There are a lost of postings on the web about the revelations or claims (take your pick) made by former Democratic National Committee head Donna Brazile. That these have led Donald Trump and a few Bernie Sanders supporters to misquote her as saying the primaries were "rigged" for Hillary Clinton should be taken as a warning light that something that means one thing is perhaps being built into something that means something else.
The best take on this I've seen is from Josh Marshall, who unlike everyone else is not rushing to sell some spin on Brazile's assertions. Give it a read. At least some of what Ms. Brazile says does not make a whole lot of sense.
The latest Post-ABC poll shows that Robert S. Mueller III, for now, enjoys overwhelming support for his investigation. He also gets high marks for the indictments of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and adviser Rick Gates. And in even worse news for President Trump, nearly half (49 percent) of Americans surveyed think he committed a crime. Mueller receives 58 percent approval and only 28 percent disapproval from Americans. Even among Republicans, nearly 4 in 10 (38 percent approve). A plurality of white men without a college degree (44 percent to 35 percent), a key Trump demographic, approve of Mueller's performance.
Is this really a poll of how many people think Robert Mueller is doing a good job? I know that's the question they asked in some form — but isn't it really a poll of how many people want to see Trump nailed to the wall and they don't care who does it or how it's done?
Several folks e-mailed me links to this article in which Cathy Young (a woman, most pointed out) is concerned that accusations of sexual harassment (or even outright assault) might go too far. Well, yeah…just as increased reporting of any crime might result in an increase in false accusations. What's the alternative? Keep a situation where the Harvey Weinsteins of the world can keep abusing people because that system discourages and even penalizes victims from speaking up? We don't want that.
Well, maybe some sexual predators do. They should not get that.
I understand why some folks — men more than women — are uneasy about this. In our pasts, many of us have a few incidents of what started as mutually-consensual flirtation but the two parties were not on the same wavelength as to how far it would go. If this were a different kind of blog, I could tell a few tales. Sometimes, consensual sex can become a little less consensual after the fact, like when one party decides they shouldn't have done what they did. There's a lot of lying that goes on about sex and it even includes lying to one's self. It's like Archie and Veronica are both dying to sleep together, "sleep together" in this case being a euphemism for screwing. They do…then Veronica has to deal with the fact that she promised fidelity to Reggie or abstinence to Dad so she tells him (and maybe herself) that Archie pressured her into it.
There are infinite other scenarios where innocent sex somehow morphs into allegedly-guilty sex…but so what? There absolutely is such a thing as coerced sex. There are also things like attempted rape, inappropriate sex talk, hints that sound like threats and other situations that fall short of actual rape that should not be tolerated or excused. An awful lot of victims of rape or near-rape do not report what happened to them because they fear they'll only suffer further for doing so. None of this can be stopped if the victims do not come forward and they will not come forward if they're subjected to what some have faced, which includes being put on virtual trial for the crime they're reporting.
The predators count on the prey deciding that it's too painful in too many ways, and there's surely a clear link between getting away with it once and doing it again and again and again. How many women have now come forth to accuse Weinstein? How many other men have done it because they saw Harvey wasn't paying any price?
What I think is going on now in this country is a corrective and sometimes, correctives over-correct before they find the right level. We paid way too little attention to this problem in the past and victims were way too afraid to speak up. Is there a danger of correcting too far in the other direction; of innocent folks being accused or at least slandered? Sure. That has already happened. Remember Brian Banks? Remember the Duke LaCrosse team? (There's a movie coming out soon about what happened to Brian Banks. Its producers couldn't have timed it better.)
Okay, so some people are afraid they'll be falsely accused; that they'll be the target of "witch hunts." Apart from the distinction that there are no witches but there are sexual predators, that's a perfectly valid fear but, you know, we could reduce the number of people falsely accused of murder by not treating murder as a serious crime. Sexual assault is a serious crime, too…and it's one that a lot of people don't think of as one because they've gotten away with it or know others who have gotten away with it. Let's find a way to be fair to the accusers and the accused instead of worrying just about the accused.
Between 1962 and 1967, a brilliant and under-heralded cartoonist named Al Kilgore wrote and drew a Bullwinkle comic strip for the Bell-McClure Syndicate. It was faithful to the TV cartoons and pretty darned funny but it never managed to make it into many newspapers. That may be why it is largely unknown these days…and hard to find. Strip collectors haven't had much luck. A couple of publishers who reprint classic newspaper strips made the same search and also came up cold.
However, recently someone — I dunno who — has dumped a ton of original art from the strip on the original art market, as well as proof sheets that presumably came from the same source. I'd love to have a book or two that reprinted it so I thought I'd suggest it here. Maybe if someone does some detective work, that someone can find copies of all the strips or at least enough to issue one volume. The reprint rights should not be difficult.
