This Erin Andrews Thing Will Help Me Calibrate My Creepiness Level

Posted by Matt on Thursday, July 23rd, 2009

Erin Andrews has been a favorite of mine for the last few years. I’m talking Top 5 Favorite and common attendee in my “photo album.”  Not only is she the typical hot, leggy blonde, but she can also talk “swing offense” with Bo Ryan. 

I know it’s not just me. I expect even Tebow would put down a Filipino orphan and unbuckle his chastity belt for a chance to bed her.

So I was very curious when I read someone videotaped naked Erin through her hotel room peephole in Omaha.  I took a couple deep breaths, and waited it out until I was only “semi”-curious. 

At this point, I have not searched this out on-line. Why? Well, while my phallic compass is pointing due north (towards viewing this tape), my moral compass has not allowed me to take a look.  I don’t judge people who seek out this video, but I can’t do it.  The only question that keeps running through my head is, “How would you come across on a hotel room hidden camera?”  The Answer? Creepy, skinny, slothful and stained.

Examples of things I’ve done while naked in hotel rooms: (1) air-guitar w/ headphones on; (2) eaten pasta with my hands; (3) blown my nose in a hand-towel; (4) watched the live Lotto numbers while holding my tickets; (5) passed out on the floor (bathroom + bedroom).  These are the PG examples.  Feel free to be inspired, Pixar. These are on the house.

The argument that she “brings this upon herself” because she is a sexy public figure is bullshit.  She is not posing for Playboy. She is not at some Omaha meth party with no underwear.  She is not out on the town, wearing a slutty dress when someone snaps a photo as one of her titties pops out.  She was not stupid enough to make a sex video with a guy who “promised not to show it to any of his friends.” 

Don't despair. I will iron your clothes myself, or at least send them to the cleaners

Don't despair. I still admire you as the sideline-reporting professional you are.


Public figures deserve privacy in private areas such as hotel rooms. Maybe not Marion Berry’s hotel room, but certainly in private rooms where no illegal activity is occurring.

On a related note, reports yesterday indicated an ESPN employee is suspected of shooting this videotape. Let’s take a look at some usual suspects:

1.  Chris Berman:  This stale windbag has been referring to her as Erin “Go-Bra-Less” Andrews for the last couple days.  I cringe thinking of him “rumblin’ bumblin’ stumblin’ ” down the hotel hall after taking the video. Gross human.

2.  Dick Vitale: Dickie V always talks about how he has only one “good-eye.” That’s all you need for a peephole. “Are you serious?  That Ass is Awesome with a capital A!!” Fuck you, Vitale.

3.  Linda Cohn:  The female Sportscenter mainstay might resent Andrews. I don’t blame her, though. I heard menopause can be a rough time. Keep your chin up, Linda!
4.  Scott VanPelt:  Until now, the sensitive anchor had the best net-wide tape among the ESPN crowd (particularly after Berman had ESPN scrub the Web of his O’Reilly-esque tirade). Perhaps it was too much being known as the “painfully long, heartfelt voice-mail guy.”
5.  Stuart Scott:  Not the primary suspect only because I don’t think he could stay quiet for the couple minutes necessary to execute the covert taping. “Check out those cans! Boo-ya!” This dated asshead exudes creepiness. Stu, I know your contrived lingo is an attempt to come across as being from the bad-side of Bristol, but you’re as transparent as Rich Eisen’s soul.                                                                                                                                                                             

Read the rest of this post →

{no comments

I Trust You to Protect Me. Just Not Everyone Else.

Posted by Matt on Wednesday, July 22nd, 2009

Dick Cheney has given more interviews since he has be out-of-office than he did in his last 3 years as VP. A common theme to these speeches is that President Obama is making this country less safe by undoing (some) of Dick’s illegal and draconian measures.  Dick’s philosophy helped limit this country to only 1 horrific, record-setting terrorist attack over his 8 years.  So, in the alternative, who does Dick want to protect him?

