Saturday, December 31, 2005

My picture!

I am going to be adding my picture to my blog. This picture was taken by the finest fashion photographer in Wisconsin.

I am a diva!

The best of 2005 Altmouse!

I decided to put up a list of this year's best Altmouse posts! You can read the best of Altmouse here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and especially here.

Do not complain if one of your most special favorites is not here! I have chosen each of these for personal reasons of my own. Only the very best have been included. Why focus on what I didn't choose?

Friday, December 30, 2005

Rumpberthomscalalitabebopaluladingdongshesmybaby predictions.

William Safire triumphantly returns to the NYTimes opinion page with his clever "office pool" predictions for 2006. What a hoot!

The last one is interesting:
14. As Bush approval rises, historians will begin to equate his era with that of: (a) Truman; (b) Eisenhower; (c) L.B.J.; (d) Reagan; (e) Clinton.
My guess is that Bush will be seen as incomparable to anyone but himself. Safire is right that his approval ratings will inevitably skyrocket. The amazing Iraqi elections have already given him a tremendous boost. Only partisans would deny Bush his greatness.

But I do have a criticism of Safire, the notorious wordsmith maven. ("Notorious" means "celebrated," right? Upon sincere self-reflection, I am sure that I am right.) He coins the term "Robertscalito" to describe the new Supreme Court. This is not aesthetically pleasing!

I propose the term "Rumpberthomscalalitabebopaluladingdongshesmybaby" instead. That is aesthetically pleasing, and nonpartisan as well! Who does not like "oldies"? Perhaps the same people that do not like Roberts or Alito because of their partisanship. These people need to get over their wombs and civil liberties manias and engage in honest self-reflection about how they present themselves to the nonpartisan American people.

Thursday, December 29, 2005

Speed stapling again.

Many people have questioned whether there is really any usefulness in speed stapling.

This is mere partisan carping. When I was in law school I was often asked to do the stapling. For every group project I had the job of stapler-in-chief. Everyone was surely afraid that I would outshine them if I were allowed to do any of the law-research and law-writing thingies. Learning how to staple rapidly and accurately got me my law degree.

Have you ever noticed that if you keep your eyes open long enough your eyeballs feel itchy?

A warning to partisans: don't be so partisan.

I have been hearing some criticism that I have not updated quickly enough. The reason for this is that I have been engaged in a process of sincere self-reflection. My conclusion? That those who criticize me are partisans who need to engage in a process of sincere self-reflection.

Similarly, the WaPo reports that
President Bush shifted his rhetoric on Iraq in recent weeks after an intense debate among advisers about how to pull out of his political free fall, with senior adviser Karl Rove urging a campaign-style attack on critics while younger aides pushed for more candor about setbacks in the war, according to Republican strategists.

The result was a hybrid of the two approaches as Bush lashed out at war opponents in Congress, then turned to a humbler assessment of events on the ground in Iraq that included admissions about how some of his expectations had been frustrated. The formula helped Bush regain his political footing as record-low poll numbers began to rebound. Now his team is rethinking its approach to his second term in hopes of salvaging it.
Increased candor about the war is a good idea. The constant stream of good news from Iraq is not being widely reported.

And liberal partisans who criticize the war need to take more note of how successful the war has been. They need to be more candid. Otherwise, they risk being left behind as Bush's approval ratings soar. Take a look at the dramatic gains he has made in the latest Gallup poll!. Compare especially the 12/19-22/05 poll to the 12/5-8/05 numbers.

Clearly, anti-war and anti-Bush partisans are reeling from the onslaught of the nonpartisan Bush truth attack.

Monday, December 26, 2005

Have you heard who is silent lately?

It is Hillary Clinton. I did a Google search and found that she has not said anything about the silly "wiretapping scandal." I am sure that liberal partisans are shocked that the authoritative Google shows one of their leaders is not blindly following in their own partisan footsteps.

Hillary is being sensible. She is trying to distance herself from the partisan Democrats who are claiming that Bush should not break the law if he wants to. That is ridiculous! If Bush does break any laws, he would do it in a nonpartisan way. It would be wrong and partisan to get upset over that. That's why I stay out of politics -- it tempts you to say absurd things.

