alike, and have been for a long time. Newt, like Rush. is a risk-taker, and more often than not, it pays off. Rush was kicked around by the radio establishment because they thought his idea of doing a “gasp” Conservative radio call-in show was nuts. Yet, here he is, years later, the King of not only a successful-beyond-anyone’s-dreams radio program, but he literally saved the AM radio format from extinction in the process, and created a new road for success for other to follow. Newt got kicked around by the establishment and was even eventually in the late 90’s driven from power by them. Yet, here he is, a creature of the system, running a campaign counter to how the establishment says it must be done, defying them to the end, and succeeding! The message, he has realized in the internet age, is more important than the structure of the campaign. Both have had more than one marriage (for better or for worse), and both have their addiction problems, Rush to Oxycontin, Newt to power! i consider both to be, pardon the expression, media whores.
I would be a blog whore if I had the time. (this is the part where I jump and down and scream – “Hey Look At Me!”)
Newt, for all intents and purposes, is Rush! Watch how Newt smacks-down Juan Williams and it’s plain to see. It’s exactly the kind of thing Rush would say if he were on that stage! And it’s not even a bad thing. The Republican party has needed to come to terms with the fact that that one man has more power of influence that anyone is willing to admit. No, Rush Limbaugh does not run the Republican party. He has, however, slowly but surely been cultivating and shaping the desires of the base for a generation. It doesn’t matter what Newt does or says now. A long as he stays on message, and no other Freddie Mac lobbyist scandals hit the press, Newt has this nomination in the bag.
Then, the true test. Is the United States ready to elect Rush Limbaugh as President?
We shall see.
While I agree with him that FOX news is not being very “fair and balanced” for not having Andrew Sullivan on any of their programs when discussing the recent article he wrote for Newsweek, Sully goes way too far in describing a phrase uttered by a Fox-ite as “homophobic”. Here is the conversation Andrew is critiquing:
GUTFELD: The ultimate hypocrisy here, Kimberly, is that Sullivan is calling critics dumb when, in fact, he is the most obsessed critic of Sarah Palin’s children.
GUILFOYLE: Remember that?
GUTFELD: I don’t want to get into it. He’s got an amazing blind spot.
GUILFOYLE: Yes, and talking about her children. I mean, it’s totally inappropriate. And he has no credibility because of that. That’s what’s so problematic about it. In fact, how do you expect this magazine to have any kind of credibility either when you have writers putting forth stuff like this? With the background that he does. Leftist propaganda.
Can you spot the obvious homophobic slur????
*
*
*
*
Answer: It’s the phrase ” He’s got an amazing blind spot.”
Here is Sullivan’s write-up. This is a pretty good “Jump The Shark” moment.
Jump The Shark!, News Critique, Politics / Law Stuff | Sonicfrog January 21, 2012 |
Comments (0)
Here is an example of some of the stuff I’ve played with the San Diego band RareForm. This is not an exhaustive list by any means, but gives you an idea of what we did together for the 18 years I was the bass player in the band.
Some of these songs were not 80’s per-see, but there are plenty of 80’s in there. Add some Mr. Mister, some Cars, and some more Police / Sting and Crowded House stuff, and we’ll be set!
Hey, at least we know what a love child between Peter Gabriel and Michael Stipe would look like!
Remember that song “Mama’s Don’t Let Your Babys Grow Up To Be Cowboys”? Well, if this is the alternative…. I beg of you… Let them!
How nature says “Don’t Touch”!
Caption That | Sonicfrog January 20, 2012 |
Comments (3)
Gay sex advice columnist Dan Savage lecturing Newt Gingrich on morals!
Technically you’re not asking your wife for an open marriage if you’ve already been fucking another woman for six years. You’re presenting her with an ultimatum. That doesn’t make you a proponent of open marriage, Newt, it makes you a CPOS.
