Fun Flashback Fact: George W. Bush had better grades than John Kerry in college. Bush’s grades were also similar to Gore’s. It has been said that Kerry got a score of 1190 on his SATs, but this is unverified. Bush’s official score is 1206, meaning that if Kerry’s figure is true, Bush got a higher score than Kerry. Under the modern standards, a 1206 is about the equivalent of scoring a 1280 out of 1600 (this is prior to the new, crappy SAT that scores out of 2400).

So ask yourself this: if someone were to tell you that he got a 1280 on his SATs and graduated from Yale, would you laugh and call that person stupid? This is what still happens to Bush, and people justify this by referencing his grades and school records. Am I the only one who sees something wrong with this?

But despite this, friends of Sheehan are saying that she may still consider running. And the truth is, I’m all for it. Because there’s no way in hell this woman could win. She has no political experience, has shown a very small amount of knowledge about how the federal government operates, and is essentially a one-issue lady. Sure, she’d get a lot of funding from the anti-war groups that currently support her, but the entire thing would end up being an embarrassment. Chances are she won’t even be in the news anymore by the time this summer rolls around, so I can’t see her having a legitimate shot 20 months from now.

This is almost as ridiculous as Al Franken running in Minnesota. Democrats need to take a hint from Republicans and run a cool celebrity candidate, like Lynn Swann. When vocal, fringe Democrats run for office and get pounded, it just doesn’t look good for the party.

Unfortunately…there isn’t. Brokeback Mountain is certainly a good movie, but it’s not one best of the year. This is not a film that deserves the honor of being the “Best” Picture. If that ends up being the case, I will have to side with the people who believe the film’s hype is the culprit, and not its quality.

King Kong is a better film. Good Night, and Good Luck is a better film. Broken Flowers is a better film. I have not yet seen Capote or Munich, but from what I hear from trusted sources, those are both better films. And in comparison to other Best Picture winners from previous years, I definitely don’t think Brokeback matches up. You’re telling me that this thing is in the same league as American Beauty and Forrest Gump?

The acting was great. If Heath Ledger wins Best Actor, I won’t have many complaints. Top to bottom, this thing was cast perfectly and there were no weak actors. Brokeback was also visually stunning, but it’s hard not to be when you’re filming on location in such beautiful areas. The plot itself isn’t bad: two guys who are supposed to be beacons of American masculinity are forced to live a lie…yada yada yada. All of this is good. But still…I cannot say that I’d be OK with this movie winning Best Picture. It’s a little bit slow in places, and I didn’t leave the theater with that buzz you feel when you see a really good movie. I had it when I saw King Kong, I had it when I saw American Beauty, but I didn’t have it when I saw this.

I don’t know how else to explain it. Now while I won’t jump on the bandwagon of people claiming that Brokeback’s hype is all just a political/Hollywood thing, at the same time I won’t deny that the gay factor in this movie has played a big part in all of the Oscar murmurs. The film is controversial and unorthodox. The main characters are the exact opposites of any cowboys we’ve seen outside of the Village People, and I think that the premise has more going for it than the film itself. I won’t delve into the numerous reasons why this movie wasn’t all that great, because my fingers are sore and I could type pages about it. Stop me in person and I’ll be happy to explain it to you.

Brokeback Mountain is a decent movie, but it surely wouldn’t make my top 10 of 2005. The truth is that it’s only an ok movie, not a great movie. I would be more satisfied with Clooney getting Best Picture rather than Ang Lee. But, just my opinion. I need to go see Munich, and then I can judge for myself whether or not Spielberg has a right to be royally pissed off about the prospect of getting beaten this year.

How in the world does Judge Cashman justify this? He claims that his sentence was light because “he said he wanted to make sure he got treatment that was unavailable to the criminal from inside a jail cell.” Now hold on a minute. This man raped a helpless girl for 4 years, and this Judge’s first priority is getting him treatment? Are you kidding me? I guess it’s open season on little girls in Vermont. Go ahead, pedophiles. Plow through all the playgrounds that you’d like, and then when you’re caught you’ll get some “help” for your “problem.” I’m not that worried about helping the guy out. I’m worried about justice. This guy does not deserve freedom. The fact that the court doesn’t see him as a “danger to society” isn’t that important to me. What’s important is that the guy gets a sentence that fits the crime. Vermont needs to stop treating the act raping children as if it were a damn medical condition.

Regardless of your opinion of Bill O’Reilly, I think the country owes him a big thank you for coming out so loudly against this Judge. The pressure put on Cashman by O’Reilly, Fox News, and countless websites has forced Vermont to examine this decision one more time. I sincerely hope Judge Cashman realizes his horrendous error.

