we all knew jim horne, certainly anyone in commercial design for the last half century, and most certainly anyone with an internet connection for at least the last five years, even if we never knew his name, which i learned for the first time today:
for about 15 years beginning in the late 1940s, mr. horne was ubiquitous, perhaps the most widely seen male model in the country, appearing in hundreds of advertisements in magazines and newspapers, on billboards and catalog covers, in television commercials and industrial brochures. he died on dec. 29 in manhattan, at 91. his wife of 45 years, francesca marlowe horne, said the cause was cancer, but added that he also had congestive heart failure.
i doubt many people knew he had been still alive.
mr. horne had been an actor with bit parts in hollywood movies before moving to new york city and establishing a second career. he had a chiseled jaw, a distinctively rounded hairline, a seemingly permanent pompadour, a gleaming california smile and an athlete's physique.
it was an image that photographers and advertisers found easily adaptable to a number of stereotypes of the day: the dashing ladies' man, the dapper dandy, the devoted dad, the suburban husband, the businessman commuter, the country club sophisticate and the one mr. horne, an avid fisherman, preferred: the rugged outdoorsman.
he learned the lesson of how evanescent celebrity could be without a famous name. few, if any, of his photographs still strike a familiar chord. well, maybe one does: a jokey shot taken in 1953 (whose rights he signed away), showing him with a sour, headachey expression of generic woe; it has been used dozens of times, even in the last decade, in ads for aspirin, tax services, hangover remedies and other stress relievers. his wife said it didn't bother him that this was the image that survived.
"to him it was a job you did," mrs. horne said. "and then you went fishing."
it's nice to finally get a name to the face:
i'd say goodbye, but i have a feeling he'll still be with us for a good long time ...
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Friday, January 23, 2009
house minority leader john boehner (r-oh), griping about the new economic stimulus bill:
how can you spend hundreds of millions of dollars on contraceptives? how does that stimulate the economy?
bonus quip: booman shares a deep thought:
everytime republicans leave obama's white house they say that they "have concerns about the size of his package".
Thursday, January 22, 2009
much to the vicarious distress of perennially sexually-insecure freepers everywhere, msnbc news host norah o'donnell, while covering the senate vote of newly-confirmed secretary of state hillary clinton, went where few village slights have gone before — that is, across the aisle:
norah o'donnell: i want to play what senator cornyn said today about these concerns about hillary clinton, and her husband still able to take money into his foundation. let's listen:john cornyn: i was encouraged by my conversation with senator clinton yesterday in the rotunda following the inaugural ceremonies. she said that she would be open to a requirement that is an across-the-board disclosure requirement, that isn't just her and the clinton foundation.
so they want more information; they want instant disclosure, essentially, not the disclosure at the end of the year. if this is a serious issue — which seems like a serious issue, why then two seconds later says "but i'm still going to vote for her"?
i mean, have they kind of lost their cojones, the republicans?
tucker carlson: [chuckling] oh ... ? kind of ... !
ooooooh ... that's gonna leave a mark.if she was looking at tucker carlson at the time, I can understand why that thought came to mind.proof that the media are slow learners.once upon a time they did. newt and the contract with america gang had them. still a few with cajones but the rest like mccain and his gang are eunuchs.the republican brand has been deteriorating ever since the senate republicans folded at the impeachment trial of wj clinton.what's with the leftist female cajones fascination?
to leftist females its meant as a compliment, meaning a guy finally 'gets it'.
of course they immediately go on to ridicule the newly emasculated males lack of cajones.technically she is wrong. they never had them to lose.it's been quite evident for some time. where has this twit been?the answer is yes, thou norah does have a great rack."lost" makes it sound like an accident....offered them up for removal more like.
sigh ... not a good day to be a republican. and may there be many more like it.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
january 20, 2009: the din of righteous battle in the defense of our sacred constitution against the marxist muslim obama-bot hordes has given way, for the moment, to a rare and quiet call for reflection in the normally boisterous hills of our favorite wingnut blog free republic. let's listen in:
with the inauguration of zer0bama today, it signals the end of a phase in the narrative of the certifigate scandal and the beginning of a different phase. the purpose of this thread is to look back on the old phase and try to learn what we could have done better, where we could have been more effective, what we would have done different, what we learned moving forward.
