World of the Bizarre Dispatch

Man Who Was Being Eaten by Maggots Dies
The Associated Press
Wednesday, July 27, 2005; 7:46 PM

YONKERS, N.Y. -- A 63-year-old man died a day after emergency workers found him at his home in such squalid conditions that maggots were eating his flesh, a fire official said Wednesday.

Paramedics went to Michael Link's home Sunday night after his 66-year-old brother and roommate, Adam Link, said the victim was having trouble breathing, fire department surgeon Roger Chirurgi said.

Michael Link was lying in his own feces on a pile of debris and "had open wounds with maggots eating on the flesh," Chirurgi said.

Link was taken to a hospital, where he died Monday, the surgeon said. His brother was undergoing psychiatric evaluation.

The home, a large Victorian across from a school, was overgrown with trees, shrubs and weeds. Inside, paramedics found no electric power and papers and boxes everywhere, Chirurgi said.

Firefighters wore hazardous-materials suits to investigate the house after the brothers were taken out. Chirurgi said several veteran firefighters were sickened by the scene and stench.

Bolton would be whose Ambassador to the UN?

This just in from our Hubris Watchdog Department!

By C. William Boyer

There are reports surfacing that John Bolton, the angry and infantile Bush administration nominee for Ambassador to the UN, may be ensconced there by hook or by crook. Never mind that members of the Senate representing roughly half of the American public are dead-set against this man ever being a diplomat to the UN. Never mind that members of the president's own party have serious reservations about this fellow, who a career state-department and GOP-card-carrying executive called a "classic kiss-up, kick-down" kind of guy. And certainly never mind that this fellow's personality is best suited to be a repo-man or mafia hitman rather than a diplomat (he's about as welcome as genital warts and as diplomatic as a hand grenade). No, never mind what anybody thinks, the Bush Administration wants to have their own man in place. And they'll utilize the skullduggery of the Midnight Recess to get it done. No vote, just emplacement. No democracy, despite Mr. Bush's professed (and ersatz) pleas of love for it, but rather simple autocracy and hubris.

Everyone sing together: "It's my nomination and I'll cry if I want to."

Which begs the question: Will John Bolton then henceforth be called what he would indeed be? Correctly stated, the Bush Ambassador to the United Nations? Because he will sure as hell not be the United States Ambassador to the United Nations.

It is this same sort of arrogant, 'I want it my way' sort of thinking that could well drive John Roberts' nomination to the Supreme Court.

The Bush people will claim, nay, demand an up-or-down vote on Roberts and will threaten the nuclear option again to overturn the centuries old Senate tradition of the filibuster, claiming as a sitting president, Mr. Bush has a right to put his man on the bench.

Wrong.

Now, Mr. Bush has every right, in fact possesses a constitutional right, to have his own cabinet nominees granted an up-or-down vote: they are his ministers, helping to guide the executive branch's policy. And it can very well be argued that Alberto Gonzalez's nomination for attorney general deserved the up-or-down vote it received, despite some Democratic posturing vis-a-vis the torture memos, and should never have been subjected to a filibuster. But Mr. Bush has no right to railroad the nominations of an ambassador to the world body nor a man who will sit the bench for the remainder of his lifetime. These are positions demanding united consensus. In fact, the titles of the two positions spell that out quite clearly:

John Bolton: nominee to be United States Ambassador to the UN.
John Roberts: nominee to the United States Supreme Court.

You will notice that nowhere in either of those titles do the words REPUBLICAN or BUSH ADMINISTRATION appear.

The word United is of course the operating and key word. It is incumbent upon Mr. Bush, and all presidents, be they members of the party in power or the party without, to gain consensus and united support for such important and party-transcending positions because, this just in, while the White House is currently occupied by Mr. Bush, it is and always will be owned by We The People.

Mr. Bush, you are nothing more than a renter.

Now, because it's our White House and our Supreme Court and our Ambassador to the UN, just like that's our lawn you stroll about on and our Oval Office you work within, We The People are due a say in how our possessions are treated.