I haven’t talked a lot about child molestation or Jessica’s law on here, but it’s probably the issue that I’m most fired up about at the moment. America is not taking these crimes seriously. Oprah agrees with me, and you should too. I wrote a paper on this issue for a class last semester, and you can read it here if the mood strikes you.

Also, stop by Bill O’Reilly’s store and pick up a Jessica’s Law bumper sticker or something. I’ve got a window decal on my car. They’re cheap, and all the money goes to Habitat For Humanity.

During a Q&A session at Kansas State University, a student asked President Bush about the gay cowboy movie Brokeback Mountain. The exchange went something like this:

Student: You’re a rancher. A lot of [people] here in Kansas are ranchers. I was just wanting to get your opinion on Brokeback Mountain if you’ve seen it yet.

[laughter]

Student: You would love it! You should check it out.

Bush: I haven’t seen it. I’d love to talk about ranching, but I haven’t seen it. [laughter] I’ve heard about it.

The kid asked the President about the gay cowboy movie, which has been the butt of jokes for the last 3 months. The President gave a funny response. But when the AP reported it, they tagged the headline: Bush Hesitates to Give Take on ‘Brokeback.’

This is exactly why I’m sick of AP headlines. Rather than playing it off as a funny exchange, the AP article makes a bunch of noise over how Bush “hemmed and hawed” before giving his response when asked about a movie he hasn’t seen. Hey, I’d hesitate too if I were the President, knowing very well that one out-of-place comment would put me in the crosshairs of GLAAD, the ACLU, and every pro-homsexual rights group in the country.

He hesitated. Does anyone care? I mean really…does anyone care? Is Bush’s hesitation really a story? Apparently a quick response to questions about Brokeback Mountain is a sign of compassion towards gays. The President needs to get on the ball.

“It’s not really terrorists George W. Bush wants to bug and torture. It’s YOU.”

“It’s not really terrorism he wants to fight. It’s opposition from people he can’t control.”

“It’s not really US security he wants to protect. It’s the power of his regime.”

“If Bush gets away with this, then it’s simple: if you are too outspoken in opposing this regime’s destruction of social security, or the natural environment, or the economy, you will sooner or later be subject to torture.”

That’s right. If you disagree with the Bush Administration and tell people about it, Harvey thinks Bush will send the SWAT team to your door with a bucket of water and electro-shock nipple clamps. What’s going through the heads of the editors of Common Dreams? Do they actually think this article is anything but a complete embarrassment? Thanks for the warning, Harvey. You’re really doing your country a service.

Congratulations GLAAD, you just made American Idol even more popular. See guys, that’s what happens when you try to start a big controversy over a TV show. Controversy = Ratings.

For those of you who haven’t heard about this yet, the Gay And Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) has become infuriated at American Idol for being “homophobic.” They claim that two of the judges, Randy Jackson and Simon Cowell, made too many insensitive, anti-gay remarks to contestants on the show’s premiere last week. The most notable remarks came during the audition of a boy (or so he claimed) named Zachary. The judges, puzzled by the contestant’s appearance, asked him “Are you a girl?”

Does that seem harsh to anyone? Well…it wouldn’t if you had seen this guy. He had a girl’s frame, a girl’s haircut, and was wearing GIRL’S CLOTHES. If I had seen him on the street, I would have thought he was just an ugly girl. But he walks in saying his name is “Zachary,” so obviously there is some confusion as to the guy’s gender. What GLAAD and other hypersensitive groups need to realize is that making fun of people is what American Idol is all about. They take 10,000 people in each city, and out of those they narrow it down 50 to 100 of the best, and then throw in a few hundred of the worst to go in front of the judges. And then it’s open season on the freaks. The judges aren’t racist or homophobic. For crying out loud, look at Ryan Seacrest! Or Clay Aiken!

The idea that the judges are homophobic is laid to rest when you consider how many gay guys they move to the next round. They discriminate based on singing ability, not which gender you like to cuddle with. The show is just brutally honest. When an obese woman comes on the show, they’ll come right out and say “you need to lose weight.” Are they anti-fat people too? I doubt it…just look at the 300 pound winner of season 2.

What’s even funnier is that Zachary’s sexual orientation is never established on the show. Yeah, he’s a guy who looks like a chick, but does that mean he’s gay? Why does the GLAAD automatically jump up and yell “homophobia” when this kid’s orientation is never even the issue? To me, it seems like GLAAD is the one judging people since they automatically assume Zachary “must be gay.” The judges made fun of how he looked, not his sexual preferences. The truth is, the GLAAD is probably just looking for attention. Mission accomplished.

