People are upset that the American Nazi Party has been allowed to participate in the Adopt-a-Highway program. This happens every few years - some kooky organization decides to get a little publicity by adopting a highway and getting their name on a sign (and then into the news when someone notices it). Once the sign goes up, everyone gets all up in arms about how offensive it is and how there ought to be a limit!

County officials say they were legally advised that excluding the organization would violate a constitutional right to free speech. Their choices, they said, were: allow the group to join the program, remove all of the signs from the program or refuse the group and risk a lawsuit.

That sounds totally reasonable. So,what's the problem?

The problem, of course, is that nobody wants to do the easiest, most obvious thing - take down all the stupid signs.

If you want to stop publicizing silly extremist groups, stop putting up signs for groups that adopt highways. Presumably, civic organizations like the Boy Scouts and Rotary Club are adopting highways to be good citizens, not to get an ugly green and white sign posted out on the side of the road in the middle of nowhere. If racist idiots want to clean the side of the road, great! Let them! Same thing for the Boy Scouts and the local church youth group. Just stop putting up the stupid signs.

I understand that we want to recognize and encourage good citizenship, but I bet we could figure out an alternative to the stupid sign that nobody pays attention to anyway (except when it says KKK or something equally as silly). Why don't they just give the organization a certificate of appreciation to hang in their clubhouse? Let members note it on their resume under the heading Community Involvement.

If you don't want to put up a sign for the American Nazi Party, don't do it. You're not required to. Don't put one up for the Boy Scouts or the church youth group, either. Really, people, who cares? It's petty.

During lunch I went to a Bob Woodward lecture at the LBJ School of Public Affairs. The lecture was very interesting and I'm glad I had the opportunity to go.

I read Woodward's book, Plan of Attack, when it came out and, while I thought it very informative, it left me with a strange feeling - I felt like there was something that didn't make sense about it. During the lecture today, I think I figured out what it was that I was missing.

Woodward began the lecture by saying that he wanted to talk about responsibility and admit some mistakes. He described the 2002 meeting at the White House in which President Bush, not wholly impressed with the evidence about Iraq's possession of WMD, turned to then CIA Director Tenet who assured him, now infamously, that it was "a slam dunk." He said the mistake was not just the faulty intelligence - after all, says Woodward, everyone thought Iraq had WMD - but that there wasn't enough fact checking before the government decided to go to war.

Woodward went on to say that, though we have given up looking for weapons in Iraq, maybe thirty years from now we'll find out Bush was right after all. But, we should have been more critical in the run up to war. He blames a lack of courage on the part of the administration and the press on the failure to ask more questions and demand better evidence, saying that the momentum just carried everything along.

Woodward joked that his book was recommended reading by both the Bush 04 campaign and the Kerry 04 campaigns. He said he didn't understand how that could be; his wife said: Nobody's read it. I wanted to stand up and tell him that the reason is that he's so mealy-mouthed and wishy-washy that anyone can read the book and get out of it whatever they want.

Bob Woodward made a name for himself by exposing the Watergate scandal during the Nixon administration. To be honest, I don't know much about what he's done since. But I do know that, with regards to the current administration and the War on Terrorism, he has been little more than an establishment apologist and a failure.

Woodward admits that the administration and the press made mistakes, but he fails to note the magnitude of their mistakes and their positions of authority. The lesson that we should learn from the mistakes pointed out by Woodward is not simply that we should demand better evidence in the future, it's that those in the administration and the establishment press - Woodward included - are not capable or responsible enough to do the jobs that we trust them to do.

Bob Woodward, and everyone in the Bush administration, should not simply admit that they made a mistake and promise to try to do better next time - they are not a freshman congressmen or journalism students. Each one of them, Woodward included, should retire in shame. The mistake under discussion is not whether or not there was a chance of rain, or the name of the local high school principal, but a claim of an imminent threat to the nation; a claim that started a war and continues to cause untold destruction and loss of life. You don't get to print a page 5 correction and move on.

Woodward wants to make everything okay. He wants to report the truth, which he mostly does, but he does not want to paint anyone in a particularly bad light. Listening to him, one is left with the impression that everyone in the administration is wholly above-board and honest, with nothing but the best of intentions at all times. Woodward asked the audience: Why did skimpy evidence get accepted with criticism? His answer: Nobody in the administration or the press had the courage to question it. Besides, everyone in the world thought Saddam had WMD. Bullshit.