It's our Supreme Court, not yours.
It's our ambassador to the UN, not yours.

Learn to play well with others, Mr. Bush, and get it right.

Get it together.

If World War Two had been an online Real Time Strategy game . . .

. . . the chat room traffic would have gone something like this.

*Hitler[AoE] has joined the game. *
*Eisenhower has joined the game.*
*paTTon has joined the game. *
*Churchill has joined the game. *
*benny-tow has joined the game.*
*T0J0 has joined the game. *
*Roosevelt has joined the game. *
*Stalin has joined the game. *
*deGaulle has joined the game. *
Roosevelt: hey sup
T0J0: y0
Stalin: hi
Churchill: hi
Hitler[AoE]: cool, i start with panzer tanks!
paTTon: lol more like panzy tanks
T0JO: lol
Roosevelt: o this fockin sucks i got a depression!
benny-tow: haha america sux
Stalin: hey hitler you dont fight me i dont fight u, cool?
Hitler[AoE]; sure whatever
Stalin: cool
deGaulle: ****Hitler rushed some1 help
Hitler[AoE]: lol byebye frenchy
Roosevelt: i dont got **** to help, sry
Churchill: wtf the luftwaffle is attacking me
Roosevelt: get antiair guns
Churchill: i cant afford them
benny-tow: u n00bs know what team talk is?
paTTon: stfu
Roosevelt: o yah hit the navajo button guys
deGaulle: eisenhower ur worthless come help me quick
Eisenhower: i cant do **** til rosevelt gives me an army
paTTon: yah hurry the fock up
Churchill: d00d im gettin pounded
deGaulle: this is fockin weak u guys suck
*deGaulle has left the game.*
Roosevelt: im gonna attack the axis k?
benny-tow: with what? ur wheelchair?
benny-tow: lol did u mess up ur legs AND ur head?
Hitler[AoE]: ROFLMAO
T0J0: lol o no america im comin 4 u
Roosevelt: wtf! thats bullsh1t u fags im gunna kick ur asses
T0JO: not without ur harbors u wont! lol
Roosevelt: u little biotch ill get u
Hitler[AoE]: wtf
Hitler[AoE]: america hax, u had depression and now u got a huge fockin army
Hitler[AoE]: thats bullsh1t u hacker
Churchill: lol no more france for u hitler
Hitler[AoE]: tojo help me!
T0J0: wtf u want me to do, im on the other side of the world retard
Hitler[AoE]: fine ill clear you a path
Stalin: WTF u arsshoel! WE HAD A FoCKIN TRUCE
Hitler[AoE]: i changed my mind lol
benny-tow: haha
benny-tow: hey ur losing ur guys in africa im gonna need help in italy soon sum1
T0J0: o **** i cant help u i got my hands full
Hitler[AoE]: im 2 busy 2 help
Roosevelt: yah thats right ***** im comin for ya
Stalin: church help me
Churchill: like u helped me before? sure ill just sit here
Stalin: dont be an arss
Churchill: dont be a commie. oops too late
Eisenhower: LOL
benny-tow: hahahh oh sh1t help
Hitler: o man ur focked
paTTon: oh what now biotch
Roosevelt: whos the cripple now lol
*benny-tow has been eliminated.*
benny-tow: lame
Roosevelt: gj patton
paTTon: thnx
Hitler[AoE]: WTF eisenhower hax hes killing all my sh1t
Hitler[AoE]: quit u hacker so u dont ruin my record
Eisenhower: Nuts!
benny~tow: wtf that mean?
Eisenhower: meant to say nutsack lol finger slipped
paTTon: coming to get u hitler u paper hanging hun cocksocker
Stalin: rofl
T0J0: HAHAHHAA
Hitler[AoE]: u guys are fockin gay
Hitler[AoE]: ur never getting in my city
*Hitler[AoE] has been eliminated.*
benny~tow: OMG u noob you killed yourself
Eisenhower: ROFLOLOLOL
Stalin: OMG LMAO!
Hitler[AoE]: WTF i didnt click there omg this game blows
*Hitler[AoE] has left the game*
paTTon: hahahhah
T0J0: WTF my teammates are n00bs
benny~tow: shut up noob
Roosevelt: haha wut a moron
paTTon: wtf am i gunna do now?
Eisenhower: yah me too
T0J0: why dont u attack me o thats right u dont got no ships lololol
Eisenhower: fock u
paTTon: lemme go thru ur base commie
Stalin: go to hell lol
paTTon: fock this sh1t im goin afk
Eisenhower: yah this is gay
*Roosevelt has left the game.*
Hitler[AoE]: wtf?
Eisenhower: sh1t now we need some1 to join
*tru_m4n has joined the game.*
tru_m4n: hi all
T0J0: hey
Stalin: sup
Churchill: hi
tru_m4n: OMG OMG OMG i got all his stuff!
tru_m4n: NUKES! HOLY **** I GOT NUKES
Stalin: d00d gimmie some plz
tru_m4n: no way i only got like a couple
Stalin: omg dont be gay gimmie nuculer secrets
T0J0: wtf is nukes?
T0J0: holy ****holy****hoyl****!
*T0J0 has been eliminated.*
*The Allied team has won the game!*
Eisenhower: awesome!
Churchill: gg noobs no re
T0J0: thats bull**** u fockin suck
*T0J0 has left the game.*
*Eisenhower has left the game.*
Stalin: next game im not going to be on ur team, u guys didnt help me for ****
Churchill: wutever, we didnt need ur help neway dumbarss
tru_m4n: l8r all
benny~tow: bye
Churchill: l8r
Stalin: fock u all
tru_m4n: shut up commie lol
*tru_m4n has left the game. *
benny~tow: lololol u commie
Churchill: ROFL
Churchill: bye commie
*Churchill has left the game.*
*benny~tow has left the game.*
Stalin: i hate u all fags
*Stalin has left the game.*
paTTon: lol no1 is left
paTTon: weeeee i got a jeep
*paTTon has been eliminated.*
paTTon: o sh1t!
*paTTon has left the game.*

