At the moment I stand a very good chance of winning the Shitty Blog of the Month Club contest for March. This should not happen. I'm not worthy. Really. I'm not. I'm just a cheerleader, I'm not one of the main string. There's two other members of SBC that are way shittier than me, and they really do deserve to win the March title as well as that atrocious button. And I can say without a doubt that the button is atrocious because I made it. So please, PUHLEEZE  go vote in the SBC poll for anyone but me.

Go here Shitty Blog Club and vote. Please!

And I thank you for your support.... or is that lack of support? Whatever, please vote but NOT for me!

*You may have to scroll down the page... the poll is on the left*

What I really wanted to do was write a blistering rant about how Michael Jackson is getting away with manipulating the judicial system. His ridiculous see-through theatrics are wearing very thin, and I'm just hearing about it on the news. So how  are the judge and jury putting up with his nonsense? Beats me. I'd be ready to rescind his bail and toss his sorry multi-colored ass in jail for the duration of the trial if not eternity.

Michael Jackson has made a name for himself not only as a performer, but also as someone who has been flipping the bird at the world whenever and wherever he chooses. He has been straining credibility to the limit, only this time he finally got caught in a real-live grown up world. If anyone else ran around proclaiming to be Peter Pan and nuzzling children on his lap in public, that person would have, at the very least, got thrown in the loony bin. Instead, Jackson comes up with some gibberish about never having had a childhood and never wanting to grow up. Incredibly, that gets him off the hook for any and all outrageous behavior.

I don't know whether Wacko Jacko did what he's accused of doing or not. I don't believe this case against him is based on race or envy or someone's get-rich-quick scheme. He either did it or he didn't, and in my realistic corner of the world when smoke becomes a rip roaring blaze, you got yourself a fire. Jackson has been playing in flames since before he made his Pepsi commercial.

I've been wondering and waiting to see at what point someone was going to make Michael Jackson grow up and take responsibility for himself. I thought this trial was going to be the place where he couldn't get away with more childish and self-indulgent maneuvers. And then he danced on the roof of his limo. And he was late for his court appearance. And then he was late again. He had a back injury. He couldn't walk. It was an old injury that put him into excrutiating pain. Funny, when he leaped up onto the roof of that limo his back looked fine. Must have been an off day for the excrutiating pain. And no matter what level of pain he suffered, he always managed to wave to his fans. Funny how pain doesn't interfere with waving and answering reporters' shouted questions. And THEN he was late for court again.

Okay. THIS time, I stupidly thought, they've got him. It doesn't matter how many doctors in scrubs he drags with him or how many tears he sheds in court, he's manipulating this whole trial. Someone has got to stop him and make him be a grown up. Hah! Goes to show what I know.

But then I got to thinking about the old give 'em enough rope to hang themselves tenet, and it occurred to  me that maybe it's best to let this stupid clown have his way until he self-destructs. Given how things have been going so far, it is pretty likely that, given enough time, self-destruction is inevitable. And patience IS a virtue.... or so they tell me.

One of the members of the Jackson Camp (my one big goal in life is to have a Punditz Camp) appeared on a talk show and said that this trial is really difficult for Michael. He's simply not accustomed to getting up every day and having to be at a certain place at a certain time. He's accustomed to doing what he wants. And he sure doesn't want to do this.

The answer is, to my way of thinking, to revoke his bail and put him in jail. There's no better way to make sure he'll be on time for the trial than that. And maybe that's what the judge told the attorneys behind those closed doors. Maybe this WAS Jacko's LAST CHANCE. I'll believe it when I see it, but as Judy Tenuda always says, "It could happen."  I just hope the court system survives Michael Jackson intact and with some dignity.

Now I've got to go see how one goes about getting a Camp. I like the sound of that Punditz Camp thing. Anyone want to be in it?

In 1997, the Texas Legislature enacted what was known as The Futility Law. This Bill stated that a hospital or health care facility could withhold respirators or feeding tubes or extraordinary means to aid survival of a patient for whom there was no hope. Then Governor, George W Bush, with strong support from Right to Life groups, vetoed the Bill.