Former Vice President Dick Cheney’s Secret Service protection has been extended for at least another six months, beginning Tuesday.

Normally, ex-veeps only get six months of protection at taxpayer expense. But Cheney asked for an extension, and President Obama – whom Cheney has excoriated in several interviews since leaving office – recently signed off.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano signed the order extending Cheney’s security detail, her spokeswoman Sara Kuban confirmed Monday.

This delusional and paranoid fucker pursued policies of preemptive war.  I believe he supports American invasion of every sovereign nation, with the possible exceptions of Israel and Suriname. He is independently wealthy. He has Blackwater and Halliburton on speed-dial and an inherent dislike and mistrust of the President.  It doesn’t add up unless he has some sort of death wish. Or he’s already dead.   Perhaps undead.

Read the rest of this post →

{1 comment

Chuck Todd’s Perfect World

Posted by Matt on Wednesday, July 22nd, 2009

During the (2007-present?) Presidential campaign, my old lady expressed serious contempt for NBC’s ineffectual Chuck Todd.  I often found myself defending him – mostly because I never liked Tim Russert, the Beltway’s quintessential, go-along “journalist.” 

But last night, Colbert nailed it.

From Greenwald’s article today, a reader makes a great point regarding the dangerous precedent of refusing to investigate and prosecute the architects of Bush’s torture program:

The huge problem here is precedent. In specifically directing an investigation of those who exceeded Bush’s torture authorization, our Justice Department is actually giving legal credence to Yoo, Bybee, and the Bush gang who sought to legalize these clearly illegal methods. Investigating only those who went beyond Yoo’s memos affirms, as legal basis, Bush’s detention and torture policies as the backdrop to be measured against; in effect establishing those practices listed in the memo as the legal standard.

It is less damaging to investigate no one at all than to use the Bush standard to measure those few who exceeded even those most grotesque of practices against. All we’ll end up with is a few more Charles Graners in prison, everyone above middle management getting away without so much as public acknowledgment of having done something wrong, and a de facto Justice Department affirmation that not only will Bush’s team not be investigated for having done something wrong, but that they never did anything wrong at all as those same standards become accepted baseline to measure future prosecutions against.

This is far worse than Obama’s previous “look forward, not backward” stance. This is looking backward and establishing crimes and indignities against humanity as solid legal footing.

Read the rest of this post →

{1 comment

50 State Limerick – IOWA

Posted by Matt on Wednesday, July 15th, 2009


World's Largest Truck Stop! Iowa's Largest Glory Hole.

World's Largest Truck Stop! Iowa's 2nd Largest Glory Hole.


      There Once was a man from Des Moines,

      Who was good at saving his coins.

      They subsidized his corn,

      So he could spend time with his porn,  

      And get that ol’ feelin in his loins.    

Read the rest of this post →

{1 comment


Posted by Matt on Tuesday, July 14th, 2009

  • Good Music:  (1) The Phenomenal Handclap Band:  (self-titled album)  A-  (2)  Sin Fang Bous:  Clangour  A-  (3) Black Moth Super Rainbow:  Eating Us B+
  • If any child of mine has the chops, I will encourage said child to go into competitive spelling.
  •  More productive time-waster than facebook.
  • Joe Morgan is awful.  
  • Matthew Iglesias puts into words the disgust I feel watching Jeff Sessions question Judge Sotomayor about her Puerto Rican ancestry:

     I would pay good money to hear Sonia Sotomayor say, “Senator Sessions, I think it’s ironic to be facing these questions from a man whose judicial nomination was rejected by this very committee on the grounds that he’s a huge racist.”


Read the rest of this post →

{1 comment

Boo! It’s Judicial Activism

Posted by Matt on Monday, July 13th, 2009

As we’ve seen with Judge Sotomayor, Conservatives love to howl about “judicial activism.”  This noise usually has nothing to do with the objective definition of “judicial activism,” but is instead a loaded term the Right throws around any time a Judge or Court makes a ruling they disagree with on policy grounds.