I hope everyone had a good Martin Luther King Jr. Day on Monday. I know Hillary did. She had a busy day at the Canaan Baptist Church of Christ in Harlem where she attended an event hosted by the slightly kooky (but loveable) Reverend Al Sharpton. This is an event that takes place every year on MLK day, and every year white politicians flock to it while on the campaign trail to convince black voters that they really, honestly care about their struggles rather than just, you know…keeping their votes.

So how do “smart” liberal politicians like Hillary Clinton try and keep the black vote on her (his?) side? By a tried and true formula of course! Take your opponents, and compare them to slave owners! When asked what the basic difference between modern Democrats and Republicans are, Hillary replied:

“When you look at the way the House of Representatives has been run, it has been run like a plantation and you know what I’m talking about. It has been run in a way so that nobody with a contrary view has had a chance to present legislation, to make an argument, to be heard.”

Abbwuh? A plantation? Oh, I get it. The Republicans are like the rich, white plantation owners and the Democrats are like the lowly black slaves who are ripped from their families, stuffed onto ships, forced into hard labor for no pay, and beaten on regular basis. See black people? Hillary’s on your side! She’s a slave too!

Nice try, Hil. But your analogy is ridiculous and anyone with a shred of common sense or who doesn’t teach political science at Hofstra University can probably see through your tactics without much effort. You’re in a black church, on Martin Luther King Day, and you’re pulling the race card out of your sweet ass. I’m telling you, it’s the same trick pulled time and time again by Democrats. Must I go over this again? All these people ever seem to do is compare their opponents to one of the following: Hitler, Pol Pot, McCarthy, Stalin, Slave Owners, Nixon, or Darth Vader. Jot those down, or make up a song or something so you can remember them all. This is one of the first things you need to know when you run for office as a Democrat.

I hope I don’t have to spell out how absurd it is for a white chick from Chicago to stroll into a a Harlem church and essentially say, “Yeah guys! The Republicans are treating us all like SLAVE MASTERS. Vote ‘fer me!” This is ridiculous in two ways:

#1. It wrongly compares primarily decent human beings to MEN WHO ENSLAVED BLACK PEOPLE.

#2. It belittles the horrendous nature of what actually happened at plantations in the early days of this country. Because, as you may know, these plantations were run by MEN WHO ENSLAVED BLACK PEOPLE.

The only reason Hillary said the word “plantation” was because she was in a black church on Martin Luther King Day. She wanted everyone to think, “Hey! It’s me, H-Dawg! I’m on your side dudes! I identify with you!” If she had been at a synagogue during Hanukkah, she probably would have said, “The House has been run like a CONCENTRATION CAMP and you know what I’m talking about.” If she had been at an elementary school, she probably would have said, “The House has been run like the PRINCIPAL’S OFFICE or the TIME-OUT CHAIR and you know what I’m talking about, kids.”

Give it a rest, Hillary. If you want to honor MLK, do it the right way. Don’t use SLAVERY as a political tool to try and wrangle some more votes. It’s a pathetic tactic.

“The House been run like a FOREST FULL OF BEAR TRAPS
and you know what I’m talking about, Teddy.”

Allen is legally blind and almost deaf. He is essentially on his death bed already, so his lawyers are trying to stop his execution by arguing that killing such a frail man would be “cruel and unusual punishment.” Unfortunately for Allen, Governor Swarzeneggar denied him clemency for committing one murder and ordering a hit on a witness while in prison. The hit claimed the life of the witness and two bystanders.
So what headline did the AP choose to go with? Take a look:

“Calif. Governor Has No Mercy for Inmate”

Is this for real? Why stop there, AP? Next time, just go ahead and print “Arnold Terminates another Victim with his Austrian Fists.” I implore anyone to explain to me how this is not completely and utterly biased. Maybe a more suitable headline would be “Calif. Governor denies clemency to 4-count Murderer.” The AP needs to be held to some sort of standard of objectivity and keep its facts straight. Good golly Miss Molly.

There have also been a number of studies over the past few years stating that trees have the ability to emit hyrdocarbons, causing smog and other nasty stuff. Dark forested areas also retain more heat than open desert areas, which reflect sunlight.

So I guess we’d better let Leo DiCaprio know (after he lands on his private fuel-powered jet) that maybe he should stop pointing his finger at humans all the time and start taking action against trees. And anyone who laughed at Ronald Reagan when he told everyone that trees pollute, well…you’ve all got a big “I told you so” in the mail.

I understand that this all seems silly. And it is easy to refute, since humans create such massive amounts of these gases. The point is that these gases have always been around, and the Earth has been fine. The rampant Hollywood/College Professor hysteria over Global Warming needs to be turned down a notch. C’mon guys…just forget about your fight for a few days and enjoy this nice weather we’re having. And cut down that tree in your front yard before it kills you.