In 1999, the Texas Legislature once again passed a Futility Bill, only this time a provision was written into it stating that if a hospital or health care facility wanted to terminate their care of a patient, there would be a 10 day grace period during which time the family of the patient would be able to find another facility willing to take their family member.  This Bill had the support of both Right to Life groups and Governor George W Bush, so it became Texas law.

Last week the life of Sun Hudson was terminated under the Texas Futility Law. Sun Hudson was a 6 month old baby born with insurmountable health problems. He could not breathe on his own and was being kept alive with a respirator. There was no hope that Sun would ever be able to survive were he disconnected from machines and that, in fact, his condition would only deteriorate as he grew older. Doctors wanted to end Sun's life. His mother, convinced that Sun was improving, objected and filed a petition with the Texas court to keep Sun alive. Her petition was denied. Her 10 days ran out, and the hospital turned off Sun's respirator. He died a few minutes later.

Sun Hudson did receive national media attention, and parallels were drawn between his case and that of Terri Schiavo. Depending upon one's point of view those parallels may or may not be valid. What does connect the two cases is George W Bush.

I have been appalled by the Republican Party for becoming involved in the Terri Schiavo case. I have followed the Congressional involvement through the weekend, and I was disgusted by Bill Frist and Tom DeLay leading the charge to involve the US Congress in something that is none of their federal business. Everything about Terri Schiavo's case is repugnant to me. This should be a private decision made by her guardian. Instead it has become a political opportunity for Republicans to "secure their base."

Except from what I'm hearing and seeing in the media, the Republican plan seems to be backfiring. Poll after poll indicates that TAP do not believe Congress should have interfered in this case, nor do they believe that Schiavo's feeding tube should be re-inserted. If the polls are indeed indicative of public opinion, and we all know about skewed polls, then the Republicans are not getting the support they anticipated.

Except there is one little item that few media outlets are reporting. George W Bush has been consistent in his behavior on this issue. Other Republicans may have suspect motives, but where the Right to Life issue is involved, Bush has consistently supported his position to err on the side of life. In the Schiavo case what he's doing is giving a little more time for the Schiavo case to be resolved differently.

I don't agree with George W Bush in this case. I think the state of Florida gave sufficient time to the Schiavo case and made its decision. The Federal Government has no business interfering with that. But where George Bush is concerned, once again, a single fact remains clear. What you see is what you get. Many Republicans can be accused of hypocrisy because of this case, but George Bush is not one of those Republicans.

That doesn't change my mind about Terri Schiavo's feeding tube. But it does boost further my opinion of President Bush. He is consistent.

I just heard President Bush give another of his rousing Freedom! Freedom! Freedom! speeches on television. I don't know who he is speaking to this time; all I know is that the message never changes. I'm beginning to cringe every single time I hear the word freedom. It's becoming over-exposed.

What surprised me was that I also couldn't stand to look at President Bush. I haven't had that problem before. But listening to him talk about freedom when in the early hours of this morning he signed a bill whose intent is to keep a helpless woman prisoner for God only knows how long inside her useless cell of a body made me want to throw up. This is the hypocrisy my Liberal friends have been telling me about for years, and I never saw it this clearly for myself.

I've been a conservative most of my adult life. I find myself naturally siding with the conservative side of political issues; I don't have to be talked into that point of view, and I can defend it believing that there are good points to be made. But not this time.

The Terri Schiavo case has no business becoming a political football. If the House and Senate insist upon tossing around a hot potato or a spitball, let them stick with steroids in baseball. Just leave Terri Schiavo alone. Her case has been decided, and just because consevatives don't like the outcome of her case doesn't make it less legal or wrong.

No matter how many times Tom DeLay fires off the charges of the cratz wanting to "kill Terri", and no matter how many times Bill Frist lends his cardiology medical expertise to a neurological medical problem, the bottom line remains that what they want to do is condemn Terri Schiavo to an indeterminate time trapped inside a useless body. She will not get better.