... even though it's as plain as day to some of us familiar with the evidence, zer0bama has been deemed to be qualified once he's sworn in. from that point onward, there is no longer any constitutional language about the eligibility, he is assumed to be eligible. the only way to remove a sitting president is by impeachment.
... if the SCOTUS didn't have the courage to take on zer0bama when he was president elect and the constitutional language was very clear, they will have less courage when the constitutional language is absent or murky and the guy has the authority to park tanks in the SCOTUS parking lot as a hint. ...
y'know ... this "reflecting" business is starting to sound just a little depressing! can we have a freepathon instead?
media bias: this scandal showed the media bias to be more stark than they’ve ever been in the past. there was an almost perfect media blackout over this issue. it’s not a conspiracy, it’s just groupthink. how could we have overcome the groupthink? well, someone tried to buy ads in the MSM and they were refused. there’s a historical first. ... the thing to do is for wealthy constitutional conservatives to buy a few of these media outlets and start a conservative media. i don’t know anybody wealthy enough to do it. there would be an obvious aggregate wealth of conservatives getting together to buy outlets, but that is a cat herding project on a scope that is beyond what is foreseeable in the near future.
hey, freepers can dream, can't they? just imagine what they could do if they had their own media run by their own moguls ...
as another example of a form of media bias was what happened at intrade. i set up a thread to monitor this scandal and push for contracts. ... after all, what business is intrade in if not setting up contracts and taking money from gullible gadflies & such? but they never set up a single contract. does that mean they’re in on a conspiracy? no. it means they made a calculated expedient decision not to raise the ire of the likely next POTUS who will be in charge of the commission that oversees their activity. ...
yes, it's hard to believe, isn't it? the obamania's gotten so bad an absolute moran can't even throw his money away anymore ...
constitution: all of us learned more about the constitution in this certifigate episode. for instance, i didn’t know before this that the 20th amendment even addresses eligibility ...
... there are freeper lawyers who know more about the constitution, the appellate court processes, etc. ... all agreed this was a legitimate constitutional issue (it probably still IS). when the discussion proceeds to the minutiae of appellate procedures and minor points of legalese, i tend to lose track and probably so do a lot of other freepers. and, notably, those who claim to be lawyers don’t all agree on the significance of things (like cases getting forwarded for conference) or on how cases are processed in SCOTUS, what the chances of cert were, that kind of thing. it was confusing. how can we improve that situation? i don’t know, i toss it out there for freepers to consider and suggest solutions.
all that constitutional law stuff ... man, that's hard work ... i mean like really hard! does it really need to be so complicated that you can't just pick it up on a blog???
what else could/should we have done with the certifigate issue? what else did we learn from this go-round? i will kindly ask those who've been operating against us to refrain from the usual "give up the tinfoil hat conspiracy stuff" and gloating and contrariness. it amounts to dancing on the grave of the constitution; this is a constitutionalist website, so show some freeping respect. if you want to gloat or dance on the grave or whatever, start a thread and do it and ask us show you respect.
just a little respect for the dearly departed, please? that's all we ask, okay? 'cause today, we're all freepers, amirite?
let it go...sheesh.
let it go birthers.
poor baby, wants an echo chamber and all you got was this t shirt...(chuckle)
oh-kay ... so it looks like some folks aren't quite ready to make nice ...
eh, as far as i'm concerned it's over. i'll be watching tomorrow and monday to see if berg or orly's cases are accepted, but if they're not, i think the issue is effectively dead.