In 2005, two attorneys analyzed the decisions handed down by the Rehnquist Court (1994-2005). The simple question they asked with regard to the Rehnquist Court was:  How often has a Justice voted to strike down a law passed by Congress? 

While other measures can be used to analyze this issue, this is probably the most pertinent – particularly considering the amount of attention the Media has given to Judge Sotomayor and the Ricci case.

Since the Supreme Court assumed its current composition in 1994, by our count it has upheld or struck down 64 Congressional provisions. That legislation has concerned Social Security, church and state, and campaign finance, among many other issues. We examined the court’s decisions in these cases and looked at how each justice voted, regardless of whether he or she concurred with the majority or dissented.

We found that justices vary widely in their inclination to strike down Congressional laws. Justice Clarence Thomas, appointed by President George H. W. Bush, was the most inclined, voting to invalidate 65.63 percent of those laws; Justice Stephen Breyer, appointed by President Bill Clinton, was the least, voting to invalidate 28.13 percent. The tally for all the justices appears below.

Thomas 65.63 %
Kennedy 64.06 %
Scalia 56.25 %
Rehnquist 46.88 %
O’Connor 46.77 %
Souter 42.19 %
Stevens 39.34 %
Ginsburg 39.06 %
Breyer 28.13 %

One conclusion our data suggests is that those justices often considered more “liberal” – Justices Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter and John Paul Stevens – vote least frequently to overturn Congressional statutes, while those often labeled “conservative” vote more frequently to do so. At least by this measure (others are possible, of course), the latter group is the most activist.

People who follow the SCOTUS probably aren’t too surprised about these findings.  Some people who listen to conservative media may want to readjust the tinfoil and take an earnest look at these numbers.

Personally, I have no predisposed  problem with “judicial activists.” After all, it’s part of the job description.  The point is that each individual decision and constitutional interpretation needs to be looked at on its own merit.  Good luck finding that objective analysis.

Read the rest of this post →


Being President Is Easy

Posted by Matt on Tuesday, July 7th, 2009

The Ex-Governor demonstrates (1) her lack of intellectual curiosity or (2) her uncanny ability to evasively bullshit a straightforward question:

As to whether another pursuit for national office, as when she joined Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., in the race for the White House less than a year ago, would result in the same political blood sport, Palin said there was a difference between the White House and what she had experienced in Alaska. If she were in the White House, she said, the “department of law” would protect her from baseless ethical allegations.

“I think on a national level, your department of law there in the White House would look at some of the things that we’ve been charged with and automatically throw them out,” she said.

The “Department of Law” – where all your problems just melt away.  On a related note -  If Palin makes it to the White House, she indicated that she, Todd and the kids would be able to start the day on a much more effective note thanks to the “Department of Breakfast.”

Read the rest of this post →

{no comments

Bronze Reagan

Posted by Matt on Thursday, June 4th, 2009


Nancy (Cancer), Jim Baker (Taurus), Reagan (Aquarius) Statue

Nancy (Cancer), Jim Baker (Taurus), Reagan (Aquarius) Statue

A beautiful day in Washington and a crowd packed with Reagan era-policymakers looked on as a Bronze Reagan was unveiled in the Capitol Rotunda. For video of John Boehner crying, click here.  I’m not kidding.    He is the Orange Crocodile. 

In other non-related Reagan news, I came across a fascinating article regarding the Reagans and Astrology.  Veracity aside, it would explain a lot.