The evidence was accepted without criticism because the administration wanted it to be true. That's what happens when you adopt a conclusion before you have evidence to back it up - you sift through the evidence to find whatever you can to back up your pre-determined conclusion. It's unethical, irresponsible, and dishonest. In this case, it's also criminally negligent.

Perhaps Woodward best summed himself up in his description of how he came to a change of heart about Ford's pardon of Nixon. Woodward said that when he interviewed President Ford a few years ago, Ford convinced him that it was the right thing to do. Why? The nation needed to move on. Ladies and gentlemen, meet Bob Woodward - go along to get along Bob.

Perhaps, Mr. Woodward, the nation didn't need to just move on. Maybe the nation needed to come to a screeching halt. Maybe the nation needed to take a step back and have a period of reflection and dialogue - not only about where we've been, but about where we want to go.

Woodward was once a great reporter. At least, that's what I'm told. Today, though, I didn't see a great reporter - I saw a tired old man trying really hard to hope that everything will turn out okay while, meanwhile, countless lives are destroyed because of what he downplays as a couple of honest "mistakes."

Voices Carry

Are you a college student that's looking for some part time work? Maybe all the work-study jobs in the commons are already taken. What to do? How about an exciting student job with the CIA? Especially attractive is the new Pat Roberts Intelligence Scholars Program (PRISP).

Now, this could be a harmless way to try to make up for all the linguists we had to fire because they were a national security risk (you know, gay). But at least one person, Dr David Price of St Martins College in Olympia, thinks that programs like this are not as benign as we might like to think:

Dr Price says, "The CIA makes sure we won't know which classrooms PRSIP scholars attend, this being rationalized as a requirement for protecting the identities of intelligence personnel." But this secrecy shapes PRISP as it takes on the form of a covert operation in which PRISP students study chemistry, biology, sociology, psychology, anthropology and foreign languages without their fellow classmates, professors, advisors, department chairs or presumably even research subjects (knowing that they are working for the CIA, DIA, NSA or other intelligence agencies.

"In a decade and a half of Freedom of Information Act research," Dr Price continues, " I have read too many FBI reports of students detailing the 'deviant' political views of their professors." In one instance elicited by Dr Price from files he acquired under FOIA, the FBI arranged for a graduate student to guide topics of 'informal' conversation with anthropologist Gene Weltfish that were later the focus of an inquiry by Joseph McCarthy). Today, Dr Price maintains, "These PRSIP students are also secretly compiling dossiers on their professors and fellow students."

The confluence between academe and intelligence is long standing and pervasive. In 1988 CIA spokeswoman Sharon Foster bragged that the CIA then secretly employed enough university professors "to staff a large university". Most experts estimate that this presence has grown since 2001.

via - Counterpunch

So, do you know who's in your class this semester?

Class act

The following exchange comes from President Bush's press conference today:

Q I seem to remember a time in Texas on another problem, taxes, where you tried to get out in front and tell people it's not a crisis now, it's going to be a crisis down the line -- you went down in flames on that one. Why --

THE PRESIDENT: Actually, I -- if I might. (Laughter.) I don't think a billion-dollar tax relief that permanently reduced property taxes on senior citizens was "flames," but since you weren't a senior citizen, perhaps that's your definition of "flames."

Q I never got my billion --

THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Because you're not a senior citizen yet. Acting like one, however. Go ahead. (Laughter.)

Q What is there about government that makes it hard --

THE PRESIDENT: Faulty memory. (Laughter.)

emphasis mine

HAHAHAHAHA!!! You know what's funny? Old people. You know what's funnier than old people? Old people with alzheimers. HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

- via Americablog

Texas Rape Rooms

The number of reported sexual assaults in Texas prisons has increased 160 percent, to 609 in 2004 from 234 in 2000, according to state records.

At least 129 Texas prisoners have alleged that they were raped or had sexual contact with corrections officers since 2000, the records show. Claims of inmate-on-inmate rape was even more frequent.

