Monthly Archives: November 2006

First a bit of business news.:

“Negotiations were so far advanced for ABC’S Barbara Walters to interview O.J. Simpson for his book If I Did It, that ABC will now be required to pay ReganBooks, the publisher of the Simpson book, $1 million as a “kill fee,” Newsweek magazine reported on its website Tuesday. The figure will at least partially offset the reported $3.5 million that the publisher had reportedly agreed to pay Simpson for the book and television interview. Both were scrubbed by Rupert Murdoch, who owns the publishing company, an imprint of HarperCollins, and the Fox network, which had been scheduled to air the interview after Walters pulled out, reportedly saying that it “wasn’t right” for her.”

In other words “You broke it, you pay for it.” Clearly Mafia Princesses aren’t used to being treated this way. I suspect we’ll hear more of this one way or another.

Meanwhile, Mr. Sheri Annis notes of a Teapot Tempest –

The flap over a disputed AP story out of Iraq isn’t gettting any quieter. HuffPoster Bob Geiger claims victory:
“When I think of every time our right-wing counterparts in the political blog world humiliate themselves, I’m reminded of former NBA star Charles Barkley who, upon hearing that Tonya Harding was calling herself ‘the Charles Barkley of figure skating,’ said ‘I was going to sue her for defamation of character, but then I realized I have no character.’
“And here we have so many conservative bloggers, after days of castigating the Associated Press for running what the wingnuts claimed was a fictitious story about six Sunnis being burned alive in sectarian violence in Iraq on Friday, having to once again face what a bunch of putzes they really are.
“The AP reported Tuesday night on eyewitnesses to the immolations, that occurred when Sunni worshippers were leaving a Mosque on Friday and have also substantiated the identity of Iraqi police Capt. Jamil Hussein, who the AP cited as the primary source for its story that the Sunnis were killed while the Iraqi military stood by and did nothing.
“Said the most recent AP story:
” Seeking further information about Friday’s attack, an AP reporter contacted Hussein for a third time about the incident to confirm there was no error. The captain has been a regular source of police information for two years and had been visited by the AP reporter in his office at the police station on several occasions. The captain, who gave his full name as Jamil Gholaiem Hussein, said six people were indeed set on fire. . .
“But over the last few days — ever since a Naval Public Affairs officer demanded in writing that the AP publish a retraction for the article, which the military claimed was false — our little Bloggers for Bush have been more excited about all of this than Mark Foley at a Boy Scout Jamboree.
“‘MSM credibility, R.I.P.’ said Michelle Malkin on her blog, while the Powerline dudes headlined it all with ‘Story of Sunnis Burned Alive Going Up In Smoke.’”
Here’s the latest take from John Hinderaker of the aforementioned Power Line:
“The AP has aggressively gone after the U.S. Army for doubting its report. AP International Editor John Daniszewski said in an email statement:
” The attempt to question the existence of the known police officer who spoke to the AP is frankly ludicrous and hints at a certain level of desperation to dispute or suppress the facts of the incident in question.
“That’s quite an accusation to level against the U.S. military, and is obviously unfair in light of the military’s aggressive exposure of its own soldiers’ misdeeds, not to mention those of Shia militiamen. But the AP evidently thinks it knows what way the wind is blowing, with the Democrats now in power in Congress and talk of defeat and withdrawal in the air.”

Truth in Conservabotspeak is always a political vaudeville act. But this time the act closed on the road.

Better luck next scam, Patterico

And now from the fabulous world chastity the confessions of Dawn Eden (Perfect name for a porn star, doncha think?)

Did you sleep mainly with drummers or guitarists?
The thing about drummers is that they are easier than guitarists. There is less competition for them, and they are easier to please and not used to the attention.
I used to play drums.
What’s the difference between celibacy and chastity?
Celibacy is static. It’s a state of grace, where nothing penetrates you.
So to speak.
Yes. And chastity is more of a fluid growth process.
Do you allow yourself the pleasure of your own company?
From the beginning, when I first started masturbating I always felt depressed afterward. As I drew closer to Catholicism I realized that masturbation was against my faith. I’ve done it once since I became a Catholic, and I had to confess afterward. The priest didn’t bat an eye. “

Of course not, dear. He’s fucked more drummers than you have.

Vows of celibacy haven’t worked too well lately for Catholic priests. Is it possible that not having sex leads people down potentially dangerous paths?
I think that a vow of celibacy is a terrible thing for an active homosexual, which is why they should not be in the priesthood.
But these are Catholic priests, not leather-clad boys cruising bathhouses in San Francisco. I wouldn’t call them active homosexuals.
I think if you research it you’ll find that these are not men who went into the priesthood heterosexual and become homosexual.”

She’s right there — and they didn’t give up leather or bath-house cruising either

Does your book and its underlying philosophy apply to homosexuals?
I think they could take something positive out of it, but the target audience is heterosexual women.
Do you support homosexuality as a lifestyle choice and a right?
I embrace chastity, and chastity is based on the idea that men and women were created and designed for union rather than same-sex unions. I believe that people who have gay inclinations should be chaste.
But just a moment ago you said that active homosexuals shouldn’t be celibate.
Active homosexuals shouldn’t. There’s a paradox. The idea is that you become celibate so that you don’t act out.
Act out? You make it sound like human sexuality is a game of charades. I’m guessing you don’t recognize gay marriage?
No, because it’s not marriage. It’s changing the construct and the definition of what marriage is.

Actually marriage IS a game of charades. See the revival of Company to find out why.

Under your philosophy, only married people can have sex that is not a “lie.” So that would mean gay people should never have sex, right?
They can have sex with people of the opposite sex if they get married. Nobody’s preventing them from doing that.
Yes, but see, they tend to fall in love with people of their own sex.
It’s a tragedy of our modern age that there is a culture that encourages people to act out on gay inclinations. In my view, far fewer people are really gay, but they will act out that way because of the encouragement of the culture. The myth is that people can’t change. People can change, at least from my own experience. I think it’s wrong to tell people that once they are gay they are always gay.”

Spoken like a true whore.