Kill All the CEO's . . .

. . . And Kill Them Tonight!

Didja hear? Hewlett-Packard just made a move to get profitable . Yeah, HP's gonna let go almost 15,000 workers, average joes and janes, mostly, and they're gonna save 1.9 billion doing it. Yep, changes needed to be made.

See, Hewlett-Packard just hired a new head-man--- appropiately named, you see, cause of all the heads he's lopping off--- a fella by the name of Mark V. Hurd. I think one reason he needed to cut off so many heads is to somehow come up with the money to pay him his bloated salary: Hurd's getting a damn lucrative compensation package: in the first four years of his contract, he will receive at least $18.8 million in pay and bonuses -- and he could get as much as $39.2 million if he meets performance targets. Ah, a cool 40 million over four years. Geez, you'd think this guy was a premium left-handed pitcher, making that kinda dough.

Thing I wonder, though, is when the day's gonna come when people decide they've finally had enough. Cut my head off? I don't think so. I'm gonna cut off YOURS. Attack the executive suite like the villagers going after Frankenstein's monster, right, with pitchforks and torches.

Ah, to dream a little dream.

From the Department of Double-Talk

. . . Or, Attack of the Killer Poodles.
By C. William Boyer


FOR A COUPLE YEARS NOW, the Washington press corps has been accused of failing to confront the Bush administration. On the administration's stone-walling of the 9-11 investigation, on the absence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and, most recently, the very damning Downing Street Memo whereby the British government nails Bush and Company for their plans a full year before the invasion to do just that. And, more importantly, to 'cook' the intelligence offered by CIA and others to justify the inevitable invasion to the American public while simultaneously and disingenuously claiming that a peaceful solution was being sought. After Pulitzer-Prize winning writer Maureen Dowd of the New York Times was banned from the White House press-conferences (Tell the truth? Bad reporter, baaaddd reporter), who wouldn't be cowed?

Well, the poodles are hitting back.