- via Houston Chronicle

The modern prison is an institution of rape and torture. That men and women are subject to cruel and inhumane treatment in U.S. prisons is widely documented, and popularly known. Our solution? As always, prosecution and incarceration of offenders - adding more fuel to the machine. Why do we continue with the same self-defeating policies of mass incarceration? There are several reasons, not the least of which are greed and bloodlust. But what does this say about us, the supposed leader of the free world? How are we to export liberty when we cannot face our own failures. I am glad that more people are questioning the death penalty in this country (though, admittedly, still far too few); how much suffering do we have to inflict, though, before we begin to question our own rape rooms and torture chambers?

When I tell people that I believe we should have a moratorium on prison construction and that we need work towards the elimination of the prison system, I'm often met with what was once my initial reaction - what is the alternative? That people who break the law go to prison has become something that we don't question in this country. It seems to be as natural as love and death. But it's not natural - it's a human institution, scientifically developed and evolved over time; it's also a failure. I believe we can do better. We moved beyond branding, quartering, and public shaming - why can we not progress beyond our centuries old system of institutional incarceration?

So, what do we do with rapists and murderers? I don't have an easy answer. But the question evades the point. Most people in prison are not rapists and murderers. U.S. prisons hold over 2 million people. That's 2 million people that will be subject to cruel and inhumane treatment. They will be subject to physical and psychological abuse. How do we being to change that?

Stop putting people in prison.

Talkies

As always, I'm out of the loop and behind the times. But I'm glad I found out about this before I totally missed it. Jessica Yu has a new film being released called In the Realms of the Unreal about the life and work of Henry Darger.

I was first introduced to Mr. Darger's work a couple of years ago by a co-worker and have been interested in learning more about him ever since. I haven't been able to find a trailer for the film, but I will post aa link as soon as I find it.

If I had the time and energy, I would put together a blog called "The Party of Small Government" and chronicle all the ways the GOP is fighting to limit government intrusion into the lives private citizens. The first post would go to Rep. Rob Eissler - R, The Woodlands, who introduced some fine bills into the Texas legislature.

HB 193 would require people who buy a keg of beer to swear that they're at least 21 years old and promise not to serve minors.

HB 36 would punish vendors who sell alcohol to people in the early morning hours of their 21st birthdays.

HB 38 would limit the amount of alcohol served in any drink by licensed retailers to a half-ounce of pure alcohol or the equivalent.

Thanks, Rep. Eissler! Thanks for working hard to limit goverment intrusion into people's lives in Texas. You're a real cowboy.

via - News 8 Austin

Remember Dick Cheney lauding as a paragon of democracy the Guatemalan elections of 1984?

This morning the VP was a guest on Don Imus's radio show where he said the following regarding why Iraq has been harder to control than he originally expected:

R. CHENEY: No, if I were to think back on things that turned out differently than I would have expected, when you talk about Iraq, one of the things I’m still struck by is the devastation, the lasting consequences, if you will, of what happened in ‘91 with respect to the Iraqi population that we found once we toppled Saddam Hussein’s regime and got into Iraq.

R. CHENEY: The brutality that he used in 1991 to put down the revolt at the time I think just had devastating consequences in terms of the ability of the Iraqi people to recover from his rule. It’s taken a very long time for them to come back, to take control of their own affairs.

I think the hundreds of thousands of people, literally, that were slaughtered during that period of time, including anybody who had the gumption to stand up and challenge him, made the situation tougher than I would have thought.

I would chalk that up as a miscalculation, where I thought things would have recovered more quickly.

Iraq - revolt - 1991. Hmmm...could the Vice President be talking about the popular revolt against Saddam Hussein that rose up after President George H.W. Bush called on the people of Iraq to rise up and liberate themselves? The revolt the U.S. aided Saddam Hussein in violently suppressing? Is that the "brutality" and "devastation" that Cheney didn't understand? The violent suppression that the U.S. helped with because, in the words of former State Department official Richard Haas, "What we want is Saddam's regime without Saddam"? That one?

Poor Dick Cheney. How could he have known? He was only Secretary of Defense at the time.

Dick Cheney - the man, the Vice President, the bald-faced liar.

Today George W. Bush is sworn in as the 44th President of the United States of America. Let's take a look back at this great man's accomplishments, as we look forward to the future:

"I'm disappointed that Iraq hasn't turned out better. And that we weren't able to move forward more meaningfully in the Middle East peace process."

Then, after a minute's pause, he adds a third regret: "The biggest regret is that we didn't stop 9/11. And then in the wake of 9/11, instead of redoubling what is our traditional export of hope and optimism we exported our fear and our anger. And presented a very intense and angry face to the world. I regret that a lot."