And while I have your attention, assuming I have your attention, here's a line that's currently on Kilgore's Wikipedia page: "He also drew the Dell, Gold Key, Whitman, and Charlton comic books of Rocky and Bullwinkle and related characters." No, he didn't. There are a few stories in the Dell issues that look like Kilgore may have penciled them. Most of the Dell issues look nothing like his artwork nor does anything done for the books published under other imprints.
Who did draw them? There's some art by Mel Crawford in a few issues but most of it is by artists who have never been identified by historians. In the absence of those names, some folks decide to credit them to Kilgore. In theory, Mr. Kilgore could have written some of those comics but I know of no evidence that he did. Jack Mendelsohn wrote a few of them but most of the writing is unidentified too.
The early comics based on the Jay Ward characters are one of those black holes of comic book history. No one seems to know anything about them. Recently in Alter Ego magazine, one of the editors of those comics was interviewed and he said that Kilgore wrote and drew the Rocky & His Friends comics and also the Hoppity Hooper comic. He was wrong about the Rocky & His Friends books as a simple look at the art proves. Only a fraction of it could be by Kilgore. He was also wrong about the Hoppity Hooper comic books because there never were any Hoppity Hooper comic books. I guess I can't prove that Al Kilgore wouldn't have drawn them if there had been any but I doubt it. He was pretty busy then writing and drawing a great newspaper strip.
It's been quite a while since I wrote about the feral cats in my backyard. Above is a photo I posted of them here about two and a half years ago. I can use it again because they're both still around and they look exactly like that. Lydia has been here for more than ten years. In fact, in April of 2008, she was pregnant and as I reported in this diary, I trapped her, took her in and had her made unpregnant and unable to get that way ever again.
She's always around…or at worst, in an adjoining yard. I feed her almost every morning and then I feed her at least once in the evening when she is joined by Sylvia. I know not where Sylvia lurks during daylight hours. Given her schedule, she just might be a vampire.
For most meals, each gets a half-a-can of some wet Friskies canned food served on a bed of dry Friskies cat food. I don't give them larger portions because I've learned that's all they'll eat. If there's more, they leave it and wander away and then it gets devoured by raccoons or possums. During daylight hours, the huge crows we have around here will sometimes swoop down for a knosh.
Lately, the Friskies I've been giving them are from a box like this one…
This is Friskies' new "Cat Concoctions," which they describe as "curious combinations chosen by cats." The box of 24 cans costs the same as any box of 24 cans of Friskies in the market I went to so I figured I'd give it a shot. You get six each of…
Scrumptious Salmon & Chicken Liver Dinner Paté
Chicken in Creamy Crabby Sauce
Lamb in Clam Flavored Sauce
Cod in Cheesy Bacon Flavored Sauce
The Creamy Crabby Sauce does smell like some sort of cheap canned crab bisque but there is no trace of actual crab in that item's ingredients. There are no clams in the Clam Flavored Sauce, just as one will find neither cheese nor bacon involved in the Cheesy Bacon Flavored Sauce. One suspects those flavors are in there for our benefit so we'll think we're giving our cats what we think is yummy.
I keep wondering about this. I feed them different varieties of Friskies in rotation — one day, salmon; the next day, chicken; the next day, turkey. Do they care? If I just bought a ton of any one flavor and fed it to them at every meal, would they be any less happy? I know feral cats are glad to get any kind of food but I have never noticed the slightest preference by them for one kind over another, whether it was your basic Mixed Grill or Chicken in Creamy Crabby Sauce. You and I might get sick of eating the same food every meal but do cats?
The tagline "curious combinations chosen by cats" suggests that the Friskies people made up a wide array of strange flavors and that some Blue Ribbon Committee of cats preferred these four. Did they opt for Cod in Cheesy Bacon Flavored Sauce over, say, Tilapia in Hickory Smoke BBQ Flavored Sauce? Why do I think the deciding factor was what sounded good to the buyers?
Here's Dylan Matthews with a good explainer of the House Republican Tax Proposal which was unveiled today. It's way too complicated for most Americans to understand…and I would imagine its proponents are counting on that. It's also not the final bill that will perhaps be passed by the Senate and sent to Donald Trump for signature. Since it's designed to give him a huge tax cut, what do we think he will do?
It's called the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. I suspect there are people in this country who would back anything called the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act even if all the actual text did was make it legal to trap and eat your neighbors' pets and maybe their children. But at least the real, current version of the bill is not going to pass without a lot of rewrites and adjustments.