Quick recap: in the ramp-up to the Iraq invasion, as Bush attempted to (quoting the Downing Street Memo) 'fix intelligence around policy', Ambassador Joseph Wilson was dispatched to Niger to investigate reports of Iraqi attempts to gain enriched uranium (called yellow-cake in nuke-speak) for the purposes of creating an atomic bomb. Wilson reported that the claims were fully bogus and counterfeit at best. Yet, lo and behold, following this, in his State of the Union in 2003 prior to the invasion, Bush cited the Nigerian Yellow-Cake connection as one more reason to invade Iraq. When Ambassador Wilson 'outed' the president for this in a New York Times piece, something curious happened: it was leaked to the press by an unknown someone that Wilson's wife, Valerie, was an undercover CIA agent, an American spy operating under cover.

As punishment for Joe Wilson's actions.
As a message to others against opposing the administration.
As revenge.

Note: Outing an undercover CIA agent is currently against the law. As in illegal.

Subsequently, an investigation was launched and those reporting the 'outing' threatened with jail unless they revealed the leaker. This invoked a First Amendment battle and one reporter, Judith Miller, is going to jail. As the investigation moved forward and while the identity of the leaker was unknown, hidden behind the skirts of journalistic credibility and confidentiality, President Bush stated that should the leaker be in the White House, they'd be fired.

Guess what? Turns out Karl Rove, Bush's brilliant campaign strategist, is the leaker. And now, with it out in the open, the White House will no longer talk about it. No comment on firings, nothing will be discussed. The following is a transcript from yesterday's White House briefing by spokesman/liar Scott McClellan. Read it. It's simply amazing, for the tap-dancing and for the tenacity displayed by a group of White House reporters:

