Saturday, July 21, 2007

"You're Gonna Have More Bears Goin' After People, Dave!! Do the Math!!"

When I heard the tragic story several weeks ago of the child who was killed by a bear, I was absolutely certain there was nothing about the story I would ever find funny. Bill O'Reilly quickly proved me wrong, with a "Threatdown" against bears.

I've been enjoying this clip over and over ever since. I was sure it would become a meme -- after all, this is Bill O'Reilly becoming the very thing Colbert parodies -- but it hasn't.

Watch this amazing interview, wherein O'Reilly is absolutely certain that this bear was no ordinary bear, but rather a cunning, deliberate murderer, the leading edge of a bloodthirsty bear army's advance.

The more the bear expert says that's simply not possible, the more paranoid and exasperated Billo gets. By the time he reaches full-bore hysteria, your jaw will be heading floorward.


Friday, July 20, 2007

Bill O' Reilly: Sexual Predator or Just a Creepy Perv?

If you haven't seen this Keith Olbermann piece on Billo's interview with Miss New Jersey, you're in for a treat. And if you have seen it, you're in for a re-treat. Either way, you will also end up laughing and queasy at the same time. Enjoy:


I Would Go on American Inventor, But It Wouldn't Be Fair to the Other Contestants


See, I have invented something so simple, yet so brilliant, that it would leave the judges breathless. (Except George Foreman. No one winds The Champ.)

My invention reaches a small-but-affluent market: celebrities plagued by paprazzi. It's called the Paparazz-No. Or The Paparazz-No-More ... or maybe The Paparazzinator 2000... Not sure yet, but patent pending. So don't steal this!

It's a hat covered on all sides by blinding, continuously-firing flashbulbs. It renders the wearer completely unphotographable (if a little laughable).

Slip it on in the limo, turn it on, and you can walk to any restaurant, club, or awards show with a new spring in your step.

Wealthy investors out there? You know where to find me.

Thursday, July 19, 2007

Did I Really Just Hear Julie Chen Say to Jen What BB8 Fans Have Been Thinking??

Quote:

You have definitely taken the "uni" out of "unitard."


Mmmmmmmm... Donut....

I Am So Excited That David Beckham is in L.A.!

Finally! A man I've never laid eyes on who does something I've never seen and have no interest in, will be doing it for a team I've never heard of in a building I've never been in which is located I-have-no-idea-where! And he brought his rude, horrid-looking wife with him?! FANTASTIC!

I never know what I'm interested in until the media tells me. But they know best. After all, they knew that John McCain had the nomination all wrapped up... and now they know he doesn't have a chance! And they knew all this months before a single person has voted, so they must be really smart!

Now I'm hearing that we love Fred Thompson! He's really popular, we're told! So cool!

Tokyo Electric: Fifty Percent More Radioactive Material Leaked Into Sea of Japan Than Previously Thought


The Giant Reptile Terror Alert Level has been raised to orange.

Lost Not Nominated??

Heroes?? The Sopranos??? Grey's Anatomy??

As Rob Corddry would say, "Come on!"

Maybe they should just call an end to the Emmys. Or maybe instead just hold a small ceremony at Tony Shalhoub's house.

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Did Boxing Get Really, Really Gay When I Wasn't Looking?

Shocker #2: Bob Barr Once Spoke the Truth... Just Nine Years Too Early

Speaking of Bob Barr... While you ponder his and Henry Hyde's and Bob Livingston's hypocrisy...

...and while you ponder Scooter Libby and signing statements and executive privilege and Harriet Meiers' no-show and deleted emails and Alberto Gonzales and domestic eavesdropping and Cheney's claiming laws don't apply to him...

... and while you ponder Bush lying us into war and committing torture and unlawful detentions and all that, and the Administration suppressing intelligence and lying to the public and the UN...

...it's fun to go back and read what Bob Barr said in his big impeachment speech on the floor in October, 1998. I suggest that, with very few changes, this could be the magna carta of the Impeach Bush movement:


Mr. Chairman and all Americans, imagine a place where a dictator, a king, a prime minister or a president could walk into your home at any time and force you to accede to any demand, however unreasonable. Throughout history, including 18th century Britain, such regimes have been the norm. The system of rule by law under which we live stands as stark exception to the historically prevalent notion that a ruler can take whatever he wants whenever he wants it from any subject.

As we so quickly, however, forget in times of stability and prosperity our system is a fragile one, a brief flicker of light in an otherwise dark march of human political history. If we drop our guard, even for a moment, and allow a president to demand citizens gratify his personal desires and let him place himself in the way of laws designed to protect -- to prevent such conduct, that light will be greatly dimmed, if not snuffed out.

Our founding fathers understood the importance of restraining unbridled power because they grew up in a system that did not.

The Constitution includes explicit provisions that protect us from the abuse of power, including provisions to prevent us from being forced to quarter soldiers, to stop the government from imprisoning us without cause, and to protect us from involuntary services.

The facts of the case before us are not complex. Bill Clinton, first as governor and then as president, using power entrusted to him coarsely demanded personal favors from individual citizens. When one of those citizens refused, our Supreme Court voted unanimously to allow her access to the courts.

Yet, instead of apologizing, Bill Clinton continued to abuse his office to smear that citizen's name and block her access to justice. Instead of telling the truth to the court and the grand jury, the president lied. Instead of cooperating with the court, he obstructed its efforts.

At this very moment, government and private employees are working under his direct orders to block this committee's efforts.

