I love pictures of babies with their mothers. Especially when the mother is a member of the undead and has spiders crawling out of her mouth. That’s just one of those things I find super sexy. I know I can’t be the only one that thinks that way.

Srsly? The photographer, in what can only be described as self-adulation, had the following to say about the photos:

“My images are not photoshop collages.I use photoshop to finesse details and to adjust color and contrast for printing. I use friends and family members as actors and crew. Everyone works for free. We do it for fun.”

So that’s a real baby hanging out there with Zombie Mom? How ’bout the one with the girl standing in front of the open fridge door with body parts inside (click the pic to go to the photo collection)?

Um, Joshua Hoffine? When you’re in your 50’s or 60’s and your heart isn’t what it used to be, don’t be surprised when these kids whose brains into which you burned some of the most disturbing images I’ve seen (and dude, I’ve seen a lot), come back to create elaborate visual pranks on you, designed to cram so much fight-or-flight adrenaline into your heart that it won’t know what to do except jiggle like jello on a spoon for a few seconds, then collapse in on itself like a pile of goo.

And if that doesn’t happen, I might just stop over and yank your testicles off with pliers. And photograph it. And then brag about how I only used photoshop to tweak the hues of your pale, screaming face.

Does this mean that I have the freedom to try some wild ass things with my business, because if they flop and the biz goes in the crapper, I can just get bailed out by nice people like you?

I think I like that.

The current Bush-proposed plan makes me nervous, if for no other reason than George Bush proposed it. The guy who got C’s in college, in charge of the largest financial bailout in world history. And the way he speaks condescendingly about it as if he’s the only one that gets it. Kinda like the pot head landlord I had in college. Dude, you just don’t get it. Drinking bong water is a BOLD move.

I’m only receiving scant bits of information about the bail out, so I think I have a very superficial understanding of what’s going on, why it’s going on, and how the $700B will help. As you might expect, I have a few questions.

Are there estimates or scenarios about what would really happen if we decided to let these companies twist in the wind? I mean real ones, not just shaky finger-pointing at sepia photos of unwashed children wearing tattered clothes during the 1930’s? Maybe that’s what needs to happen - a few million people need to have the finances ruined, lawsuits need to be filed against executives and boards of these companies, their personal assets seized, a few high profile heart attacks, a few executive suicides. Mobs with pitchforks and torches are totally optional. Sphincters across the solvent financial companies clench so hard that nobody with a credit score short of 780 sees a penny and for investment firms to regain lost trust they’re forced to offer contractual assurances that your money is safe, doing so by having some portion of their funds in a zero-risk, interest bearing escrow account. Shareholder meetings are no longer conducted by proxy, and company boards are treated to tomato showers and threats of bodily harm when they can’t keep their companies in the black.

How many of the politicians involved in the vote are directly affected by the failures of these companies? Would they have a reason to want to pass the bail out? Hmm?

And what about the top brass at each company? They should have their testicles placed on a piece of poplar and hammered with a tenderizer, obviously. But what if the bill includes minimal compensation for all executive staff at each failed company, or a zero-golden-parachute clause? Do they all leave, opting for other jobs (oh yes, they’d find other jobs)? Might nobody qualified be interested in filling those positions? (I bet dubya has a few former classmates that’d apply for those jobs.) Then who runs them? A guy who passed the civil service test in 1989?

The alcohol from my drinks is starting to kick in, so I’d better cut this short.

BTW, does Barney Frank have any teeth?

Here’s an interesting link. It’s from Fox News, so take it with a grain of salt, but at least watch the video starting at the 1:23 mark.  (I was trying to find video of Barney Frank, and this was the first thing in Google to pop up - honest.)

So I watched last night.

Going into the debate I was about 60% Obama, 40% McCain, based on my thus far unscientific review of the candidates and my positions on the issues (no matter what Nutmeg might think).  I felt Obama at least had assembled an economic plan and was going to be better able to adapt to the quickly changing financial landscape, and that’s got to be among the most important, immediate challenges facing the next President.

Then the debate got rolling. McCain spoke in simple terms about votin’, fightin’ and taxatin’ that reminded me a little of Sara Palin. Not an advantage.