What infuriates me more than anything else is how casually Frist and DeLay and others like them declare that the only thing Terri Schiavo can't do is feed herself. That's an outright, bold faced lie. Terri Schiavo can do absolutely nothing for herself. If she wanted to roll over in bed, and her cognitive responses have been shown to preclude even that, she cannot. She cannot comb her hair, brush her teeth, wash her face, take a bath, wipe her own behind, talk, sing, speak, and the list goes on and on. Doctors who have examined her say her cerebral cortex is gone. When that happens, there's just no 'there' there.

Those who claim to know so much about Terri without ever having spent so much as 30 seconds in the same room with her show their ignorance about more than simply Terri herself. They show their stupidity about her overall condition and about the death process.

Try going without food and water for more than 48 hours. A fully cognitive person will find that very difficult and will not be cheerful. So how could it be, according to reports from Terri's mother, that when Mom went to see Terr after Terri had been nutritionally and hydration deprived (gotta love those euphemisms), Terri was just the same as she always is. Very happy to see her mother. Very aware. Very wanting to live. Her family even tried to pass off the notion that at one point Terri managed to say, " I waaaaaaaaaaaaah", but wouldn't you just know it, someone came along and interrupted her before she could finish saying "I waaaaaaaaaaaaaaahnt to live." Those people either have no shame or have lost their own intelligence. They are now tape recording Terri's gutteral shrieks and playing them for television stations to use as "exclusive" Terri quotes.

Terri Schiavo is not cognizant. Her case has been reviewed in the Florida courts for 8 years with 19 judges. The US Supreme Court has refused to hear this case. It has been decided. Except conservatives with an agenda of their own don't want to accept that. And to further their agenda they will sentence a helpless woman to a useless life she has stated she never wanted.

I used to be proud to be conservative, and at some point I may feel that way again. But not today. 

Sean Hannity interviewed Ahnuld for a segment on Hannity and Whoeverthatguyisnoonepaysanyattentionto. I tried to watch, I really did. It made my head hurt. It was the kind of exchange that puts a person in mind of beating one's head against a brick wall. It feels very good to stop.

Someone needs to instruct Ahnuld to slow down the speech pattern. Listening to his whirling dervish response to any question on topics from steroid use to homeland security is just too stressful. It's a non-stop barrage of words that after a while cease to have any meaning. There's no "there" there; there's just a rapid-fire string of gibberish.

Gary Condit has a stripe down his back. It probably wraps around down there in his nethermost regions and works its way right up his front too. The color of the stripe is yellow. Like in coward's yellow.

Gary Condit is suing Dominick Dunne for some things Dunne allegedly said about Condit when Dunne appeared with Larry King as well as on some other talk show. According to Condit, the things Dunne said had to do with Condit having some extra-marital entertainment with Middle Eastern women, and in the process of his enjoyment, Condit also suggested to some Middle Eastern thugs that it would be a good idea if someone got rid of Chandra Levy for him.  Condit took offense, so he's suing Dominick Dunne for slander.

There is a lengthy list of newspapers and talkshow hosts around the country who had quite a bit to say about Gary Condit while Chandra Levy was missing. It would be impossible to count all the theories posed about Condit's involvement or non-involvement in Levy's disappearance. Out of all those who expressed opinions either verbally or in writing, Condit chose Dominick Dunne to sue.

Should a parent be able to eavesdrop on a child's telephone conversation, or is that an invasion of a child's privacy?

Fox News is reporting that yet another money scandal has been uncovered within the United Nations organization. This one involves the Sudan and there's supposed to be roughly $3 million involved. The reicipient of the $3 million has apparently disappeared.

The report went on to say that instead of focusing only on the Oil For Food Program scandal, the US investigation may now decide to encompass the entire United Nations with an eye toward reforming that whole place.

There's a much easier solution. That would be for the US to simply pull out of the UN and let the place fall apart. As more and more information comes out about how the UN is being run, there's simply no reason to remain part of it. The US has no problem in realizing what its responsibilities are when it comes to humanitarian or financial relief to 3rd world countries. The UN certainly can no longer make the same claim. The disaster relief reports from Indonesia describing the attitudes and actual participation of UN employees during the tsunami disaster was disturbing at best.

The US should withdraw from this bogus organization and allow it to find housing for its center elsewhere.