On one level, maybe it’s not such a big deal that Ronnie and Nancy went to weekly astrology classes and ‘zodiac parties’ in the fifties and sixties. Or that Reagan signed legislation as governor declassifying ‘licensed’ astrologers as fortune-tellers, thus allowing them to receive compensation for their, uh, ‘craft’. But sweat beads start to form when you read former advisor Donald Regan reveal that Reagan’s entire schedule was based around White House astrologer Joan Quigley’s advice about planetary alignment. This caused embarrassment for the staff more than once, when they would have to explain arbitrary changes in the itinerary without giving away the game. And there’s evidence we can thank astrology for the picking of George H.W. Bush as VP as well. Joyce Jillson says she was paid $1200 to pick the vice president from a list of seven names. The elder Bush’s response to this:

“I don’t know about that,” he said. “But I will tell you one thing: There are two edges to this sword. There are a helluva lot of people across this country that read these columns. Otherwise they would not be in the papers.”

Not sure what makes that a double-edged sword, but I’m glad he wasn’t overly bothered by the fact that he was picked for the position of second-most powerful person on the planet essentially at random. Putting aside the unnerving knowledge that the president who relied on such gobbledygook was the same man with his finger on the button, there is the high comedy of the Christian Right embracing an avid astrology buff. The same folks that love to reinvent Barack Obama as a radical Muslim utterly ignored Reagan’s enthusiastic adoption of a practice they consider demonic idolatry. Ah, well.

And in death, let us celebrate Reagan’s life in a way he would appreciate – with his horoscope via this week’s The Onion:

Aquarius Jan 20 – Feb 18

It’s okay to feel a little nervous and unsure of yourself during your first day at work. After all, it’s not as if you were even hired there.


Read the rest of this post →

{1 comment

Obama and Secrecy: Bush Redux (Now With Less Democracy!)

Posted by Matt on Wednesday, June 3rd, 2009

The Obama administration is supporting Sens. Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman’s  Detainee Photographic Records Protection Act of 2009.  

As Greenwald states, (this bill)

literally has no purpose other than to allow the government to suppress any “photograph taken between September 11, 2001 and January 22, 2009 relating to the treatment of individuals engaged, captured, or detained after September 11, 2001, by the Armed Forces of the United States in operations outside of the United States.”  As long as the Defense Secretary certifies — with no review possible — that disclosure would “endanger” American citizens or our troops, then the photographs can be suppressed even if FOIA requires disclosure.  The certification lasts 3 years and can be renewed indefinitely.  The Senate passed the bill as an amendment last week.

What kind of a country passes a law that has no purpose other than to empower its leader to suppress evidence of the torture it inflicted on people?  Read the language of the bill; it doesn’t even hide the fact that its only objective is to empower the President to conceal evidence of war crimes.

That this exact scenario is now happening in the U.S. is all the more remarkable given that the President who is demanding these new suppression powers is the same one who repeatedly vowed ”to make his administration the most open and transparent in history.”  After noting the tentative steps Obama has taken to increase transparency, the generally pro-Obama Washington Post Editorial Page today observed: “what makes the administration’s support for the photographic records act so regrettable” is that “Mr. Obama runs the risk of taking two steps back in his quest for more open government.”

While I understand that Obama entered the Oval Office following an administration that greatly expanded executive power and was criminal in its considerable violations of the Constitution and rule of law, the increased use of  ”state secrets” justification is complete bullshit.  Merely saving the government from embarrassment or preserving political capital are not appropriate reasons to sacrifice transparency and disclosure.  Greenwald continued…

What makes all of this even worse is that it is part of a broader trend whereby the Government simply retroactively changes the law whenever it decides it does not want to abide by it.  For decades, we had laws in place authorizing citizens to sue their telecommunication carriers if the telecoms allowed government spying on their communications in violation of the law, but when it was revealed that the telecoms did exactly this, the Congress simply changed the law retroactively so that it no longer applied.  For decades, we had laws imposing civil and criminal liability on government officials who engaged in or authorized torture, but when it was revealed that our government did that, the Congress just retroactively changed the law to protect the torturers.  And now that courts have ruled that our decades-old transparency law compels disclosure of this torture evidence, the Congress is just going to retroactively change the law — again — this time to empower the President to suppress that evidence anyway.