- Outgoing Deputy Secretary of State Dick Armitage
via The Australian

Sure, okay - things could be better in Iraq. But why don't we take a moment to remember how we liberated Afghanistan - now a democratic land of opportunity, especially for all those Afghani women we heard about during the campaign:

Most of the pupils in the Laila (Tulip) school in the north of the city attend as an alternative to government schools. Their parents banned them from making the journey to and from the state school because security is still bad in their part of the city. Parents fear their daughters will be kidnapped on the way to or from school - the girls attending the Tulip school all live within a couple of streets of the classroom.

The teacher, Rahela, started lessons seven years ago. "I would like to teach in a government school and perhaps when security conditions are better I will do that," she said.

"But God knows when that will be. We still haven't seen democracy in our land."

...

The appointment of three new women ministers to the Afghan cabinet last month was dismissed as window-dressing of a government dominated by conservative old men, many with fundamentalist leanings.

Ms Ismat said: "We saw in the election many women who were proud to vote, but we do not think this new government will help women much.

"Hospitals for women are terrible, commanders can still force girls into marriage, and there are hardly any jobs for women. Unfortunately we are not hopeful about the future of Afghanistan. There are some open-minded men here, but most are still very backward."

- via The Independent

Okay, okay. Foreign policy is tough. But let's bask in the glow of our booming economy, feeling the warm rays of our fiscal strength:

Jan. 17 (Bloomberg) -- The dollar dropped to a five-year low against the yen as some traders declined to bet on an advance in the U.S. currency before a Treasury Department report tomorrow on foreign purchases of American assets in November. The dollar also weakened versus the euro.

- via Bloomberg

Actually, we can't really expect to know what's going on with the economy since this administration learned how to keep books from their friends at Enron and Arthur Anderson.

Well, happy inauguration day, my fellow Americans! You wanted him, you got him!

As I have pointed out here before, I know little to nothing about economics. Social Security, like most questions of economic policy, falls into the category of stuff-I-know-nothing-about. Fine.

Because President Bush and those in his administration have shown themselves to be, over the past four years (or more, depending on the individual - Rumsfeld, I'm looking at you) habitual and unrepentant liars, I tend to view anything they say - even on topics about which I know nothing - with a lot of suspicion.

I'll leave it to other people to debate the Bush plan to destroy Social Security on the merits of economics. But this is just too much:

"African American males die sooner than other males do, which means the system is inherently unfair to a certain group of people," Bush said. "And that needs to be fixed."

Let me make sure I understand the President on this - African-American men have a lower life expectancy than white American men, so they, as a group, potentially get less from Social Security as it now stands. Bush's solution? Change Social Security.

What flabbergasts me about this is that the President is so f-ing dense that he doesn't see that the problem isn't that black men get less from Social Security, it's that African-American men are dying younger than white American men!?! Social Security isn't the racist system that is killing black men in this country.

Since President Bush is so concerned with justice for the black man, I'm sure we'll be hearing soon about his plans to increase resources for predominantly black schools; his plans to restructure the racist criminal justice system; his plans to ensure that black men are not disproportionately targeted by military recruiters to serve as cannon fodder; his plan to make sure that black men have equal access to jobs that pay a living wage; his plan to make sure that black babies have equal access to health care as good as his own.

Mr. President, I'm all ears.

What don't those biased liberals in the mainstream media want you to know? What are they hiding? How about this:

THERE IS NO SOCIAL SECURITY CRISIS

In late November, 2004, the Times reported that Bush had set up an interagency group to study whether it “would best serve the nation” to give the Pentagon complete control over the C.I.A.’s own élite paramilitary unit, which has operated covertly in trouble spots around the world for decades. The panel’s conclusions, due in February, are foregone, in the view of many former C.I.A. officers. “It seems like it’s going to happen,” Howard Hart, who was chief of the C.I.A.’s Paramilitary Operations Division before retiring in 1991, told me.

...

"It’s a finesse to give power to Rumsfeld—giving him the right to act swiftly, decisively, and lethally," the first Pentagon adviser told me. "It’s a global free-fire zone."

via - The New Yorker

What is wrong with people? Is being utterly unChristian a requirement for joining an evangelical church?