UPDATE: Hillary has gone too far! Yes, she still is being tasteful in not yet criticizing a president for the victimless crime of not following a law passed by Congress. But I saw on one of those blogs I never read that she has been so gauche as to question the way the FISA court rubberstamps warrant requests. She is actually not a total fan of the Patriot Act!
The Senate bill, which I supported, not only required the government to meet a higher standard before issuing these orders, it also gave recipients of a FISA order an explicit and meaningful right to challenge these orders and their accompanying gag orders in court. The conference report sadly retains a variation of the current law’s exceptionally lenient standard of review, a standard that effectively turns the courts into little more than a rubber stamp. Further, the conference report does not give the recipient of a FISA order any express right at all to seek meaningful judicial review of its gag order. Quite simply, the conference report places inadequate checks on these orders.
It is interesting that a Google search does not always say everything you want to know about what someone has not said. Do you like Google? I like Google. Maybe one day we can have Google races and see who can do the quickest searches for things like "Mello Yello" and "drywall." That would be fun!

But it is clear that the hyper-partisans at Kos and Atrios will still never criticize Hillary for anything, ever, because she is a Liberal. They are too partisan!

Speed stapling.

You know what would be exciting? Speed stapling. That would be a competition in which office workers "face off" to see who could staple the most collated reports in a designated time period. Points could be awarded for accuracy as well. Is the staple perfectly horizontal each and every time? I've always liked staples. What is your favorite office supply? Do you like toner? I enjoy toner. There is a lot of it in the supply cabinet in my office. It has a very pleasant aroma. I also think it would be fun to find out how much my hair weighs.

Behind the mask.

I love masking tape! It's really very interesting. This morning I found this article which is all about how to buy masking tape. What a hoot!

Saturday, December 24, 2005

Visions of sugar plum evil partisans.

One non-argument one sees a lot on the left is to characterize your opponent's criticism as a "whine." That is too boring! I could just say back to you that you are whining about me. What's the point? How do you begin to imagine that you've said something?

I never read the silly stuff they say about me on the internet. Who has time to read those sad little blogs? I am above such things.

But this horrible little foulmouthed creature needs to understand what placid nonpartisanship means. Why does this little nonentity care so much for namecalling?

He may also be a hypocrite. I am sure my loyal readers agree. We all concur here completely about the value of civilized dissent, after all.

Friday, December 23, 2005

"Eveyone" says Kos is an "asshole."

That is the chief lesson to be drawn from this extensive profile of Kos -- Markos Moulitsas Zuniga -- in the latest Washington Monthly:
Moulitsas is touchy, far too self-assured, and easily provoked. But he's more interesting in person than he is on his blog, more thoughtful and funny and even a little bit more capable of self-criticism. He laughs, he makes fun of himself, he says absurd things and then takes them back, and then thinks again and doesn't—he actually enjoys himself.... "Everybody says I'm an asshole, and they're right, I am."
I am fascinated by learning that Kos is much more interesting live than on his blog. So I suppose that's how he became a top-tier political blogger -- being an asshole. And being an asshole means behaving as if you are absolutely certain at all moments of the absolute rightness of your own snap judgements, being cutting and dismissive when confronted with even the mildest criticism. Being an asshole means being totally unable to correct oneself when shown to be wrong based on obvious evidence.

That's a price I just won't pay.

I am sad that we will never read the more reasonable Kos blog, the funny one, the one where he shows even a glimmer of self-awareness. Doesn't he have any idea how he comes across to people who aren't his sycophants? Doesn't he realize how he is just projecting his own neuroses and egotism onto his enemies? It must be awful to be a person like him, so utterly incapable of self-doubt, of honest self-reflection. I am absolutely positive you all agree with me.

This is why I am rigorously non-partisan. Politics requires an almost savage exclusion of all self-doubt, makes you unable to see yourself. I myself of course rise placidly above partisanship. My judgements about politics are clear-eyed and untainted by ideology. Pure.

Poor Kos. Poor, poor Kos. One day I sincerely hope he can come to the place I have arrived at, free of partisanship, free of petty poitics. One day if he is humble and penitent, he may at last understand why nobody has ever, ever, been tempted to call Ann Altmouse an asshole.

Thursday, December 22, 2005

Dive for the diva.


Omigod! This is so hot! I am nominated for "Blogress Diva"! I just wish the Gay Patriot would fix the typo in my name. But EEEEEEEEEK! Omigod!