White House Press Briefing
July 11th, 2005

Q: Does the president stand by his pledge to fire anyone involved in a leak of the name of a CIA operative?
MCCLELLAN: I appreciate your question. I think your question is being asked related to some reports that are in reference to an ongoing criminal investigation. The criminal investigation that you reference is something that continues at this point.And as I’ve previously stated, while that investigation is ongoing, the White House is not going to comment on it.The president directed the White House to cooperate fully with the investigation. And as part of cooperating fully with the investigation, we made a decision that we weren’t going to comment on it while it is ongoing.
Q: I actually wasn’t talking about any investigation. But in June of 2004, the president said that he would fire anybody who was involved in this leak to the press about information. I just wanted to know: Is that still his position?
MCCLELLAN: Yes, but this question is coming up in the context of this ongoing investigation, and that’s why I said that our policy continues to be that we’re not going to get into commenting on an ongoing criminal investigation from this podium.The prosecutors overseeing the investigation had expressed a preference to us that one way to help the investigation is not to be commenting on it from this podium....
Q: Scott, if I could point out: Contradictory to that statement, on September 29th of 2003, while the investigation was ongoing, you clearly commented on it. You were the first one to have said that if anybody from the White House was involved, they would be fired. And then, on June 10th of 2004, at Sea Island Plantation, in the midst of this investigation, when the president made his comments that, yes, he would fire anybody from the White House who was involved. So why have you commented on this during the process of the investigation in the past, but now you’ve suddenly drawn a curtain around it under the statement of, 'We’re not going to comment on an ongoing investigation'?
MCCLELLAN: Again, John, I appreciate the question. I know you want to get to the bottom of this. No one wants to get to the bottom of it more than the president of the United States. And I think the way to be most helpful is to not get into commenting on it while it is an ongoing investigation. And that’s something that the people overseeing the investigation have expressed a preference that we follow.And that’s why we’re continuing to follow that approach and that policy. Now, I remember very well what was previously said. And, at some point, I will be glad to talk about it, but not until after the investigation is complete.
Q: So could I just ask: When did you change your mind to say that it was OK to comment during the course of an investigation before, but now it’s not?
MCCLELLAN: Well, I think maybe you missed what I was saying in reference to
Terry’s question at the beginning. There came a point, when the investigation got under way, when those overseeing the investigation asked that it would be — or said that it would be their preference that we not get into discussing it while it is ongoing.I think that’s the way to be most helpful to help them advance the investigation and get to the bottom of it.
Q: Scott, can I ask you this: Did Karl Rove commit a crime?
MCCLELLAN: Again, David, this is a question relating to a ongoing investigation, and you have my response related to the investigation. And I don't think you should read anything into it other than: We're going to continue not to comment on it while it's ongoing.
Q: Do you stand by your statement from the fall of 2003, when you were asked specifically about Karl and Elliot Abrams and Scooter Libby, and you said, "I've gone to each of those gentlemen, and they have told me they are not involved in this"?
MCCLELLAN: And if you will recall, I said that, as part of helping the investigators move forward on the investigation, we're not going to get into commenting on it. That was something I stated back near that time as well.
Q: Scott, this is ridiculous. The notion that you're going to stand before us, after having commented with that level of detail, and tell people watching this that somehow you've decided not to talk. You've got a public record out there. Do you stand by your remarks from that podium or not?
MCCLELLAN: I'm well aware, like you, of what was previously said. And I will be glad to talk about it at the appropriate time. The appropriate time is when the investigation...
Q: (inaudible) when it's appropriate and when it's inappropriate?
MCCLELLAN: If you'll let me finish.
Q: No, you're not finishing. You're not saying anything. You stood at that podium and said that Karl Rove was not involved. And now we find out that he spoke about Joseph Wilson's wife. So don't you owe the American public a fuller explanation. Was he involved or was he not? Because contrary to what you told the American people, he did indeed talk about his wife, didn't he?
MCCLELLAN: There will be a time to talk about this, but now is not the time to talk about it.
Q: Do you think people will accept that, what you're saying today?
MCCLELLAN: Again, I've responded to the question.
Q: You're in a bad spot here, Scott... because after the investigation began-- after the criminal investigation was under way -- you said, October 10th, 2003, "I spoke with those individuals, Rove, Abrams and Libby. As I pointed out, those individuals assured me they were not involved in this," from that podium. That's after the criminal investigation began.Now that Rove has essentially been caught red-handed peddling this information, all of a sudden you have respect for the sanctity of the criminal investigation?
MCCLELLAN: No, that's not a correct characterization. And I think you are well aware of that.....And we want to be helpful so that they can get to the bottom of this. Because no one wants to get to the bottom of it more than the president of the United States.I am well aware of what was said previously. I remember well what was said previously. And at some point I look forward to talking about it. But until the investigation is complete, I'm just not going to do that.
Q: So you're now saying that after you cleared Rove and the others from that podium, then the prosecutors asked you not to speak anymore and since then you haven't.
MCCLELLAN: Again, you're continuing to ask questions relating to an ongoing criminal investigation and I'm just not going to respond to them.
Q: When did they ask you to stop commenting on it, Scott? Can you pin down a date
MCCLELLAN: Back in that time period.
Q: Well, then the president commented on it nine months later. So was he not following the White House plan?
MCCLELLAN: I appreciate your questions. You can keep asking them, but you have my response.
Q: Well, we are going to keep asking them. When did the president learn that Karl Rove had had a conversation with a news reporter about the involvement of Joseph Wilson's wife in the decision to send him to Africa?
MCCLELLAN: I've responded to the questions.
Q: When did the president learn that Karl Rove had been...
MCCLELLAN: I've responded to your questions.
Q: After the investigation is completed, will you then be consistent with your word and the president's word that anybody who was involved will be let go?
MCCLELLAN: Again, after the investigation is complete, I will be glad to talk about it at that point.Q: Can you walk us through why, given the fact that Rove's lawyer has spoken publicly about this, it is inconsistent with the investigation, that it compromises the investigation to talk about the involvement of Karl Rove, the deputy chief of staff, here?
MCCLELLAN: Well, those overseeing the investigation expressed a preference
to us that we not get into commenting on the investigation while it's ongoing. And that was what they requested of the White House. And so I think in order to be helpful to that investigation, we are following their direction.
Q: Does the president continue to have confidence in Mr. Rove?
MCCLELLAN: Again, these are all questions coming up in the context of an ongoing criminal investigation. And you've heard my response on this.
Q: So you're not going to respond as to whether or not the president has confidence in his deputy chief of staff?
MCCLELLAN: You're asking this question in the context of an ongoing investigation, and I would not read anything into it other then I'm simply going to comment on an ongoing investigation.
Q: Has there been any change, or is there a plan for Mr. Rove's portfolio to be altered in any way?
MCCLELLAN: Again, you have my response to these questions....