The debate over whether there is value in disclosing these specific photographs is entirely misplaced.  That isn’t how open government works.  The burden isn’t on citizens to prove that there is value in disclosure.  Everything that government does is supposed to be transparent to the public unless there is a compelling reason for secrecy — and the whole point of FOIA always has been that mere embarrassment, the mere fact that information reflects poorly on our government, isn’t a legitimate ground for concealment.  That’s a critical principle for open government.  This new law explicitly guts that principle.  It institutionalizes the pernicious notion that secrecy is justified where disclosure would reflect badly on the Government and thus “endanger” American citizens and/or our troops.

Combine all of this with the increasingly disturbing spectacle taking place in a California federal court in the Al-Haramain case — where the Obama DOJ is on the verge of being sanctioned by a federal judge for defying the court’s order to make available documents relating to Bush’s illegal eavesdropping activities — and the infatuation with excessive presidential secrecy, the linchpin of government abuse, appears alive and well in the new administration.  Is there really anyone who wants to argue that defiance of a federal court’s order and enacting a new law authorizing suppression of torture evidence — the disclosure of which is compelled both by courts and FOIA — are remotely consistent with anything Obama said he would do, or remotely consistent with what a healthy democratic government would do?

As I said, Obama came into office after 8 years of utter incompetence, indifference and mismanagement. I wouldn’t be surprised if he found elephant dung under some shredded documents when he opened the top drawer of his desk in the Oval Office.  Though it’s obviously way too early to judge the administration, I think he is generally moving this country in the right direction.  He has been proactive in areas from health care (SCHIP) to civil rights {of some} (Lilly Ledbetter Act) and has appropriately engaged the foreign community.  However, for someone who has a background teaching Constitutional Law, I am incredibly discouraged by his administration’s continuation and (in some cases) expansion of Bush-era policies in the areas discussed above.  

Unlike some liberals, I was under no illusion that Obama would be the leftist-ideologue, elected to swing the pendulum 180 degrees.  He never presented himself as that guy during the campaign.  But as a self-proclaimed pragmatist (and student of history), he should realize that sweeping the past 8 years under the carpet only ensures that these transgressions will occur again, giving this nation the proverbial “black eye,” and ultimately eroding the fundamentals of our democracy and making this country less safe.

Read the rest of this post →


Celebrity Haiku: Chapter 1

Posted by Matt on Friday, May 29th, 2009


                  Repress that rage, kid

           Unleashed all shapes and sizes

               Still hustlin’, douchebag?

Read the rest of this post →

{1 comment

Gratuitous World Blog

    • College Football Players, Awaken…
      January 29, 2014

      [Former NCAA President Myles Brand:] They can’t be paid. [Q:] Why? [Brand:] Because they’re amateurs. [Q:] What makes them amateurs? [Brand:] Well, they can’t be paid. [Q:] Why not? [Brand:] Because they’re amateurs. [Q:] Who decided they are amateurs? [Brand:] We did. [Q:] Why? [Brand:] Because we don’t pay them. – Michael Rosenberg’s 2010 Sports Illustrated interview of former NCAA president Myles Brand Yesterday, quarterback Kain Colter led a group […]

    • GW: Favorite Albums Of 2013
      January 11, 2014

      On time as always! Happy New Year. 20.  Vampire Weekend – Modern Vampires of the City:  Ok kids, we get it. Good work. 19.  Scott & Charlene’s Wedding – Any Port In A Storm 18.  Charlie Parr – Barnswallow 17. My Bloody Valentine – MBV:  Per usual, I can’t understand a fucking word, but still pretty […]

      January 7, 2014

      (originally posted 2/10/10) then again (7/9/10) now one more time before retirement. for love. UPDATE: So it’s as hot as fuck out east because, you know, it’s July. Anyway, I’m just checking in because although You Know and I Know daily mid-Atlantic microtrends in weather do not offer any proof or disproof with regard to […]