I don’t think Newt has made himself a proponent of open marriage; he’s just a flawed individual, as we all are. I think going on TV and trashing your ex-husband in the days before a critical primary is bitter, bitter, bitter. But I’m a Christian. The private stuff I forgive and understand. Like many men, over the years, my libido has sometimes seemed to have a life of its own. I think we should all give people’s priavte consensual adult sex lives alone. But the public hypocrisy? The ranting about gay marriage destroying America? The lecturing of the poor on family structure? Not so much.
In my opinion, it is foolish to look for an un-flawed candidate. I contend that we never would have been able to elect an Abraham Lincoln (didn’t go to the right schools) or a Winston Churchill (drank too much) under the standards we set for our modern candidates. It’s why I was very please when 3 1/2ish years ago, Republican Rudy Giuliani had rival Barrack Obama’s back when he admitted he had used cocaine in college. I’m not saying we shouldn’t scrutinize a politicians personal live. All I’m saying is that we are not electing the person to be our moral guide, we are electing the guy (or gal in the future) to run the country in accordance with political philosophies and public policies we deem most appropriate. I am definitely not a Newt support in any way, but, really, does the fact that Newt was (and may still be) a cad really going to affect how he governs now should he win? The fact that he was having an affair at the time certainly didn’t stop him from riding Bill Clinton’s nose into the ground for doing the same thing.
Life, Politics / Law Stuff | Sonicfrog January 19, 2012 |
Comments (3)
The delicious quote of the day! From this article quoting none other than Rupert Murdoch concerning Obama’s ambivalence to take a stand to support the dying SOPA legislation:
“So Obama has thrown in his lot with Silicon Valley paymasters who threaten all software creators with piracy, plain thievery.”
Murdoch… Complaining about paymasters?
That’s Rich!
Somehow, I’m not convinced that Murdoch is all that concerned with the plight of software creators. His support of SOPA might have something more to do with protecting this content, maybe.
Regardless, the moguls are outraged!
“We just feel very let down by the administration and Obama for not supporting us,” one studio chief explained to me. “At least let him remain neutral and not go against it until we can get the legislation right. But Obama went against it. I’m personally not going to support him anymore and not give a dime anymore,”
The article continues:
Several moguls have informed Obama’s newly anointed Hollywood re-election liason to the entertainment community Nicole Avant and her husband who is helping her, Netflix chief content officer Ted Sarandos, that they are pulling out of major fundraisers planned over the next few days and won’t participate in any more headed by Obama and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (whom they see as in the pocket of the Internet giants like Google).
And all this is the result of Mr Obama refusing to vote present on this issue. It would have been nice if Obama himself were to have come out against this piss poor legislation before it gained such a negative amount of notoriety, but having his lackeys hint that the White House doesn’t support it will do I suppose.
Oh, and on that fundraising boycott….. Raise your hand if you believe these Hollywood big-wigs are really going to write no more check to this candidate, especially if Newt wins the primary.
I don’t have to be clairvoyant to know that no hands went up.
PS. I case you missed it, this is a very interesting admission by this writer, and I’m not sure if it was wise for the editors to let it pass through:
The boycott even extends to many of the moguls’ families who also are big Obama and Democratic Party donors. The situation is serious because many moguls and/or their families comprise Obama’s top bundlers in the TV/movie/music biz. Bundlers as defined by opensecrets.org are “people with friends in high places who, after bumping against personal contribution limits, turn to those friends, associates, and, well, anyone who’s willing to give, and deliver the checks to the candidate in one big ‘bundle’.” These donors direct more money to the candidates than anyone else. As of September 2011 these 357 elite bundlers were directing at least $55,900,000 for Obama’s re-election efforts — money that has gone into the coffers of his campaign as well as the Democratic National Committee, according to opensecrets.org. That figure by now has significantly increased and will continue to do so.
$55,900,000!… And that was four months ago! Kind of puts Romneys $364,000 dollar speaking take-home into perspective, doesn’t it. And I love that a well known but little talked about method of getting around campaign laws is brought into the light.
Where is the campaign reform crowd when you need them!