Friday, March 28, 2008


There doesn't seem to be much that the media, the TSA and the Department of Homeland Security can agree on these days. But if there's one item at the top of all of their agendas, it's the overwhelming importance of getting out any story that involves nipple rings.
A Texas woman who said she was forced to remove a nipple ring with pliers in order to board an airplane called Thursday for an apology by federal security agents and a civil rights investigation.

Hamlin, 37, said she was trying to board a flight from Lubbock to Dallas on Feb. 24 when she was scanned by a Transportation Security Administration agent after passing through a larger metal detector without problems.

The female TSA agent used a handheld detector that beeped when it passed in front of Hamlin's chest, the Dallas-area resident said.

A friend of mine had convinced me to get my nipples pierced back in the nineties. In fact, she convinced me roughly seven times, but only managed to do it after I'd had about seven shots of tequila and, by then, all the piercing places were closed. I'm feeling more and more lucky about that these days. I'm considering going out to the Democratic National Convention this summer, and I'd hate to be caught in some bloody, tearful incident involving needle nose pliers at the boarding gate.

So, for all of you who are now cringing and crossing your arms over your chests, happy Friday!

Monday, March 24, 2008

Where Josh and Big Tent Both Get It Wrong

There was a rather controversial post today from one our favorite bloggers, Josh Marshall at TPM, purporting that Hillary Clinton's supporters are trying to game the system outside of the rules to put their candidate over the finish line.

I imagine playing poker around a table with friends. Player A has a Straight Flush; Player B has four of a kind. Then B says well, sure, if you're counting straights, but if we were adding up the numbers rather than going by straights winning, I'd have won.

A similar theory was extolled at KOS. Over at TalkLeft (another excellent blog) Big Tent Democrat retorts that Clinton's strategy is exactly within the rules.
Let's focus on whether the rules allow this. The answer is obviously yes, they do. It seems to me that it is Obama supporters like Markos who are complaining that the rules MAY NOT favor Obama. It is they who are whining that the rules permit Super Delegates to pick a nominee who is not the pledged delegate leader. I do not like the rules either. But for a different reason. They allow Super Delegates to pick a nominee who might not be the popular vote leader.

While I may sound like a tiresome Mike Brady trying to settle a dispute between Greg and Marsha, might I suggest that each of you have many technical points which recommend your theories, but that you are both missing the big picture and getting it completely wrong. The problem here does not lie with the current rule set (which is in desperate need of improvement) or with the party leadership or with the supporters of the two candidates. It is with the two campaigns themselves.

On the one hand, this is the Democratic Party you're talking about, and thwarting the will of the popular vote, the total pledged delegate count, most states won, etc., would send a terrible, fracturing message to the party membership, possibly keeping new, excited voters on the bench in November. On the other hand, the rules are clear and are there for a reason. The super delegates exist for the express purpose of being able to resolve such disputes in their best judgement, so a candidate asking to push the contest to the convention for such a "coup" is completely within their rights and might be putting the decision in the hands of experienced players better suited to reading the tea leaves for the upcoming election.

But none of this addresses the real fault here. First, let me say that we are in no way out of time... yet. Some of the numbers are not yet out of reach for either candidate for all the major metrics being discussed, and allowing Pennsylvania, Oregon, and North Carolina (among others) to have their say will not kill us. However, the longer this drags on past that, the more harm is done. As Ron and I discussed during our interview with Shaun Mullen on today's edition of Mid Stream Radio, time is on McCain's side. A story on St. John McBush's questionable relationship with telecom lobbyists passed almost without notice today. And why would the media bother? Why chase scraps of bread sticks when there are chunks of filet mignon on the table?

The solution to this conundrum can not come from the blogs, the media, the DNC, or even the super delegates. Any forced resolution will come at a higher cost to the party than all of these pretty rationalizations would lead one to believe. It is high time for both of these candidates to act like adults who are committed to the one concept which both of them seem to embrace - that they both wish to see the Democratic party prevail in November. The only viable remedy is for one of these candidates to come out very publicly to their own supporters, well ahead of any type of Waterloo, and say that they will never forget the boundless support of their followers, but that for the good of the party they are going to bow out and support their opponent. This need not be done now, but this pause before the Pennsylvania primary is indeed the time for them both to sit down, look at the numbers, and decide on the parameters which each will accept for moving forward by June at the latest.

What this does is allow both candidates to come together and say, "No. This is most certainly not a case of some anonymous group of party power brokers robbing you of the nation's first [black] - [female] president. It is to our great credit and honor that both have been fairly considered and given this opportunity. It is simply a case of our party coming together to decide that the most electable one of this pair of historic contenders will be the person to defeat John McCain in November."

Anything short of this is nothing less than yet another case of the Democrats snatching defeat from the jaws of victory and giving away the White House in an election year where they should have taken it in a walk. There is too much blood in the water for either candidates' supporters to bow down gracefully before a victor anointed by the Powers That Be during the convention. I personally find it difficult to envision a scenario where Hillary Clinton makes this case successfully, given the math, but that could still change in the primary battles next month. Be that as it may, I will gladly take either of them at this point if the other is willing to make that long, hard walk down the hall and do what is in the best interest of the party.

