Supreme Court Declines to Look at Dildos

From the all-knowing AP:

The Supreme Court declined Tuesday to review the constitutionality of a state law banning the sale of sex toys, rejecting an appeal that said consumers have a right to sexual privacy.

Without comment, justices let stand a lower court ruling that said Alabama had a right to police the sale of devices that can be sexually stimulating.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed the challenge on behalf of merchants and users seeking to overturn the 1998 state law. They say the Supreme Court's 2003 ruling in Lawrence v. Texas, which decriminalized gay sex on privacy grounds, protects sex toy users from unwarranted state intrusion in their homes.

"The sexual devices covered by the statute have many recognized beneficial uses and are used by consenting adults in deeply private acts that are beyond the reach of government regulation," argues the filing on behalf of Sherri Williams, an adult novelty retailer, and seven other women and two men.

A divided three-judge panel of the Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed. It said in a ruling last July that siding with the sex toy merchants could open the door to the legalization of undesirable sexual behavior such as prostitution.

"If the people of Alabama in time decide that prohibition on sex toys is misguided, or ineffective, or just plain silly, they can repeal the law and be finished with the matter," the court said.

"On the other hand, if we today craft a new fundamental right by which to invalidate the law, we would be bound to give that right full force and effect in all future cases including, for example, those involving adult incest, prostitution, obscenity, and the like."

That's right, I learned that in math class: Dildo + Human Orifices = Prostitution.

Um, if anything, I think legalizing sex toys will decrease prostitution. Like my pappy always said, "Buy a whore, you have mediocre sex for twenty minutes, buy a pocket-pussy, fuck like a champ for a week." What? That's what he said!

But seriously, I'd like to commend the Supreme Court for not somehow trying to link the legalization of sex toys with homosexuality. We're making real progress here!


P.S.
I apologize to any of my professors and parents' friends for such a crude entry. Hmmm, maybe "entry" isn't the best word. Oh well, you can still see my remorse, can't you?

She Says What We're All Thinking!

From the AP:

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, a possible White House candidate in 2008, joined 2004 nominee John Kerry and other Democrats Thursday in urging that Election Day be made a federal holiday to encourage voting.

Fucking finally! I've been saying this since I was in 6th grade (also about the same time I started reading Hunter S. Thompson, count it!).

In addition to creating a federal holiday for voting, the bill would:

• Require paper receipts for votes.

• Authorize $500 million to help states make the changes in voting systems and equipment.

• Allow ex-felons to vote. Currently an estimated 4.7 million Americans are barred from voting because of their criminal records.

• Require adoption of the changes in time for the 2006 election.

And my favorite part of the article:

Both parties have called for changes to ensure a more accurate vote count. Republican efforts have centered on reducing voter fraud, while Democrats have called for making access to the ballot box easier and simpler.

Telling, isn't it?

Tom Cruise's New Beard!

Yes, I did that because I can. Here's the article, if that's what you're really interested in.

Corporations + GOP = BFF

Robert Scheer of the LA Times talks about the gay (and therefore illegal!) union between Big Business and Big Government:

Here's the agenda, as laid out by the president and the Republicans who control Congress: First, limit people's power to right wrongs done to them by corporations. Next, force people to repay usurious loans to credit card companies that make gazillions off the fine print. Then, for the coup de grace, hand over history's most successful public safety net to Wall Street.

Of course, the GOP and the White House use slightly different language for this corporate-lobbyist trifecta: "Tort reform," "eliminating abuse of bankruptcy" and "keeping Social Security solvent" are the preferred Beltway phrasings for messing with the little guy.

The first installment came last week with the passage of a law that will make it more difficult for consumers to win class-action lawsuits against private companies. Because state courts, which are closer to the people, have proved sympathetic to the liability claims of ordinary folks, the new legislation puts many class-action suits in federal courts, which turn out decisions more attuned to the heartfelt pleas of corporate attorneys.

What is so phony about the much ballyhooed tort reform is that it aims not at overzealous lawyers but only at those who happen to represent poorer plaintiffs. Corporate lawyers are very much in play in writing this new legislation.