... you need to post it on your own blog. you put it up in a public forum, you get all kinds of viewpoints...thats what these forums are FOR, remember?
including from conservatives like myself, that understand this is no different than 'bush knew', and KNOW this will be cited in the mainstream media as another 'example of FR being a hate site/kook site'.
that you and those fixated on this ridiculous snipe hunt don't understand the damage you cause is the only thing surprising.
no 'gloating' here and no 'dancing on the grave'.
and finally, this doesn't warrant a thread from me. its that ridiculous.
you trolls just don't get it, do you? this is all about truth, justice and the american way!
what i learned is that the constitution means nothing as long as the people vote for an unqualified candidate, the electoral college ignores it, the congress ignores it, and the supreme court swears him in.
in other words, the constitution is just a piece of useless paper. i'll remember that. my new attitude towards everyone and everything is, "yeah? what are you going to do about it. screw you."
yeah, tear up the constitution already. it's so 18th century.
not letting go of this. troll.
thanks for showing your true colors. it's plain for all to see what you and others did to dismay constitutionalism on this constitutionalist website.
curse the day that i should have lived to see constitutionalism dismayed!
to me, there is nothing as important as truth. nothing. everything else is secondary or even further down the list. has truth been served in this election? i don't think so.
those who taunt, naysay and sling words like "troothers" and "birthers" and "kook" around seem to have little regard for truth. ... if such people think that people like you, me and others who want the truth are idiots and kooks, what does that say about their desire to have the truth?
anyone who says stuff like "move on" etc is not caring much about truth. and i'm all for trying to get real conservatives elected - heck, isn't that the goal? - but after four years of 0bama it's not going to be easier, it'll be harder.
as a sort of side point, it is clearly that the GOP leadership [sic] need to be cleaned out like the augean stables. spineless, power hungry, egocentric with who knows what kind of hidden dirty laundry - they don't represent me.
i think much prayer and deep contemplation is the next step.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
and too long in coming ...
bush's final approval rating: 22 percent
president bush will leave office as one of the most unpopular departing presidents in history, according to a new cbs news/new york times poll showing mr. bush's final approval rating at 22 percent.
seventy-three percent say they disapprove of the way mr. bush has handled his job as president over the last eight years.
mr. bush's final approval rating is the lowest final rating for an outgoing president since gallup began asking about presidential approval more than 70 years ago.
the rating is far below the final ratings of recent two-term presidents bill clinton and ronald reagan, who both ended their terms with a 68 percent approval rating, according to cbs news polling.
recent one term presidents also had higher ratings than mr. bush. his father george h.w. bush had an end-of-term rating of 54 percent, while jimmy carter's rating was 44 percent.
harry truman had previously had the lowest end-of-term approval at 32 percent, as measured by gallup.
nation's hopes high for obama, poll shows
obama will take office tuesday as the most popular incoming president in a generation. he also will enter the white house with a broad mandate to act that was missing when george w. bush was elected by the narrowest of margins in 2000.
more than half of all americans have high hopes for his presidency, almost three-quarters of the public say obama's proposals will improve the struggling economy, and about eight in 10 have a favorable view of him — more than twice the percentage now holding positive views of bush. about seven in 10 say obama understands their problems, and a similar proportion say his victory gives him "a mandate to work for major new social and economic programs."
poll finds faith in obama, mixed with patience
president-elect barack obama is riding a powerful wave of optimism into the white house, with americans confident he can turn the economy around but prepared to give him years to deal with the crush of problems he faces starting tuesday, according to the latest new york times/cbs news poll.
... as the nation prepares for a transfer of power and the inauguration of its 44th president, mr. obama’s stature with the american public stands in sharp contrast to that of president bush.
mr. bush is leaving office with just 22 percent of americans offering a favorable view of how he handled the eight years of his presidency, a record low, and firmly identified with the economic crisis mr. obama is inheriting. more than 80 percent of respondents said the nation was in worse shape today than it was five years ago.
by contrast, 79 percent were optimistic about the next four years under mr. obama, a level of good will for a new chief executive that exceeds that measured for any of the past five incoming presidents. and it cuts across party lines: 58 percent of the respondents who said they voted for mr. obama’s opponent in the general election, senator john mccain of arizona, said they were optimistic about the country in an obama administration.