I just want to say that I am not a conservative, so I can't quite understand why I should be put up for an award for a "Conservative Blogress Diva." I am non-partisan and independent. It's only small-minded misunderstanding that causes everyone else in the entire world except me to call me a "conservative." So much is obvious.

I am however quite clearly a "Blogress." Squeak! Tee-hee! Omigosh! I am the girliest Constitutional Law Scholar ever! Even more so than John Roberts!

Giggle! I am a DIVA! Worship at my shoes!

Of course, I am also too serious-minded to be remotely impressed by such frivolity, too much of a genuine feminist. That is why I won't gush.

My favorite things.

Regular readers know that I never read any of those "blogs" which seem to devote all of their time to slandering me in the vilest, most personal terms. Who can be bothered? I just have better things to do.

I have been told that some what's-his-name at his little blog has tried to "tag" me with a "meme." I decline to respond to someone who has attacked me by in a very sexist fashion calling me a tiny sea creature. And it troubles me that none of the alleged "feminists" of the ugly Left have been able to tear themselves away from their Bush-hatred long enough to defend me. These women seem utterly self-absorbed and shrewish. Why aren't they rushing to defend me? How hypocritical of them!

Anyway, the questions asked as a part of this "game" are partisan and vicious, and I refuse to play this absurd "game." Such "games" are nothing more than artifacts of thinly disguised hatred.

UPDATE: I have been asked by a very prominent blogger who will remain nameless (thanks Glenn!) to answer a set of fun questions! That's what the blogosphere is all about -- intellectual exchange with a set of smart peers in a freewheeling, exciting way.

Seven Things To Do Before I Die:
1. Become a prominent, top tier blogger.
2. Consolidate my position as a top-tier blogger.
3. Continue, in a friendly way, to show misguided people why they are wrong.
4. To keep promoting the friendly, open exchange of ideas.
5. To buy lots of shoes!
6. To combat the crass materialism of society.
7. To crush terrorism beneath my feet.
Seven Things I Cannot Do
I don't "get" the question.
Seven Things That Attract Me to...Blogging
1. The inherent democracy and "levelling" of the format -- the way it allows everyone a voice!
2. The chance to display my expertise to better educate the misinformed and the vulgar.
3. The way it allows for access to opinions from all parts of the political spectrum.
4. The way it allows the well-informed to crush the incoherent, angry Left in the pincer-grip of logic.
5. I love how the blogosphere is all about IDEAS!
6. The ad revenue -- pays for my shoes!
7. Oh, David!
Seven Things I Say Most Often
This is another silly one. Regular readers know I never repeat myself. Only partisans repeat themselves, not independent-minded Constitutional Law scholars.
Seven Books That I Love
1. The Odyssey, by Homer
2. The Tempest, Shakespeare
3. Remembrance of Things Lost, Martin Proust
4. The Mighty Mountain, Thomas Mahon
5. Pilgrim's Progress, Paul Bunyan
6. Gulliver's Travels, John O'Swift
7. The Great Big Book of Constitutional Law, Mr. Blackwell
Seven Movies That I Watch Over and Over Again
1. My Dinner With Andre
2. Aguirre the Wrath of God
3. Crumb
4. Grey Gardens
5. 32 Short Films About Glenn Gould
6. Limelight
7. Dr. Strangelove

I love these movies so much, one day I might even watch one of them with the sound on!
Seven People I Want To Join In Too
OK! This is exciting!

1. John Roberts (BFF)!
2. Pope Benedict XVI
3. Glenn Reynolds!
4. Sammy Alito
5. Hayden Christiansen (hottie!)
6. Ron Artest (see how non-partisan I am?)
7. You know who you are! Yoo-hoo!
Gosh, this was fun!

Wednesday, December 21, 2005

Humanities horrors.

The blogger and liberal/socialist Penn State professor Michael Berube has posted a very strange little essay. Berube seems to be the prisoner of his childish liberal worldview when he attacks George Bush for protecting our freedom by invoking the authority to wiretap any Amewrican whenever he sees fit. But at the same time, Berube hits the nail on the head when he attacks Protein Wisdom's puerile Jeff Goldstein, who is a tool of the Pajamas Media conspiracy and was once so tasteless as to cold-bloodedly kill fourteen people at a Thanksgiving Day parade with a shotgun loaded with M & M candies.

It is rather a shame Berube is not a civil, non-partisan, independent thinker like myself. Don't you agree?