I've been part of BlogExplosion for quite a while now. I like the service very much. It does exactly what it claims to do - bring more traffic to our weblogs.  That's not the only reason I signed up, though.  The main blog I use for posting political opinions is made up of a small community of people who don't always get along very well. Okay, how about they throw hissy fits and go on the occasional verbal rampage. It's stupid and childish, so I went in search of another place to do my blogging where I was less likely to have some moron criticizing me because he's a fading star.  that's how I wound up at BlogDrive. Occasionally I think about closing the other place down completely, but there are some people there I really like, one in particular has become an online friend, and I've got a truckload of stuff I'd want to move.  So I keep things as they are and have most of my surfing credits going toward the other place.

One of the main subjects of dissent at the other journal site is who shows up on their most read journals of the day list.  For some that seems to be an indicator of just how good a blog is because it's a measure of how many people read it in one day.  I wasn't a member of Blog Explosion long before I realized that a topic of dissent there is the rating system. It's the same popularity issue at both places.  The journal community does it with numbers of readers; Blog Explosion does it with arbitrary numbers members assign to each other through a ratings system.

I didn't really care about the rating system at Blog Explosion. That's not why I joined. I just wanted more traffic, and I wanted to see what the rest of the blogging world was about. I got what I expected. But in the process I also got rated whether I liked it or not. I didn't pay much attention and as a result, I didn't know what my rating was unless I made a point of checking which I didn't often do.

I know some folks took the ratings very seriously. A message board was set up to discuss it. Complaints were received by Blog Explosion because people wanted to rate anonymously. Rating wars were apparently going on with low ratings as the revenge. So, BE made the ratings anonymous and had a poll to get input on what system should be used. I had no idea how that was going. When I saw a blog I really liked a lot, I rated it. My ratings were in the 9 point range with 10 being the highest rating available. The criteria I used for my ratings system was purely subjective. I liked the place for a number of reasons that mattered to me, so I rated. I didn't bother with those that weren't my preference. Frankly I liked being able to leave comments far more than the numbers rating game. With comments I could be specific about what what on my mind. So I did more commenting than rating.

The other day I found out that BE has revamped the rating system. I found that out because I read it on a blog I was visiting. So I checked out the new system. In my opinion, it's a fucking mess. There's about a bazillion and five categories I'm supposed to rate and then it all gets merged together into one final number. I noticed that I already had one rating. So I read it.

I don't know who it was who rated my journal. I don't care, nor will I bother to find out even if I can find out which I don't know that I can do. The main point the reviewer seemed to want me to know was that he or she didn't like my layout. No, let me rephrase that. He or she really HATED my layout. Big Time. Enough to finish the rating and then add an additional comment that the layout really stank.

This is hilarious to me. I used to have more to my layout, but there were some suggestions that it was too busy. So I de-busified it. It is now about as bland as it can be and still have what I want. No flashy colors. Easy on the eyes. Bland. The content was my focus. My one and lonely reviewer said the content was okay, but geez... that layout is dreadful.

Now, this could be interpreted as sour grapes, but it really isn't. I don't care what that reviewer thinks of my journal. Not one bit. I have been criticized for what I write, for what I don't write, for what kind of fancy layout I have, for some vague I-hate-the-layout complaint that tells me nothing about how to fix it. for being on a most read list, for being a sycophant, for being a bottom-feeder... the list goes on. If I took any of this to heart, I would never blog another word.

So what's my point? Believe it or not, I do have one. I'm not going to participate in the latest version of BE's rating system. I think it's ridiculously bogged down with categories, and I have no interest in that kind of evaluation for my blog or someone else's. I will, however, continue to leave comments. It's my opinion that blog owners get more pleasure from those anyway. There's nothing wrong with blogs being competitive, but there's Blog award spots for that.

As for that stupid most read journals list at the other place... there's still people who don't realize the list is too easily manipulated. They continue to throw temper tantrums because of who is on the list and who isn't. Puhleeeeze. Grow Up. Try blogging because it's a nice pastime from which there is some recognition if just one person shows up to read what we've written.

All these subjective opinions simply don't matter, but still.... I Mind.