If that's a response, Mr. McClellan, you can keep it.

At FOX NEWS, English Deaths Advantageous

Or, Always Look on the Bright Side (as sung by Monty Python)

When you're the propaganda arm of the Bush administration, even in despair you can find joy. Take the London Bombings.

At last report, with British authorities still plumbing the grisly depths of the bombed out London Tube, the toll of woe stands at more the 50 dead and 700 injured. Still more bodies are believed to be undiscovered in the tunnels beneath London, and of those 700 injured, many will never be the same again, maimed, blinded, rendered deaf and perhaps even rendered mad by the homicidal madness of Islamic terrorists. But that doesn't mean it has to be all bad. You just have to look on the brightside. Maybe, in the parlance of that great new band The Killers, you just have to be Mr. Brightside.

Enter Fox News host Brian Kilmeade on the day of the blasts during the Fox&Friends telecast. Never mind the dead and the aggrieved, this boy's found good in the whole thing:

KILMEADE: And he [British Prime Minister Tony Blair] made the statement, clearly shaken, but clearly determined. This is his second address in the last hour. First to the people of London, and now at the G8 summit, where their topic. Number 1 --believe it or not-- was global warming, the second was African aid. And that was the first time since 9-11 when they should know, and they do know now, that terrorism should be Number 1. But it's important for them all to be together. I think that works to our advantage, in the Western world's advantage, for people to experience something like this together, just 500 miles from where the attacks have happened[italics mine].

Even in times of war, these guys are all about the metrics of power and politics. But, perhaps, akin to the maturity factor of seeing a disfigured person and not blurting out "Oh, what a freak," perhaps Mr. Kilmeade ought not to have called the dead and damaged in Britain advantageous. Of course, when you live in the All-Spin Zone that is Fox News and your grasp on reality is already so tenuous, perhaps it makes all the sense in the world to compute political calculus in the face of grave human loss.

Brian Kilmeade IS Mr. Brightside.

We're gonna need a different boat.

And a lawyer. A good one.

By C. William Boyer

Randy "Duke" Cunningham [R] update:

Copley News Service

July 2, 2005

WASHINGTON – In a dramatic sign of a fast-moving, bicoastal investigation, federal agents searched the Rancho Santa Fe home of Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham yesterday, along with the Washington office of a defense contractor linked to the Republican congressman and the yacht where Cunningham had lived.

The federal task force that conducted the coordinated, surprise raids on opposite coasts included agents from the U.S. Attorney's Office in San Diego, the FBI, the Internal Revenue Service and the Defense Criminal Investigative Service, said Debbie Weierman, an FBI spokeswoman in Washington.

"The operation is part of an ongoing investigation," she said.

In Washington, federal agents questioned employees of the Capitol Yacht Club, here Wade's yacht, the Duke-Stir, is berthed. After Wade bought the yacht, he renamed it in an apparent play on Cunningham's nickname, placed it in a boat slip Cunningham had been leasing and made it available for Cunningham to live aboard while in Washington. Cunningham has defended the arrangement, saying he paid monthly dock fees and maintenance costs for the boat in lieu of rent.

Two weeks ago, The Reasonable Rant did a piece about Randy "Duke" Cunnigham's [R] little run-in with the law. Last we checked in on the Duke-stir, he was working on a 'comprehensive statement' about how the defense contractor to whom he sold his San Diego house, Michael Wade, could just two months later lose 700 grand in the turbo-charged California real estate market. Seems that 'comprehensive statement' (which, being the cynical skeptics we are, we call a LIE) wasn't good enough for the Feds. Ba-da-bing, the Duke-stir's got men with gun's busting down his door.