"Normally, Banda Aceh is closed to foreigners and closed to the gospel. But, because of this catastrophe, our partners there are earning the right to be heard and providing entrance for the gospel," WorldHelp said in an appeal for funds on its Web site this week.

The appeal said WorldHelp was working with native-born Christians in Indonesia who want to "plant Christian principles as early as possible" in the 300 Muslim children, all younger than 12, who lost their parents in the tsunami.

"These children are homeless, destitute, traumatized, orphaned, with nowhere to go, nowhere to sleep and nothing to eat. If we can place them in a Christian children's home, their faith in Christ could become the foothold to reach the Aceh people," it said.

The Web site was changed, and the appeal was removed Wednesday after the Washington Post called to inquire about it.

The Rev. Vernon Brewer, president of WorldHelp in Forest, Va., said in a telephone interview that his organization had collected about $70,000 in donations and was seeking to raise an additional $350,000 to build the Christian orphanage.

Hey, guys, look over there! It's a horrible disaster! Let's exploit the suffering of others and use the opporunity to indoctrinate small children!

What's that I hear in the distance? Why, I think it's the sound of Christ vomiting!

Ah, Afghanistan - our old friend. What have you been up to now that you have had the yoke of tyranny lifted from your shoulders and have tasted the sweet ambrosia of liberal republican freedom?

NATO hopes to announce a “milestone” expansion of the alliance-led peacekeeping force in Afghanistan next month, an official said Jan. 12.

via Defensenews.com

Nearly 1,100 people including civilians and militants have been killed in suspected Taliban raids since August 2003, mostly in southern and eastern Afghanistan where the Taliban and their allies are mostly active.

via Alertnet.org

But, it's not all bad news. The Lincoln Journal Star has this article about a local gal who's working for the U.S. Embassy in Afghanistan.

"Afghanistan is on the right track," Lee said. "Afghans truly want security, peace and stability. That speaks volumes about the chances of success.

"Progress is made every minute, not because it is forced, but because Afghans want the change. It will take years, however, to turn the negative pages of 30 years of war."

Sure, they don't mention that Afghanis (like all people) always wanted security, peace and stability. Sure, Ms. Lee doesn't mention that the, ahem, "negative pages of 30 years of war" were ghost written by U.S. foreign policy and published with American arms (thank you, thank you). But, heck, it's nice to see that we're making an impact. And, hey, if we're lucky, maybe Iraq will turn out just like Afghanistan

Afghanistan is a land of mountains and rough roads, when there are any. The nation has been devastated by war and years of drought. The people are poor. The landscape is carpeted with landmines.

Bombed-out buildings are home to fruit vendors, stores and shops, Lee said. Trash litters the streets. But there are signs of vibrancy and life and emerging prosperity in Kabul, she said.

"New markets, new shops, new jobs and more cars, which may not be a good thing."

.

Shucks, I feel better already!

By the way, my favorite part of the last article is when we learn that

Afghan food is "quite good, but not Atkins-friendly"

Something to consider, folks, something to consider.

More on the Iraqi elections

Steven Weisman reports in the NYT that "...an estimated 240,000 people living in the United States will be eligible to cast ballots in the coming election in Iraq, by voting in five American cities later this month."

Over at the Washington Post, Robin Wright and Jim VandeHei note that "...the United States is lowering its expectations for both the turnout and the results of the vote..."

For months, the administration has promoted the elections as a major milestone in its efforts to bring democracy to Iraq and then the wider Middle East and Islamic world. But the continuing insurgency and the inability of U.S. forces to stabilize Iraq almost two years after the invasion to topple Saddam Hussein has forced the administration to redefine the context, goals and role of this first vote.

Of course, let's not forget that "Most international experts assessing the fairness of Iraq's elections will monitor the Jan. 30 vote from the safety of neighboring Jordan."

As the 30 January elections in Iraq draw near, current Iraqi Prime Minister and ex-Saddam Hussein hitman turned CIA stooge Iyad Allawi admits that parts of Iraq probably won't be safe enough for people to vote.

But, not to fear! We'll just supplement the actual Iraqi votes with votes from people who at some point in their lives visited Iraq!

Anyone who has an original Iraqi birth certificate may take part in the vote. Other required certificates are an Iraqi passport, an identity card, or a form from the Iraqi population registrar testifying that the holder is or was an Iraqi citizen.