... his favorable rating, at 60 percent, is the highest it has been since the times/cbs news poll began asking about him. overwhelming majorities say they think that mr. obama will be a good president, that he will bring real change to washington, and that he will make the right decisions on the economy, iraq, dealing with the war in the middle east and protecting the country from terrorist attacks. over 70 percent said they approved of his cabinet selections.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
bush: there have been disappointments. abu ghraib obviously was a huge disappointment during the presidency. not having weapons of mass destruction was a significant disappointment. i don't know if you want to call those mistakes or not, but they were — things didn't go according to plan, let's put it that way.
matthews: i found it interesting that the president, who admitted he was wrong about WMDs as a justification for war, called it a "disappointment." if a police officer in the line of duty in the middle of the night shoots a fellow because he thinks he's got a gun, it turns out he's got a wallet, your reaction if you're a police officer is not that you're disappointed he didn't have a gun, it's shame that even if it was a technical mistake that you've made, that you've killed a guy without reason. why does the president use the word "disappointment" when he says they didn't have the WMD to justify us going in? i think it's an odd use of the word.
walsh: and finally ... the point that you made earlier, about a cop who shoots an unarmed man, does not then regret that the guy did not have a gun. he regrets that he killed an innocent man. and he regrets that he didn't take the extra 30 seconds maybe to ascertain whether the guy was armed.
with the impending coronation of not-my-president-elect barry "the usurper" hussein obama-soetoro now only days away, excitement that's been building since the election is finally coming to an effervescent head at our favorite right-wing blog. ever confident, the natural-born™ citizens of free republic are in an upbeat mood; the waiting is almost over.
in the longest thread yet seen (now clocking in at 1,640+ comments), freepers are gaming out every possible scenario — and more than a few impossible ones — for the last-minute rescue of life-as-they-know-it. now's the time, if ever, for all patriots who still love the constitution to double down and put their freepin' money where their first amendment-protected mouth is:if something happens this week are you will to give a large contribution to free republics?ah, a wager? i might be up for that, if you could be a little more specific. what exactly are you expecting to happen?physical proof that obama is not qualified, was not born in the USA. you work out the amount with jim rob.
("jim rob" = jim robinson, founder & owner of free republic.)ok, if physical proof is uncovered or announced this week which leads to obama's being declared unqualified for the presidency because he is not a natural born citizen then i will make a contribution to FreeRepublic in an amount to be agreed upon with you and jim robinson. i'll even set the week being from today, tuesday january 13th through noon, tuesday january 20th when obama is sworn in. to be clear, the proof only has to be announced or uncovered this week. if based on it obama isn't removed until sometime in the future then you still win.
and what do you do if it doesn't happen?THE SAMEthen we have an agreement.
and jim robinson has some cash — since, as we all know, the house always wins. ka-ching! viva las vegas!while you’re in a betting mood, how about contacting FR-little jeremiah, keeper of the BC troll list, and approaching the obots with a ‘pay to play’ offer of sorts?
("BC" = birth certificate = the macguffin)
("obots" = obama-robots = certifigate doubters = saner folk.)how about you two? you want to play hoo-mama’s pay to play?
how much are you willing to pay FR if they find proof that BO is not qualified?...
see above arrangement with NON for details.not a problem. the only acceptable proof that bambi wasn’t born in the US would have to be proof that he was born in another country. if that shows up we’ll all have a party.i’m in but i have six kids with a seventh on the way, so i need a stop-loss feature at $250. i say nothing will happen because there is no statute, case law, or constitutional mechanism to compel production, AND, given that that is so, the USSC won’t make new law.if any court in the u.s., between now and obama's inauguration, holds that obama is not a natural born citizen, or orders him to produce proof of his citizenship, i will contribute $1,000.00 to FR. will you contribute the same amount if obama is sworn in by chief justice roberts on schedule?
now we're talkin'!!!"physical proof"
too much weasel room on that one. that’s one reason why i like intrade. they arbitrate on the actual meaning and payout of the contract, and if someone wants to weasel out, they can’t.