. . . Next on the corporate wish list is savaging Chapter 7 bankruptcy relief, which is offered to individuals who can't pay their debts. It allows them to give up nonessential assets in exchange for a fresh start. Chapter 7 has been a tool for family and societal stability for decades; torquing it in the favor of credit card companies has been a fantasy of the industry for almost as long.

Never mind that it is obvious to everybody who gets junk mail that lenders should be far more responsible about how they hand out credit cards. The credit industry's sleazy come-ons, onerous interest rates and frantic marketing to teenagers go unaddressed by Congress; it is only consumers who are expected to be conscientious.

Is "onerous" too strong? Hardly. It's way beyond onerous when a struggling parent puts back-to-school expenses on an "introductory rate" credit card and then sees the interest rate surge toward 30% when she's two days late with her payment. Now $500 in books and clothes are going to cost her thousands by the time she can afford to finish paying for them. Ironically, considering the number of senators and representatives who love to quote Scripture, such outrageous usury was explicitly condemned in the Old Testament as what it is, "extortion."

Krugman: Bush Will Change the Debate, Bitchslap Liberals

Well, in so many words. Anyway, Paul Krugman's column in the Times today appeared to begin with his usual "Social-Security-is-a-sham" talk, but swiftly moved into a more widespread and vicious attack on Bush himself, and by the end, was challenging Bush to a duel. Well, not a duel per se, but he did mock the President for "playing the terrorism card." From the NY Times:

The fact is that Mr. Bush, while willing to go to war on weak evidence, hasn't taken the task of protecting America from terrorists at all seriously.

Consider, for example, the case of chemical plants.

Just days after 9/11, many analysts identified sites that store toxic chemicals as a major terror risk, and called for new safety rules. But as The New York Times reported last fall, "after the oil and chemical industries met with Karl Rove ... the White House quietly blocked those efforts."

Nearly three and a half years after 9/11, those chemical plants are still unprotected.

Other major risks identified within days of the attack included the possibility of terrorist attacks on major ports or nuclear plants. But in the months after 9/11, the administration flatly refused to allocate the sums that members of the House and Senate from both parties thought necessary to secure these sites.

And when the administration does spend money protecting possible terrorist targets, politics, not national security, dictates where the money goes. Remember the "first responders" program that ended up spending seven times as much protecting each resident of Wyoming as it spent protecting each resident of New York?

Well, it's still happening. An audit of the Homeland Security Department's (greatly inadequate) program to protect ports found that much of the money went to unlikely locations, including six sites in landlocked Arkansas, where the department's recently resigned chief of border and transportation security is reported to be considering a run for governor.

Goodbye Rube

As we all know, the world lost the Godfather of Gonzo to a bullet in the brain on Sunday. Now the lawyer of the man I like to call Hunter S. is saying that the signs were there, however faint. From the Boston Globe:

"This was definitely not spur of the moment," said Tobia, who plans to fly to Colorado today to help carry out Thompson's wishes. "He arranged to have things dealt with, and he wanted his family close by, but he didn't want anyone to know -- he didn't want anyone to try to stop him. In a weird way, he wanted it to be, I think, a celebration."

Was there anything specific that led Thompson, the model for a character in the comic strip "Doonesbury," to commit suicide? Tobia said he did not know, but noted Thompson has written about suicide and talked about it with friends.

The decision, he said, had nothing to do with the reelection of George W. Bush or the current trend in national politics, which provided a certain grist for Thompson's mill. Nor did he have significant financial problems. With his land, archives, royalties, and other valuable possessions, Tobia said, Thompson's estate is worth millions of dollars.

The best explanation, perhaps, is that in recent months Thompson had chronic pain from back surgery and an artificial hip. He also broke his leg on a recent trip to Hawaii and was limping, which made it difficult for him to travel.

"He didn't want to waste away," Tobia said. "He did not want to exist as an invalid or as someone who needed constant care. It wouldn't suit his sense of self.

I don't blame the man for not being clued-in on Thompson's fateful plans, for there would have been no stopping him anyway.

Note: I once heard a great story involving Hunter S. Thompson, a bar, and cumquats. Katie can fill in the blanks for you.

You were an original.

A Rare Sight Indeed

Famous camera-shy screenwriter Charlie Kaufman picked up his first WGA Award, thus showing his face. Here is the (small) picture. Memorize his face and pester him for autographs and movie roles when you see him in public. That'll teach him.