Lady Justice, you go girl!

Pyscho Celebrity Spotlight, Volume 2

And there's the bell and it's Round 2 in Brad versus Jen . . .

By C. William Boyer

So, you hear the latest news? Real Access-Hollywood, burning-up-the-wires stuff: Jennifer Aniston's getting some revenge, according to Us Weekly. This week's issue's got a headline reading JEN'S REVENGE, and a picture of Jen and her new boyfriend.

Some revenge. The Spanish say revenge is a plate best eaten cold. This revenge is best shoved to the back of the 'fridge with the rotting casserole from last month's family barbecue.

Let's see here, uh, Brad, he hooks up with Angelina Jolie who, despite being a very weird bitch, is one of the hottest women on the planet. I don't like to admit that, cause she annoys the crap out of me, but I will. You know, Angelina Jolie with the lips and the tits and the ass and can you possibly imagine that woman between the sheets? So you gotta say Bradley did pretty well for himself.

Now for Jen's revenge. Jennifer Anniston, she's a pretty good looking woman, I mean, she's got the big rack and a pretty face and hell, can you imagine getting her between the sheets, hey, I know it's not Angelina but for a mortal man, even more than just mortal, that would be a la-de-da kind of deal and she seems like she's a helluva lot cooler than Angelina Jolie. Well, it seems she's decided to get her revenge by dating . . . Would you hand me the envelope please? Thank you. Okay, the revenge date of the year is . . .

Hold on. Really? C'mon, you gotta be kidding--- I am reading the goddamn cue card, I opened the envelope didn't I? No, you shut up, this bothers me . . . Okay, fine, I'll read the goddamn card: Jennifer Anniston's revenge against Brad Pitt for dating Angelina is . . . is . . .

Vince Vaughn?

You remember the Vince Vaughn from Swingers? Remember that guy? Tall, thin guy with nice fine features, looked good in a suit? Now that Vince Vaughn would be revenge. The new Vince Vaughn, though, he's a fucking embarrassment. Would someone please call Jen and tell her this is NOT how you make Brad jealous?

The new Vince Vaughn is beginning to remind me more and more of the new Alec Baldwin: swollen and corpulent and not aging well at all. You telling me Vince is 35? Jesus, I look better than that and I'm a 40-year old advertising salesman, not some hot-shot Hollywood star. This guy, he needs to excercise or drink water or take a shit load of vitamins cause he is going south in a hurry.

I don't know, maybe it's me, but I would think Jen could do better.

Hey, would someone let Jen know I'm available? You there, with the cell-phone. Give her a call, tell her I'll bring over a pizza and some beer, will ya?

Is that right? Well fuck you, too, buddy.

Bush Gives Super-Rich 'Free Checking'

By C. William Boyer

Okay, I guess Mr. Bush is not a total failure as a president, I mean he has accomplished a few things. Why, let's not forget that seminal piece of legislation on bankruptcy reform. No more will scofflaws like Ethel and Marvin Pinwhistle of Okeefenokee, FLA run up a bunch of medical bills when Marvin spent 3 months in the ICU, barely alive with Ethel, that skinflint, sitting next to him with tears in her eyes and his hand in hers, no more will lowlifes like that stiff our nation's proud credit card companies of what's rightfully there's.

"Pay up, Ethel, or so help me I will break both your legs." The Credit Card man shifted the gun from right hand to left, wiping a meaty hand across his forehead; his forehead was wide and sloping, with a greasy shine of perspiration. "Look, I'm taking what's mine cuz the government says I can. Now give me Marvin's watch and those earrings you got there, yeah, the pearl jobs he gave you for your 40th anniversary. Now, I'll be back in two weeks for the rest, so if yous knows what's good for yous, you'll have my dough. Capice?"