("physical proof" = we're getting a little queasy = this ain't what we're used to dealing with here in freeperville.)so what’s the intrade line on obama not being a natural born u.s. citizen?
no contracts posted yet.
none yet? you'd think there'd be plenty easy money to be made betting on such a sure thing ...intermission time folks, go refill the popcorn and grab some fresh drinks.
Friday, January 16, 2009
from erstwhile republican now democratic convert john cole @ balloon juice:
via alicublog, i see that the cornerites are taking the time today to celebrate vince foster's birthday as an excuse to bring up his suicide. you will have to read edroso's commentary to fully appreciate the right wing ability to raise "serious questions."
i don't know if i will ever be a member of "the cause" again.
on the eve of obama's inauguration, it is both funny and disturbing to look back to how things were eight years ago — i was so thrilled that a republican was about to be inaugurated. i was so excited to vote for bush in 2000 that i literally could not sleep, and, as always, was at the voting booth at 6:30 — 7:00 in the morning, the only person under 60 standing in line.
now, today, i am so disgusted with the republican party that i don't think i will be able to vote for a national republican for twenty years. i wouldn't say my positions have changed completely, either. i really don't feel like there has been a dramatic shift in my opinions. on several issues, i am certainly more to the "left" than i was before. for example, i was never a proponent of gay marriage, and felt that civil unions were more than an acceptable compromise. not anymore — gay marriage is the future, it is the right thing to do, and those who can't cope with that reality one day will just have to deal with it when we finally get there.
what has changed, however, is that i have seen a lot of the arguments that come from the republicans for what they are — just bullshit. i have watched over the past few years and seen how nonsense bubbles up into the mainstream, and how distorted versions of events designed to distract and queer the debate turn an upside down version of events into the "conventional wisdom." you don't have to look any farther than the recent attempts to blame the entire financial crisis on democrats, fannie mae and freddie mac and poor minority borrowers. we just spent an entire election season where prominent republicans thought they really had something with bill ayers and obama's birth certificate. of course, months could be spent documenting all the bullshit that has been churned up in the past eight years. the embrace by the right-wing of the idiotic tome "liberal fascism" could itself be the subject of lengthy study.
you all know by now what a dork i am, so i am not outing myself when i state that one of my favorite all-time episodes of the x-files was a show called "folie a deux", in which scully and mulder investigate a man who thinks his boss is a monster. everyone thinks the man is insane because he insists that his boss is a zombie who eats people brains, and he is driven to madness that no one else can see his boss for the monster he is. he states frequently that the monster "hides in the light." eventually, fox is able to see the monster as the show comes to a conclusion.
you see where this is going, don't you? i understand now why the dirty fucking hippies were driven to near madness by the gop and the election of bush. having watched things pan out the last few years and observed how truly perverted the beltway insiders who dominate our dysfunctional discourse are, i understand bob somersby and glenn greenwald and others.
i don't know how much to "the left" i have actually moved on a lot of issues, but i do know one thing. when i see this nonsense from byron york and wideload doughpants, raising their "serious questions" about vince foster's suicide, i know clearly what i am seeing — i'm just watching the monsters hiding in the light, right where they always have been. this time, though, i see.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
former bad plumber sam wurzelbacher, a.k.a "joe the plumber", plumbing the depths of just how bad a former bad political mascot can be as a very bad war correspondent.
eagerly waiting on your next bad career move, mr. sarahcuda-in-drag.
so, i mean, ah ... now, d'ya have ... aw shoot.
[sighs deeply] i've a lot of questions. just tryin' to find the right one ... um ...
oh, what did i learn today? um, y'know, the israel people are actually incredible. even with world opinion beatin' down upon 'em, they're not broken ... ah, y'know, they, ah, for most part don't care, y'know, they need to be protected.
and, ah, i'm ah ... amazed with the courage that i see in the people — i'll be honest with ya, i don't think that journalists should be anywhere allowed war. i mean, you guys report where our troops are at, you report what's happening day to day, you make a big deal out of it. i-i think it's asinine.
y'know, i like back in world war i and world war ii, when you'd go to the theater, and you'd see your troops on, uh y'know, the screen, and everyone would be real excited and happy for 'em. now everyone's got an opinion and wants to down on, down soldiers, our american soldiers — or israeli soldiers. i think media should be abolished from, ah y'know, reporting, y'know, war is hell. and if you're gonna say "look at this atrocity", you dunno the whole story behind it half the time, so i think the media should have no business in it.
it can be safely said that you can identify any conservative ideologue by their congenital lack of irony.