Obama was very articulate. At the start. I don’t know if he felt like he was coming off as elitist relative to McCain, but soon he was talkin’ ’bout taxatin’, too. By mid-debate the closed captioning service had to make a run to Wal*Mart for more apostrophes.  It didn’t seem to take very long before it appeared Obama was getting flustered and on the defensive, accidentally thwopping his mic and spending a good portion of each of his time chunks explaining and clarifying.
Obama fired the first salvo, the first negative shot. He spoke first, so I suppose that’s to be expected.  McCain, possibly following on the success of Obama’s lines in his acceptance speech about things McCain doesn’t understand, sang the same refrain about Obama, and did it often.

One thing McCain did on a few occasions with success was to give a more historical perspective on current situations; an understanding of what happened in the previous two decades  that led to today’s current state in the various situations abroad (Pakistan, Iraq, Russia) that were discussed.  He made a point that resonated with me; if Obama was so concerned about the situation in Afghanistan or Pakistan, why didn’t he get on a plane and go see for himself?  McCain claimed that as the chair for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s Subcommittee on European Affairs, he’s done little.  It’s a job his running mate worked to be able to turn into something truly substantive.  The selection of Biden for his credentials as a foreign relations guru came because of his work holding the very same position Obama holds in the Senate.

Another thing that resonated was the claim of meeting without preconditions Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (totally copied and pasted that name, btw).  And not the substance of the point, but the nitpicking of factual details, mainly because they were so easy to track down and verify.  Obama claimed Henry Kissinger and other of McCain’s own aids said the very same should be done.  Ha!  Except that I was near a computer, googled it, and discovered that Kissinger never said the President should meet with Ahmadnoyoudi’int without preconditions (this wasn’t the page I found at that moment, but I can’t find that page now - google it yourself to do your own fact checking).  He said talks should begin at a much lower level.  Obama had it wrong.  Next, Obama said he never indicated he would meet personally, but would possibly have a cabinet member start the discussions.  Nope.  Unless he wants to channel Bill Clinton and challenge the meaning of the word “I”.

And advice to Obama - the telecast was carried live in the Middle East, so when Obama described Ahmadinejad’s rants as a crazy lunatic (or whatever it was, I don’t recall exactly), he may have soured Ahmadinejad on Obama, should the conditionless meeting ever come to pass.

In the opening statement Jim Lehrer quoted Dwight Eisenhower.  Shortly thereafter McCain provided as part of an answer an anecdote of two letters Eisenhower wrote.  One of Diane’s concerns was whether the 72 year old McCain still had all his faculties.  Either it was spectacular luck that Lehrer opened with that quote, of McCain really does still possess his full compliment of mental abilities.

I thought Lehrer did a great job of making this about the two candidates speaking to each other and not to himself.  And he tried his best to get both to answer the “what would you do without, now that we have to spend $700B on a bailout” question; McCain fired from the hip on Lehrer’s second time around, while Obama stuck with the things he wanted to spend on, not the things he’d have to cut out.

In all, I thought Obama did not perform as well as I’d hoped.  I think this debate could be chalked up as a McCain win.  This makes my decision harder, as now I’m back to about 50-50 for each candidate, with VP selection favoring Obama.  Two more to go.  If Obama wants my vote, he’ll need to have a better command of his opponent’s record, his own record and be able to take control of the debate instead of very much looking the subordinate.

And one last thing - I think I agree with Nutmeg on one part of her earlier comments - most everyone has already made their decision and will not be swayed by the debates or any facts presented contrary to their beliefs.  McCain and Obama are probably fighting over 10-15% of the population that have not yet made up their minds.  I’m part of that population, so taking notes during debates and doing some online digging then posting my findings here feel relevant to me.  I’m not really trying to change a McCain or Obama supporter’s mind; I’m not of the left, nor necessarily the right (though I’ve made my leanings as clear as I’m able, and an argument on that last point could probably be made).

Game on, Obama and McCain.

I don’t think this is part of the text “How to Win Friends and Influence People,” but it oughta be.

My father and I rarely discuss anything where we have opposing points of view. It didn’t used to be that way, but over time I realized that for any given topic, my father has done some research and come to the right conclusion. Every other conclusion, by definition, is not right. So instead of having discussions that revolved around explaining perceptions, dissecting facts and coming to understandings, they were more discussions about why my thinking was flawed.

You’re probably thinking “What a jerk.” Not at all. He’s a great guy. Brilliant mechanical, logical mind and a big heart. But discussions on divisive topics are out of the question for us because our approaches are too different.

