Submitted for your consideration...

I saw the most recent offering from the McCain Girls yesterday, thanks to a tweet (Twitter posting) from 23/6.com. And I've decided something. The McCain Girls are "supporting" John McCain in much the same way Stephen Colbert supported George Bush at the White House Correspondents' Dinner a few years back. Some of the lyrics: Just an Arizona senator Lookin' for the fight of his life The Democrats don't see him as strong They all say he's crazy Keep in mind now, that "they", presumably the Democrats, "say he's crazy". One would assume that McCain's supporters would beg to differ. Yet they go on to give us this... Purple Heart and Silver Star McCain can cut you with his knife Slice you up and slice and dice if you challenge his candidacy ...accompanied by this picture I rest my case.

Does Viagra Work On The Spine?

Crossposted from Left Toon Lane, Bilerico Project & My Left Wing click to enlargeAs the most remote village in all of the Himalayas has already learned by now, Eliot Spitzer hired a female prostitute, maybe several. And that is it. I honestly never liked Spitzer and I thought he made a horrible Democrat. Now he even does sex scandals bad. No, when Democrats are involved in sex scandals, they should not be protected by the Party. The same goes for the GOP. What is good for Mark Foley is good for Eliot Spitzer. But where Foley's antics were outrageous, even for a Republican, Spitzer's behavior, while tragic for his family and shows the smallness of his character, is just plain lousy as a scandal. His family is who I really feel sorry for, especially his wife who stood by him at the podium. I hope the reason she was standing so close is because she only had a 1 foot cattle prod. Where are the teenage enema nurses in bondage we have all grown to expect in a sex scandal? If floozies in bed is all we can get out of him, then Spitzer is spineless. Next time I see Bob Dole, I will need to ask him if Viagra works on the spine, clearly Spitzer could use some stiffening there.

Tell us about your childhood, Duncan

I'm confused. Atrios, aka Duncan, is *far* too important to even acknowledge the existence of the mere mortals of the blogging world. Yet he does. He saw fit to write about my "I can't believe it's not a meritocracy" post, although I didn't know it until Maryscott posted about what he'd said. And today I find out from skippy that he popped off a one liner about Terrance's thoughtful post which delved into the psychology/sociology of the linking issue, blogger caste system, etc. Interesting. Veeeery interesting. Why should it matter to Duncan if some nobodies are saying stuff about him in their puny, insignificant, non-blogroll-worthy corners of cyberspace? I decided to consult some professionals. I tried asking this guy, but he wasn't much help. Duncan Black? Sorry--name doesn't ring a bell for me.... Alfred Adler thought the behavior was evidence of an inferiority complex. John Watson said that was a load of poppycock. But he wasn't surprised that one of Freud's followers would come up with such nonsense. He said that Duncan's anger was clearly a conditioned emotional reaction. And while we were on that subject, Watson wanted me to remind everyone really *did* have every intention of curing the experimentally induced phobia of that little Albert kid. And he would have, too, if Albert's mom hadn't freaked out and disappeared with the boy. Albert Bandura thought it had something to do with observational learning. Typical Bandura. But you never know--could be some backstory to the classic study that I'd never heard of before. Maybe Bobo made the June Cleaver-looking lady angry when he dissed her ideas about "blogroll amnesty". So naturally she felt compelled to beat the crap out of him. And when the little kids saw her do that, well, "monkey see, monkey do". Albert Maslow didn't know for sure, but he was pretty clear on the fact that people who are truly self actualized don't engage in such dickish behavior on a regular basis. And speaking of dicks, I thought I should round out this imaginary discussion by checking in with someone who always seemed to be thinking about them. Hey! Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar! Sorry, Sig. I probably have some aggressive feelings towards you because of all that misogynistic crap you subjected us to over the years and I'm sublimating, or something. Oh, you don't mind if I call you Sig, do you? 'Course not. You're dead. And I'm making all of this up. But if we were able to ask Sigmund Freud about why Duncan gets so upset when he learns that the peasants are speaking his name in tones other than awe and reverence, what might he say? Maybe he'd explain it as an overactive id. Or maybe he'd say Duncan is identifying with his father--a healthy outcome of the phallic stage. Or that the behavior is some form of defense mechanism. Maybe some people are just schmucks and you shouldn't spend too much time worrying about them. Huh? Who said that? Was that you, Sig? No wait--that was me! But that makes a lot of sense. I really should listen to me more often...