We are witnessing nothing less than symptoms of a cancer on the American presidency. If we fail to remove it, it will expand to destroy the principles that matter most to all of us.

Any system of government can choose to perpetuate virtue or vice. If this president is allowed to use the presidency to gratify his personal desires in a way that -- in the same way a corrupt county or parish boss solicits money for votes, future occupants will sadly do the same.

If the proposition that perjury is sometimes acceptable is allowed to stand, in the blink of eye, it will become acceptable in every case. Such a precedent would hang forever as an albatross around the neck of our judicial system.

If we stand by while a president obstructs justice and destroys his enemies, our entire government will be contaminated with cynical disdain.

The president of the United States controls at his fingertips the greatest arsenal of destructive power ever assembled in human history, just as the governor of a state controls the state's police power. He has the ability to destroy one life or billions. He is the singular individual charged with the constitutional duty of faithfully enforcing the laws, all the laws, of the United States.

When evidence emerges that he would abuse that power or fail in that duty, it is a matter of gravest constitutional importance. If we fail to address such charges, we will soon be left standing dazed and befuddled among the smoldering ruins of a great democracy.

We will count the cost of choosing temporal stability over permanent justice and policies over principle in diminished freedoms -- lost policies, lost lives and ruined institutions.

History is littered with the records of nations whose leaders buried their heads in the sand as adversity appeared on the horizon. The U.S. of -- America, in 1998, must not suffer the same fate.

In America, we have a right not to be tapped on the shoulder and escorted to a room where a mayor, a governor or a president, endraped [sic] with absolute power, mistreats us.

When such conduct occurs, it is the right of any citizen to seek ultimate redress in the one -- the only form -- designed for that purpose, where each of us is on a level playing field with any other: our courts, the ultimate equalizer in our system of government.

Mr. Chairman, I also would say that anyone who has made it their goal to hide the truth, obstruct this process today or use it for political gain, should summon up whatever tattered remains of honor they have left, stand up and walk out of this room, taking with them such erroneous arguments as that the need to include graphic detail in the Starr referral was based on whim rather than the need to rebut the president's sorry attempt to deny reality and common sense alike.

Mr. Chairman, imagine if all the journalists, lawyers and staff who fill this room today disappeared. Imagine if they were replaced with the faces of all the great American heroes who have come before us -- the patriots who pledged their lives, fortunes and sacred honor to create a republic; the men who gathered in Philadelphia 211 years ago to solidify that with a Constitution.

HYDE: The gentleman's time has expired.

BARR: Would ask 15 additional seconds.

HYDE: Fifteen seconds.

BARR: The men who gathered in Philadelphia 211 years ago to solidify with a Constitution; the young soldiers who bled to death on foreign shores to protect it; the prosecutors who put their lives on the line to enforce its laws; every teacher who has led her class in reciting "The Pledge of Allegiance."

Could anyone look into the faces of those people and tell them it really doesn't matter that the president abused his power, lied to the American people, perjured himself and subverted the rule of law? Anyone who can answer yes to that question does not have the right to sit here today.

Here's a Shocker: Ann Coulter Lied

Watch as Ann Coulter pretends that Larry Flynt only exposed the hypocrisy of one Republican before Vitter. She also maintains that it was a pathetic little story of something that happened 20 years ago, and that two or three others outed themselves, then resigned.

In fact, Flynt outed three Republicans: Clinton impeachment Managers Bob Barr and Henry Hyde, and Bob Livingston, who confessed and resigned only because Flynt was about to publish.

Coulter knows that Barr and Hyde continued to serve after they were exposed. Hyde only left office in 2006!

When Livingston resigned he had just been elected Speaker of the House, replacing Newt Gingrich, who was facing 84 ethics charges, not including any related to his marital infidelities. Livingston's replacement was David Vitter.

A pathetic little story that happened 20 years ago seems less pathetic when you realize it was one of several, ongoing stories exposed 9 years ago. Not only did Bob Barr cheat on at least two of his wives, but under oath he refused to answer questions about whether or not he cheated. (Yet still he had no sympathy for Bill Clinton.)

More on Bob Barr (not to be confused with Babar, the elephant) after the scummy video:



Barr was a fierce anti-choice advocate who said abortion was wrong even in cases of rape. When it was revealed that one of his former wives had an abortion during their marriage, he said under oath that she did it over his objections.

Well...

Turns out that "object" isn't a totally accurate description. A better phrase would be "drove her to the clinic and paid for it." (It's okay, though, because he was already cheating on that wife)

Confronted with the lie, Barr told CNN that his lying about his marriage under oath was "vastly different" from Bill Clinton's lying about his marriage under oath, because Barr's perjury "didn't influence the members of the House." (No one pointed out to him that if the House had left Bill Clinton alone, his perjury wouldn't have "influenced" them either.)

Ancient history? Sure, but Ann Coulter brought it up.

"West Hollywood City Council Votes to Call for Impeachment of Bush and Cheney"

Monday, July 16, 2007

You Don't Know Jen

If you're not watching Big Brother 8, that is.

If you are watching, then you know Jen all too well. You know that Jen is the single most irritating, shallow, noxious, odious housemate in BB history.

Just try to keep your food down as you watch this vintage piece of Jen-ius:


Are We Talking About the Same "Downtown"?

And exactly how many things are "waiting for me" there?!

In honor of the upcoming Spice Girls reunion tour -- the answer to a prayer no one uttered -- I ask the musical question: Is Emma Bunton trying to tell us something?