I see a lot of Obama supporters taking the path of my father. Those supporters have come to their conclusion and will reverse-engineer every sound bite for both sides to meet their desired end. While that appears short sighted to me and often suspends logic in favor of fanaticism, it’s also not helping the cause they support.

If I call you stupid, what’s your response going to be? “Damn, Jack. You’re right. I AM stupid. Thanks for pointing that out.” Probably not. I might get the bird back from you. Or a “motherfucker”. But I doubt you’ll acquiesce. Yet that’s what some expect of the people they’re trying to influence.

And here’s the thing - eight years ago I loved John McCain. (Loved Colin Powell too, but that’s another story.) But some of the things he’s saying and doing now, now that he has the nomination as the Republican candidate for President, are eroding my support. Things are in the crapper hard and I won’t buy a blanket “we’re gonna fix it,” no matter who those words come from. I want a fucking action plan, and it better make sense.

But I don’t want to throw in with crazy, either. I read somewhere about how Sarah Palin had a tanning booth installed in the Alaska governor’s mansion when she was elected, and how she now “can’t find the receipt” when asked about it, and how that implied her propensity for cover ups, but also spoke to her stupidity, doing something that causes cancer. Well guess what? Obama smokes. And I bet he doesn’t have all his Marlboro receipts, either. And he probably smokes while performing his duties. GWI. Governing While Inhaling. Does that make Obama a moron? If you use the previous example as our strip of litmus, then you have to.

Seeing one side of a small story and blowing it up like a stewardess on an inflatable auto-pilot is just crazy. And not very responsible.

I took a shit behind a big lilac bush in an empty lot next to a jobsite today. (Srsly, I did.) If a reporter had caught me in the act and wrote about it, how would I appear in the papers? The Pooping Perv? A Symbol Of What’s Wrong With People Today? All I was was a dude who had to go and wasn’t going to make it to the nearest restroom, but I’d bet that’s not how the story would play out in the media. (Thank God I collect fast food napkins in the glove box, btw.)

Is Palin’s tanning bed really important? Really relevant? Eccentric, sure. But looking on eBay, you can get a tanning bed for less than $2K*, and installing it should simply be a matter of locating it and plugging it in, right? A pack a day smoking habit would cost almost as much ($1825 at $5 a pack). I want a Funhouse pinball machine in my home. They can run as much as $5k. What does that make me?

If you want to influence those of us who might be on the fence, stay away from the unimportant and salacious; focus on what your candidate can do, not what you think the other can’t. That’s what’ll win my vote.

Then again, maybe you really aren’t trying to influence. You’re just freaked the fuck out about everything that doesn’t come from your side and you can’t help but spit venom about it. But if THAT’S the case, them my advice would be to shut the eff up until the election is over. You aren’t helping your team.

Until election day, I’m just going to keep trying to live Rodney King’s dream. Can’t we just all get along?

*The oft-reported quote from an Alaskan tanning bed dealer is that tanning beds CAN cost UP TO $35,000. Well, shit. I own a car. Cars CAN cost UP TO $1.2 Million. I guess that means MY car cost $1.2 Million. I sure could use a million. Think I’ll sell.

P.S. WRH, I’m not talking about you. Nutmeg? You either. Nat? Same. But I think the influencing people stuff still applies, no matter which side you’re for. Bees with honey and all that. Slather me in honey and I might just buzz your ballot. Er, whatever. You get the idea.

So Matt Damon is going off about Dinosaurs and Sarah Palin.  Palin’s ability to Veep notwithstanding, the quote credited to Palin was bogus.  Kinda like this one:

It’s being reported that Matt Damon has left his wife Luciana in favor of blogger WellReadHostess.  When asked, Damon said “Our torrid affair was getting more and more difficult to hide, so it seemed the only fair thing to do.  To tell Luciana that we were done, and that WRH and I were going to spend the rest of our days in a thatched bungalow on Fiji, naked except for a threadbare linen shirt missing it’s buttons, sipping drinks from hollowed pineapples.”

Just because he’s hot and has millions and can do wicked long math calculations despite being a janitor doesn’t mean he’s any smarter than you or me.  He needs to do his due diligence just like the rest of us.  And so far he hasn’t.

And then there’s Lindsay Lohan.  Oh yes.  She opines politico, too.  I shudder at the thought of her having influence over anyone capable of pairing two like socks and placing them on their own feet.