Someone whose e-mail I can't find again pointed me to this video and rather than explain it myself, I'm going to steal the explanation of the fellow who posted it, David Rowen…
This music video is the culmination and fulfillment of a small dream I have had since college. I attended James Madison University, where I sang in an a cappella group called The Overtones. During my last semester of school, I was commissioned by the American Heart Association (AHA) to arrange an a cappella medley of music from Wicked, The Wiz, and The Wizard of Oz for the Overtones to perform at two Oz-themed galas hosted by the AHA. Outside of these events, the medley was only performed one other time, and since then, I have wanted to revive and revamp the arrangement, and take the creative vision to new heights. With the help of an amazing team, a stellar cast, and generous donors, the new vision has finally come to fruition. I am thrilled to present "The Oz Medley."
I love this kind of a cappella singing. I suppose I'm fortunate that I have a wretched singing voice because if I could sound like these folks, I'd join one of those groups and never do anything else. This is worth ten minutes of your time. Thank you, whoever sent me the link!
Kevin Spacey's statement the other day reminds me of one of the many, many reasons I don't drink alcohol. I know many folks who handle it fine and enjoy it and it never creates problems for them or others around them. But imagine being told you did something horrible and your best defense is that you have no memory of having done it…but you might have.
Of course, few will believe that Spacey does not remember the incident in question. My point is that if he honestly doesn't, that's pretty horrible…and it's maybe worse than if he does. It makes you want to ask the guy, "Hey, how many other minors might you have tried to rape and forgotten about?"
I also kind of wonder if a smart lawyer vetted that admission. When you confess you might have tried to rape a minor but you can't remember for sure, aren't you just inviting others to accuse you of doing other things you might not remember? Aren't you kind of disqualifying yourself as a witness to your own life?
And of course, that isn't the worst part of his "apology." It's that he handed ammo to those who, through naivete or deliberate smears, want to link homosexuality with pedophilia. I suppose, given the accusation against him, he had to finally "come out" and admit to being a "proud, gay man." But he could have separated the two concepts. He could have reminded all that just because a gay man does that kind of thing, that doesn't represent all gays any more than Roman Polanski is proof that all straight guys molest 13-year-old girls.
Mr. Spacey has never disappointed me as an actor but he sure has as a human being. And I guess it's finally time to admit that I never thought his impressions were very good.
Here's another list of the most popular Halloween candy treats. A lot of them contain peanuts or peanut butter.
There's also a list there of the Most Hated candies. Candy Corn is in second place right after Circus Peanuts. I don't believe anyone in the world has ever liked them, either.
But actually, you shouldn't pay much attention to my taste in candy since I don't like any of 'em. About ten years ago, my sweet tooth mysteriously went away and I don't find any of them appealing. When I did, I didn't really like anything but chocolate. These days, I'd rather eat gravel than M&Ms.
Peanuts? You give out peanuts? With so many kids having problems with nut allergies, apparently of a serious nature, you're giving out peanuts? Yes, you and I both like peanuts, but I'm hearing that folks are now supposed to have non-food and food treats.
Well, actually I have little packets of peanuts to give out if (big "IF" there) anyone comes to my door tonight. Considering that no one has for around seven years — and since I may not be home anyway — I don't think anyone's in much danger.
Also, each of these packets of peanuts says PLANTERS PEANUTS on it in quite legible type and has a drawing of a character who looks like a peanut wearing a monocle and top hat on it. I assume that if some kid has serious allergies to nuts, he's learned not to open one of those and devour the contents. If he hasn't, he's in a lot of trouble.
If we are to believe this survey, the top ten most popular treats to give out on Halloween are — in this order — Reese's Peanut Butter Cups, Reese's Miniatures, Twix, Kit Kat, Snickers, Reese's Pieces, Milky Ways, Reese's Stuffed With Pieces, Peanut Butter M&Ms and Butterfingers. By my count, seven out of ten contain peanuts or peanut butter…and note that Peanut Butter M&Ms and Peanut M&Ms both outrank non-peanut M&Ms.
So I have a hunch a lot of people are giving out peanuts and the kids who are allergic and/or their parents are on alert. They'd better be. At least the peanuts I have here to give out are (a) clearly labelled PEANUTS and (b) never given out.
Believe me, Jim. I'm aware of the bad effects some foods can have on people. There are very popular candies that contain ingredients that are just as bad for me as peanuts are for someone who could eat one and go into anaphylactic shock. But I recognize you can't run the world protecting everyone from everything that might harm someone. These days, I'm not sure we're even that interested in protecting everyone from everything that might harm everyone.
