Talent

I've always been a fan of Amy Sedaris - I think she's funny and unafraid. I remember after Denzel Washington and Halle Berry won Oscars, she made a joke on Letterman about the Oscars turning into Midnight at the Apollo - and it got edited out. Still, it's not politically correct, and it's hilarious. But here's true talent, and dedication to craft - a woman who normally is seen looking like this photo, turns out to be HOT. I mean, not Jessica Alba, car crashing hot, but a seriously attractive lady. Look at this photo from the Onion AV Club, which has a great interview with her.


I'm pretty sure I'm going to sound gay when I say this (not that there's anything wrong with that) but the only word I can think of when I see this second picture is radiant. That's just not a word I would normally...well, use at all, but certainly not think of when I think of Amy Sedaris.

Yes, there's no real point to this posting, but I just thought I'd share.

A month of silence

Well, that wasn't intentional. I'm really not sure why I haven't posted in so long - it literally slipped my mind. And it's also interesting that my last post dug on Al Gore, when in reality I get more impressed by him all the time. The Al Gore of 2000 isn't that interesting, but in 2006? He looks like a savvy genius.

The latest hubbub in Washington is that Bush is ripping the New York Times for disclosing a program where the U.S. tracked banking transactions (including Americans). It is a very similar reaction the administration had when the same paper disclosed the NSA wiretapping program.

So, let's see...the U.S. Government is tracking the money and phone calls of suspected terrorists - that's not only something most people would agree with, but something they'd expect. Frankly, if there was a story that Bush and Cheney were NOT doing this, it would be a much bigger deal.

So why are they upset? Why did Bush call it "disgraceful," and Rep. Peter King label it "treasonous?" Do they really think that Al Qaeda wouldn't expect this? That such a disclosure will get them to stop whatever they've been doing, because they naively assumed the U.S. would let them talk and bank without any type of surveillance?

No. Of course not. The administration is upset because:

a) It expects to act without supervision, and to make the rules as it sees fit.
b) It knows that most U.S. citizens think it's fine for them to snoop on suspected terrorists, but not EVERYONE in the country. I have nothing to hide, but do I want Alberto Gonzalez checking my credit card transactions? Probably not.
c) It understands at some level that what they are doing is not only a PR problem but potentially a legal one, if challenged.

All of these reasons make indignation and accusation the only logical response to these kinds of articles. It's yet another example that the country is being run by arrogant children who can't believe that they have to play by someone else's rules.

Exactly.

Someday, there's going to be a Presidential candidate I can be excited about...even impressed by.