Thursday, March 20, 2008

What I know about Purim

I realize that most One True Tami fans (blessed be Her name) are itching to talk about the eagle ray that jumped out of the water and killed some woman in a boat in Florida, and for failing to do this, I humbly apologize. (For the record, I ran into a couple of those bastages when scuba diving off the Florida Keys and had no idea they were so lethal. I should have eaten them when I had the chance. Perhaps the poor woman would be alive today.) However, given the season - both political and religious - there are bigger things afoot which require our attention.

Here's what I know about Purim. Pretty much nothing. I recall reading that it celebrates a narrow escape by the Jewish people from some bad man during biblical times. Apparently it's customary to party down and wear costumes at this time, so perhaps that's why the increasingly senile appearing Sen. John McCain thought that Purim was the Jewish version of Halloween. (Hat tip to Jill from Brilliant at Breakfast.)
McCain made the incorrect statement during a press conference with Defense Minister Ehud Barak after touring the Israeli city of Sderot to view buildings damaged by Hamas rocket fire. McCain was discussing the numerous rock attacks on the city. "Nine hundred rocket attacks in less than three months, an average of one every one to two hours. Obviously this puts an enormous and hard to understand strain on the people here, especially the children. As they celebrate their version of Halloween here, they are somewhere close to a 15-second warning, which is the amount of time they have from the time the rocket is launched to get to safety.

Now, let's face it. McCain is some regular old vanilla dude, much like myself, and it might be considered rather typical that he's no expert on Purim either. But the follow-up to this little gaffe is what I found remarkable. No less an august Jewish personage than Joe Lieberman rushed in to McCain's defense and took credit for the unforced error.
When Sen. Lieberman had a chance to speak at the press conference, he placed the blame of the mistake on himself. "I had a brief exchange with one of the mothers whose children was in there in a costume for Purim," Lieberman, who is Jewish and celebrates the holiday, said. "And it's my fault that I said to Senator McCain that this is the Israeli version of Halloween. It is in the sense because the kids dress up and it's a very happy holiday and actually it is in the sense that the sweets are very important of both holidays."

Now, I'm not Jewish, and neither is McCain. But you might think that Lieberman would have had a clue on Purim. And it's not as if he's lacking experience on the national campaign trail and was unaware how such a mistake could be played in a presidential campaign. He ran for veep himself. But the point is, how likely is it really that Joe Lieberman had no clue about Purim and fed the bad info to McCain? Or was it just his way of falling on his sword for the GOP candidate and was just lying through his teeth?

Didn't he used to be a Democrat?

Thursday, March 13, 2008

Does Anybody Else Wonder...

Who client numbers 1-8 are?
People care about scandal more when it's famous people, don't they?

Who are the other people involved? Why don't their lives get blown up on the news, too?

Monday, March 10, 2008

Random Tami News

I am now officially looking to buy a new home. A small home, a condominium/townhouse-type home.

It needs to be within reasonable commuting distance from Morristown, NJ.

Anyone got any suggestions?

Thursday, March 6, 2008

The Jewish Google

Yes, my friends. The Century of the fruit bat has truly arrived in style. Here's.... JEWGLE!

Now, you couldn't expect me to stumble across a gem like this without taking it for a test drive, so I typed in "Tami, the one true" to see what sort of results I would get. They included:

Find a Nice Jewish Person - Your mother worries about you -- she just wants you to be happy, and she really does know what's best for you. You can search for tami the one true later...

Call your mother instead of searching the Internet for Tami the one true - These newfangled VOIP services make it so cheap, and she really hasn't heard from you in a while. Would it kill you to pick up the phone and give your mother a call?...

He'Brew, the Chosen Beer - Way more fun than tami the one true -- delicious beer and delicious shtick. L'Chaim!...

You're too thin. Eat something - Soups, smoked fish, bagels -- all strictly kosher....

Tuesday, March 4, 2008

All Jews Think Alike

Seriously, people believe that. If they didn't then why would the Jerusalem Post have the headline, 'Jewish vote could swing Ohio primary'.

I'm offended that a Jewish-run newspaper has its nose so far up its own butt that it thinks of Jews as a block rather than individuals. Look at this paragraph:
... said that the intense focus on these issues was also telling about the Jewish community, whose contributions - both in votes and donations to campaigns - represent a far larger amount of candidate support than their actual numbers, some two percent of the country's population.

"The community always had influence beyond [its] numbers and this is another sign of that," he said.
In the past, when I've seen something like that, it has seriously raised my hackles. It makes me wonder who's so afraid of Jewish people that they think that we "buy" votes - that there's even a "we" to do the buying?

Oh, wait, that quote was from Matt Berger, a political reporter with NBC News and the National Journal and former Jewish Telegraphic Agency correspondent. Mr. Berger also mentions the "Jewish Black" divide, and apparently, he meant for that whole "influence beyond numbers" thing to sound impressive, not "conspiracy theory".

Well, hell.

If the Jews really do control all the world's money, where's *my* share? I have to work for a living, dammit, and I'd *much* rather be in a smoked-fish-filled room somewhere deciding on who the next world leaders should be.