A wedding registration from Iraq, a university graduation certificate or land registry ownership certificates will also be accepted. Those whose father is Iraqi may also vote, even if they were born in another country, as long as they have a certificate proving it. However, children to mothers of Iraqi descent may not vote, because the Iraqi law from 1957 grants citizenship only to children with Iraqi fathers.

via Haaretz

Isn't democracy grand?

Put up or shut up

If there's one topic of debate out there that makes me roll my eyes and yawn it's whether or not mainstream commercial news has a liberal bias. Here's the short version:

Q: Is there a demonstrable liberal bias in mainstream commercial media?

A: No.

Why anyone wastes their time treating this as a legitimate issue, I don't know. You'd think there was no real news to report. But since you asked, do I think straight news stories are ever colored by rhetoric, point of view, choice of subject, etc? Probably; it seems rather unavoidable as long as we keep using humans to do our news reporting. Do I think there's either (a) a vast conspiracy or (b) the inevitable result of too many liberals going to journalism school? No.

I think, and this is fairly convincingly demonstrated in the Ed Herman and Noam Chomsky's book Manufacturing Consent, most mainstream commercial news media is not really liberal or conservative so much as it's establishment. Asking how this reporter or that anchorman votes is silly, it's so oversimplified that it totally misses the point.

Eric Alterman reacts to this article by Howard Kurtz.

The impeccable James Wolcott treats Howard Fineman to an eloquent bitchslap.

So, to all the mealy-mouthed right-wing whiners out there complaining about the so-called "liberal media," why don't you put up or shut up? If you're so concerned about there not being a legitimate source for straight news, why don't you put one together? God knows you've got the goddam money.

FNC may still use "Fair & Balanced" in their ugly-ass graphics, but nobody with a triple digit I.Q. is buying it. National Review balances out Weekly World News, not The New York Times. "The Left" can keep The Nation and "The Right" can keep The Weekly Standard. Fine, both have their place (the latter in the birdcage).

To sum it all up, if all you crybaby wingnuts continue to complain about biased media whilst you continue to exclusively fund rightist propaganda, don't expect anyone to take you seriously other than your pathetic, self-important selves. If you seriously think there's a problem with political bias in the media, then why don't you show us all what non-biased reporting looks like? Until then, put a sock in it.

Just when you think it couldn't get worse...

When President Bush appointed John Negroponte as Ambassador to Iraq, as when VP Dick Cheney invoked the 1984 Guatemalan elections as an example of successful democracy building, I wondered if these guys knew anything about history.

Turns out they do.

Jonathan Schwarz makes a particularly chilling point about where we're going.

Charles Demers at ZNet weighs in.

Two items to think about today.

First, the Bush Administration has been paying a prominent radio commentator to promote Bush policy on the air.

Second, Slate has a disturbing article about Alberto Gonzalez and his excuses for torture.

Ladies and gentlemen, we live in a nation that is run by gangsters. It's going to be a long four years, folks. Let's hope we make it.

New Year's Resolutions:

(1) Cut Out Cruelty

After being a strict vegan for about five or six years, I fell off the wagon and indulged in a saturated fat and cruelty gorged diet. I have always felt a little guilty, like I let myself down (not to mention the people, animals, and environment that suffered for my choices). I finally admitted to myself that the only thing that was really keeping me from returning to a more cruelty-free lifestyle was pride - I didn't want to admit that I was wrong. So, here you go - I was wrong.

(2) Get In Shape

Why not go with a classic? But this time I'm serious! (insert laugh track) Okay, I went to the gym yesterday and did a pretty intense (for me) cardio workout. The result? Wow, am I ever out of shape. But, seriously, I mean it this time. Don't be surprised if you mistake me for Peter Paul this time next year.

(3) Travel

I submitted my passport application on Monday. That's right - I don't have a passport. I'm one of those people - an untravelled, uncivilized, monolingual American; it's amazing that I can even dress myself. But, world be warned! I'm going to get on a plane and visit the far reaches of the planet! I will do better than my best to be respectful of your language and culture and to be an unofficial ambassador of international goodwill. Unless, of course, you're French*.

(4) Consume less

For someone who talks a lot of trash about crass consumerism, I sure have a lot of crap in my house. I don't need 95% of it, probably. I certainly don't need to add to the pile.

* Just kidding!!! I love the French! Just not the French Canadians**.

** Once again, that's not true. Good thing I didn't make any resultions about honesty.