UPDATE: You can see the Thanksgiving carnage here.

Asking about rhetorical questions.

This is a fascinating article about rhetorical questions:
The rhetorical question is usually defined as any question asked for a purpose other than to obtain the information the question asks. For example, "Why are you so stupid?" is likely to be a statement regarding one's opinion of the person addressed rather than a genuine request to know.
I personally avoid asking rhetorical questions. When I ask why someone is stupid, I am genuinely curious as to why that person is not as intelligent as I am. This is called "intellectual curiosity." Do you like rhetorical questions? Why are stupid people always so partisan and interested in electoral politics? Why do such people question the War on Terror? What sorts of movies feature rhetorical questions? Yes, it's rhetorical question time at the Altmouse blog!

Robert says the question mark is his favorite bit of punctuation. I think he's right.

Partisans miss the interesting issues.

There has been a lot of huffing and puffing from the usual suspects over the so-called wiretapping "scandal." Much of this is driven by the desire of partisans to further their own agenda. But responsible observers need to ponder the constitutional issues here, which are fascinating. It should be interesting to see how this all unfolds over the course of the next several decades.

Partisans of the angry left need to understand that matters such as this cannot be resolved or even understood quickly. They need to look at Bush's actions and use them as an opportunity for self-reflection. Why are they not supporting Bush? What inadequacies drive them? After all, little that has occurred over the course of the Bush presidency is so simple as it was in the 1990s, when it was quite clear that Bill Clinton was a sexual predator who deserved public humiliation. That was a much more innocent time.

But again, the constitutional subjects involved with the FISA case are highly intriguing and worth elucidating in detail by experts.

Why I am not a Democrat.

Liberals often pretend to be feminists, but I have yet to see any evidence that they really care about women's issues. If a woman is not "part of the in crowd," they will permit the most horrific attacks on her to go unchallenged. Indeed, they will cheer these attackers on, because they have no bedrock principles. They are mere partisans. And that is why I hate partisan politics.

I think this is a perfect example of what I mean. This post is a vicious attack on me personally, couched in the most abusive, unregenerate sexist terms. Glossodoris cincta? What century are we living in when such hate can be spewed, without fear of consequence? Oh, I suppose they will say they are being "ironic." As if "nudibranches" are ever "ironic."

Nothing better exhibits the raw hatred and unhinged viciousness of the supposedly tolerant "Left." I will not ever vote for a Democratic politician while such hatemongers as this are in full and total control of the Democratic Party.

UPDATE: I will not link to it, because I never read any other blog that mentions me, ever. Why give them free publicity? So I never know what they are saying. However, I saw that a so-called "conservative" blogger has called me a "total skag whore who should be beaten back to the kitchen where she belongs." This is further evidence that both the entire "nudibranch" Left and even sometimes some stray figure on the Right have exactly the same opinions and say exactly the same things. The evidence here is crystal clear. That is why they attack independent minded non-partisans like myself with such venom.

Tuesday, December 20, 2005

Know your onion.

Do onions really add flavor to your favorite recipes? Or do they provide health benefits as well? This article suggests that onions can do both.
Onions not only provide flavor; they also provide health-promoting phytochemicals as well as nutrients.

Onions contain quercetin, a flavonoid (one category of antioxidant compounds). Antioxidants are compounds that help delay or slow the oxidative damage to cells and tissue of the body. Studies have indicated that quercetin helps to eliminate free radicals in the body, to inhibit low-density lipoprotein oxidation (an important reaction in the atherosclerosis and coronary heart disease), to protect and regenerate vitamin E (a powerful antioxidant) and to inactivate the harmful effects of chelate metal ions.
On a related note, I do not like partisan politics. But these attacks on George Bush for promoting a policy of torture are unfair.

UPDATE: Isn't Chewbacca rather underrated? Chewbacca was really crucial to the entire Rebel Alliance, when you stop and think about it. But then I don't like it when a director tells me what to think. Don't you agree?

UPDATE: Pajamas Media isn't doing very well, like I predicted.

The movie of the year.

I haven't seen it, but I hear The Chronicles of Narnia is very good. I have no opinion about talking lions generally, but this talking lion is supposed to represent Jesus, which is interesting. Do you like lions? Do you think lions can represent Jesus, or should the producers have gotten a tiger, or an ocelot, or perhaps a wildebeest? Do you think lions can talk?