LOTUS blog

From Vanity Fair:

Regrettably, some Americans are simply not aware of how large an asshole footprint they leave on the planet. Here, Vanity Fair offers a questionnaire that will help such individuals determine the size and breadth of their footprint.

Some sample questions:

Do you leave vitriolic comments in the “Comments” sections of blogs and Web sites, even if you’re commenting on something innocuous, such as an old Linkin Park video?

When leaving such comments, do you use such rote Internet pejoratives as “asshat,” “douchebag,” and “‘tard”?

Does it take more than two words to describe what you do for a living?

Do you refer to having young children as “doing the parent thing”?

When your companion gets up to use the facilities at a restaurant, are you incapable of passing even the smallest blip of solitary time without theatrically scrolling or tapping on your BlackBerry, Tr?o, or iPhone?

Reducing your Asshole Footprint:

Stop gelling, mussing, and spiking your hair. You should part it, and that’s that.

Do not ever order a Cosmopolitan again.

Go two entire, consecutive days without using a wireless electronic communication device.

I’ll spare you the details.  Needless to say, blogging will be light to nonexistent for a few days.

This is almost as bad as Senator Ted Kennedy naming his dog “Splash.”  In order to get his wife elected, Bill Clinton is generously offering to watch the debate with three luck Hillary donors.  Bill explains:

There are two things in this world that I love more than anything else — my family and politics. So you can imagine just how fired up I get when Hillary is on the stage debating the issues that matter to our country.

So here’s an idea: why don’t you and I share that excitement together during an upcoming debate. Hillary’s campaign will pick three people — each invited with a guest to watch one of the upcoming presidential debates with me. We’ll sit down in front of a big TV with a big bowl of chips, watch the debate, and talk about the race. If you enter before the Sunday midnight deadline, you and a guest could be the ones to sit down with me to watch a presidential debate.

Following this awkward e-mail, Hillary writes:

H/T Wonkette

A recent post on Craig’sList:

Date: 2007-08-30, 2:03PM EDT
Whenever I get a package of plain M&Ms, I make it my duty to continue the strength and robustness of the candy as a species. To this end, I hold M&M duels.

Taking two candies between my thumb and forefinger, I apply pressure, squeezing them together until one of them cracks and splinters. That is the “loser,” and I eat the inferior one immediately. The winner gets to go another round.

I have found that, in general, the brown and red M&Ms are tougher, and the newer blue ones are genetically inferior. I have hypothesized that the blue M&Ms as a race cannot survive long in the intense theater of competition that is the modern candy and snack-food world.

Occasionally I will get a mutation, a candy that is misshapen, or pointier, or flatter than the rest. Almost invariably this proves to be a weakness, but on very rare occasions it gives the candy extra strength. In this way, the species continues to adapt to its environment.

When I reach the end of the pack, I am left with one M&M, the strongest of the herd. Since it would make no sense to eat this one as well, I pack it neatly in an envelope and send it to M&M Mars, A Division of Mars, Inc., Hackettstown, NJ 17840-1503 U.S.A., along with a 3×5 card reading, “Please use this M&M for breeding purposes.”

This week they wrote back to thank me, and sent me a coupon for a free 1/2 pound bag of plain M&Ms. I consider this “grant money.” I have set aside the weekend for a grand tournament. From a field of hundreds, we will discover the True Champion.

There can be only one.

(H/T Joe Logue [JOTUS] via Instapundit)

Finally, a YouTube clip that brings my many interests together.  Well, except the Star Wars part.  I’m not one of those people.

(And yes, that really is Rush Limbaugh’s voice.)

Someone in the comments section said that now that Coulter has called the LOTUS Blog “fabulous,” it’s time for a new banner.  So, what do you think?

Actress and pro-life advocate Patricia Heaton recently commented on actress Sally Fields’ acceptance speech at the Emmys. 

Fields said, “And, let’s face it, if the mothers ruled the war, there would be no (expletive) wars in the first place.” 

Heaton said, “I’ve actually become a more violent person since I became a mother.  If someone came between me and my kids, they’d be dead meat.  So I didn’t agree with that particular statement.”

By the way, imagine what people in China and Venezula must think of America’s definition of “censorship.”  Everyone from Drudge to CBS to Shepherd Smith referred to Sally Fields as being “censored” at the Emmys.  Then, they proceeded to print all of her comments or show the video over and over again.  If that’s censorship, then hand me a microphone.

The Associated Press is reporting that former Senator Lincoln Chafee (?-RI) is leaving the GOP. 

PROVIDENCE, R.I. (AP) — Former Sen. Lincoln Chafee said he has left the Republican Party because the national GOP has drifted too far from him on critical issues, including the war in Iraq, the economy and the environment.

“It’s not my party anymore,” Chafee, who represented Rhode Island from 1999 until 2007, told The Providence Journal in an article published Saturday.

Chafee said he is now an unaffiliated voter after leaving the GOP “in June or July.”

He said he made the move because “I want my affiliation to accurately reflect my status.”

During his last year in the Senate, Chafee had the exact  same American Conservative Union Rating (12) as Senators Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein, Debbie Stabenow and Hillary Clinton. 

From the ACU’s press release:

Alexandria, VA – American Conservative Union (ACU) chairman David A. Keene announced today that ACU has filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) against MoveOn.org Political Action and the New York Times Company for violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended and the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002.

On Monday, September 10, 2007, MoveOn sponsored a full page advertisement in the New York Times attacking General David Petraeus prior to his report to Congress regarding the status of the United States military operations in Iraq. The open rate for a full page black and white advertisement in the New York Times is $181,692. MoveOn only paid $65,000 for the ad, according to multiple press reports.

The New York Times Company’s “discount” is in effect a corporate soft money contribution to a federal political committee. MoveOn’s acceptance of this corporate soft money contribution exceeds federal contributions and is a clear violation of FEC laws.

 “ACU demands a full and thorough investigation of the cost of the Ad and the discount given by the New York Times Company to MoveOn.org Political Action, for payment by MoveOn of the usual and normal charge for the costs of the Ad and the requisite civil money penalty for violation of federal law by each of the Respondents,” ACU Chairman David A. Keene stated in the FEC complaint. 

Click here for the formal complaint (pdf).

Click here for the New York Post’s report, “$ign of the Times.”