Yes, what a bravado, forward-looking piece of historic legislation that was, bankruptcy reform, and lest we forget, Mr. Bush was pivotal in enacting something utterly VITAL to our nation's well-being, tort reform. Blessed be the corporations, now safe from egregious lawsuits aimed at recovering money for people undeserving. Now, it's possible for automakers, drug companies, whomever to apply The Formula (Average rate of failure (x) Average settlement per failure; or cost of recall; if the cost of the recall is less, we don't recall the cars with the faulty brakes or the drugs that cause cerebral hemorraging).

Okay, I digress.

What I really wanted to share was this: Because of George W. Bush's ruinous and unfair tax polices, this past year, fiscal 2004, 15% more SUPER RICH PEOPLE paid NO TAXES. Let me repeat: 15% MORE SUPER RICH PEOPLE PAID NO TAXES. I'm talking about people earning over a million dollars a year paying less in taxes than the kid working the summer job at 7-11. Piss you off? Then read this and feel the burn:

The Nontaxpaying Affluent Grew by 15% in One Year

The New York Times
June 29, 2005

The number of affluent individuals and married couples who paid no federal income
taxes jumped more than 15 percent in 2002, to 5,650, new government data showed yesterday.

The chances of having a large income but not paying taxes on any of it are growing, according to the data, issued in the Internal Revenue Service's annual report to Congress on well-to-do Americans who live tax free. About one in every 436 high-income Americans paid no taxes in 2002, up from one in 531 in 2001 and one in 1,010 in 2000.

Over all, the top 2 percent of earners, the 2.5 million filers with income of $200,000 or more, paid almost 27 cents in taxes for each dollar of income they reported in 2002, other I.R.S. data showed. This group accounted for 53.5 percent of the income tax paid by all Americans. Among that high-income group, however, almost 83,000, or one in 33, paid less than a dime in taxes for every dollar of income. An additional 79,000 paid less than 15 cents. The average for all Americans was 13 cents.

Congress taxes Americans on their worldwide income. Of the 5,650 individuals and couples who paid no income taxes to the United States, only 728 paid any to a foreign government, while 4,922 lived completely free of income tax.

The I.R.S. measured income in two ways.

One was by adjusted gross income, the last line on the front page of the Form 1040 tax return. By this measure, 2,959 affluent individuals and married couples paid no federal income tax, down from 3,385 in 2001, but up from 2,328 in 2000. There were 60 such examples in 1977, when a dollar was worth three times as much as in 2002.

On a worldwide basis, 2,551 such individuals and couples paid no tax in 2002, down from 2,875 in 2001, but up from 2,022 in 2000. There were 37 such examples in 1977, the first year the agency disclosed such data.

The second measure, giving a fuller picture, was expanded income, which also includes money from sources like tax-exempt interest and untaxed Social Security benefits. By this measure, 5,650 well-to-do individuals and married couples paid no federal income tax in 2002, up from 4,910 in 2001 and 2,766 in 2000. There were 85 such examples in 1977.

Worldwide on this basis, there were 4,922 individuals and couples who lived tax free in 2002, up from 4,119 in 2001 and 2,320 in 2000. There were 64 such examples in 1977.

The I.R.S. report said that "the most important item in eliminating tax" was taking income in the form of tax-exempt interest on state and municipal bonds. Nearly two-thirds of those who lived tax free reported income from such bonds.

The four largest items that reduced income subject to taxation, the I.R.S. said, were miscellaneous deductions; interest paid on borrowing to finance investments; various tax credits; and large medical bills, which can be deducted once they exceed either 7.5 percent or 10 percent of adjusted gross income, depending on the taxpayer's
circumstances. And you wonder why George W. Bush has posted the five biggest budget deficits in history? Why George W. Bush, the 43rd president, representing a little more than 2% of the president terms, has now accrued 40% of our nation's historic debt? That's right: in five years, he's racked up almost half what every president before him racked up COMBINED, guys like Abe Lincoln fighting the Civil War and Woodrow Wilson sending our boys 'Over There' and FDR taking down the Nazis and the Japs, yeah, all that, and George has racked up almost half our historical debt fighting a POLICE ACTION.

Okay. I'm all done now. How're you?