Friday, January 09, 2009
... that always seem to hurt the most.
despite the seasonably bad northeast weather, in freeperville the sun's always up in the morning. and today the natural-born™ patriots of right-wing blog free republic had an especially good reason to bask in its warmth, for today was the day that the new congress counts and certifies the electoral votes cast in november, thereby putting its official stamp on the results.
freepers today is the big day. i'm assuming it's going to be on C-SPAN. i did not find a discussion thread so i'm starting one for us.
now why would freeperville look forward to the day that legitimizes and carves in stone the theft of the election by the "bitter" enemy of all who love the constitution — "the usurper" barry hussein obama-soetoro?
the answer, of course, is that all freepers love good theater:
i bet someone challenges the count, just one person.
i hope one will. ... if for no other reason than to make a symbolic stand ... and give me hope that a spinalectomy isn’t performed on everyone who enters DC.
i was hoping an elector from alaska naturally.
we will just have to wait and see i suppose.
picturing a scenario of what if, how would the MSM react?
my guess is they will go into shock mode with constant red alerts on faux.
if there was a contested scenario it could also open up other fracture scenarios, it could turn the tide in as such as the MSM going into shark feeding frenzy.
mmm ... popcorn!
that’s the only thing i’m hoping for. at least ONE person with enough guts to at least broach the subject. i’m not under any misconception of hope that it will change today’s outcome in certifying the vote, but if at least ONE representative, or senator brings it up at least it’ll be in the record.
i hope whoever steps up will run for president in 2013.
2013 ... ?
i predict we’ll have one congressman attempt to object and it will be ignored by the speaker as if no one said anything.
well, we all know by now how the afternoon matinee played out. obama-biden got all their pledged 365 electors. mccain-palin got all their 173. do i hear any objections? bueller ... ? bueller ... ?
i picked an awful day to quite drinking.
not one single comment about ineligibility issues.
seeing that cheney did NOT even offer an opportunity to voice objections does this go against procedure, or not?
... i’m wondering if there is a procedural rule regarding request for objections or not. if there IS, then the supreme court may indeed have something to say about it (not holding my breath on that either though).
3 USC 15 - section 15if i’m reading this right, no one objected in writing beforehand, so cheney didn’t have to call for it.
"every objection shall be made in writing, and shall state clearly and concisely, and without argument, the ground thereof, and shall be signed by at least one senator and one member of the house of representatives before the same shall be received."
the rep. from georgia failed to do what he said he would do. he must not have been able to get a crook from the sen. to join him! this is sad. no constitutional supporters in either house! of course if you ain’t got any you don’t need a jock strap!
they can certify all day long, it means nothing. until he releases documents to verify his past, he's a phony.
there is now no way to deny that the GOP has joined with the rats to form one big happy party.
this was the design all along. now we have witnessed it.
and they all just took an oath to uphold the constitution.
they have no intention of ever doing so.
now we will see amnesty, a trillion dollar bailout, energy DE-pendence, the complete devaluing of the dollar and of our personal worth, the emasculation of our military.
make no mistake about it — we are in the pot, and the temperature of the flame is being increased incrementally.
it only took ten years for this country to fall. from february 12, 1999 when the senate failed to do its job to convict a perjurious president to january 8, 2009, when not one member of congress objected to obama not being qualified under the constitution to be president.
only ten years to lull the sheep to sleep, and to take away their will to fight. biden and obama will ensure another terror attack, the result of which will be to extend control over us in the guise of security.
darkness awaits. we rebelled against england for less than this.
sigh ... those little disappointments.
well, we can always count on one thing — when freepers just can't find good theater anywhere, these hearty troopers aren't shy about supplying their own!