Links of the Week - With Stupid Edition

Weiner Admits to Picture
The underwear picture heard around the world finally has its guilty man. New York Representative Anthony Weiner finally admitted the picture was his and apparently one of several he has sent out to woman over the internet the years. He admitted to the behavior but says he never had sex or even met the woman he was flirting with online. The GOP, of course, is asking for his head on a platter. Ignoring the fact that they stridently defended previous leaders like John Ensign among others that actually did take the step of cheating of getting laid by someone other than their wives. In the case of Ensign he broke the law multiple times to try and cover it up. Andrew Breitbart, he actually "broke" the story by buying the photos from one of Weiner's online woman, felt this "proved" he was a real journalist. After all in Republican land, if a "liberal" makes a mistake his entire career should be flushed down the toilet (see Dan Rather) but is a conservative makes nothing but mistakes (fake Black Panther story, fake Acorn story, fake Sherrod story, etc) then getting one right undoes all those others.

Now if you are wondering why I don't have more outrage it is because no hypocrisy has been committed here. Weiner has not run a family values campaign or claimed to be a higher moral authority on issues such as marriage. All the Republicans (and John Edwards) that have been busted have all done that. If you claim to be the authority on what a proper marriage and win office in part because of that "authority" than when that person violates the marriage, that is very much a voter issue. When you don't run on it, don't make claims to be an authority on such things, than that behavior is not a voter issue. It is a subtle but important difference, one that most Republicans would not understand. The hypocrisy matters, the action itself is really an issue between husband and wife.

Frankly, I have never cared who screws who in Washington as long as they are trying to make the country better. Jeff Jarvis summarized my feelings on the subject when he said, "If he had sexually harassed someone, then maybe there's a legitimate story. But if, at the most, he sent out a photo from his hard drive with his photo on it, what's the big deal? What's the news there? What's the impact on democracy and how we live our lives? Zippo." This, of course, is a subtle difference the press refuses to understand.

Palin's Paul Revere Rewrite
Speaking of stupid things - Sarah Palin. Over the weekend, Sarah unintentionally embarrassed herself once gain during her unofficially running for President bus tour/ego fest. The tour was at Paul Revere's house in Boston when she was asked:

What have you seen so far today and what are you going to take away from your visit?

Considering her location, she answered:

[Paul Revere] who warned the – the British that they weren’t going to be taking away our arms by reading those bills and ah, making sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were gonna be secure and we were gonna be free.

Clearly she doesn't know her elementary school basics of "the british are coming! the british are coming!" that was part of a rhyme we all heard in school and as adults can barely remember. Ok fine for normal people but consider Sarah claims to be an expert on the founding of America and the founding fathers. Paul Revere is very much part of that

She was given a second chance to provide a correct nugget of history and she still got it wrong. Now most people, when caught and made fun or for getting something so wrong might take a few minutes to verify the answer by say hitting up wikipedia but not our Sarah, reading and learning stuff is a sign of weakness (and so is apparently asking all the advisors around her). What makes the story really amazing is her continued belief that a strong leader can never, under any circumstances no matter how insignificant, admit being wrong. This deeply held belief was shared by George Bush. As a result she provided another horrible answer that changed history yet again by saying Revere was warning everyone to protect their guns rather than the revolution that was forming.

"You know what, I didn't mess up about Paul Revere," Palin replied. "Here is what Paul Revere did. He warned the Americans that the British were coming, the British were coming and they were going to try to take our arms and we have to make sure we were protecting ourselves and shoring up all of our ammunitions and our firearms so they couldn't take it."

She continued: "Remember, the British had been there, many soldiers for seven years in that area. Part of Paul Revere's ride -- it wasn't just one ride -- he was a courier, a messenger. Part of the ride was to warn British that we're already there. You are not going to succeed. You are not going to take American arms. You are not going to beat our own well-armed persons, individual private militia we have. He did warn the British."

"In a shout out, gotcha question that was asked of me, I answered candidly. I know my American history," she added.

To Sarah, "what did you take away from your visit?" is a "gotcha question." How in the world think this woman would be a good President? Even on something this simple she not only cannot be bothered to take the time find out answers but she defends her wrong information to point of looking foolish yet again and not even aware of it. On top of that she claims a normal question was a special question out to get her. If Sarah Palin can't handle simple "gotcha questions" like this, how in the world can she handle "gotcha" moments that is being the President. How anyone can follow such a lazy, intellectually dishonest person I will never understand.

The Question That Could Cost Obama the Election“Are you better off than you were four years ago?" The answer really is "about the same" but most will think "no." Considering that Wall Street and large corporations are doing better than ever (as in more cash flush than stuff like that was recorded), the answer is a big "hell yes!" but again most don't know that. Big business is doing outstanding under the new economy, small business aka Main Street isn't. Nor will it continue to. To help the economy you have to sometimes spend money, something the GOP refuses to allow. Corporations, flush with money, could do that but why should they considering how the incentive free tax cuts the GOP has granted them over the last 10 years. As of now, around 10% unemployment is the new economic status quo. Get use to it. Corporations are fat and happy and see no reason to change things. Things could improve if tax cuts had riders on them like encouraging investment or hiring employees (something Obama tried but GOP blocked). It could be helped with infrastructure projects but GOP said no, the money was better spent on tax cuts for the rich and large corporations.

The GOP ran on a priority of "jobs, jobs, jobs" but has completely failed in that promise. Instead they have focused on everything else but jobs. The reason why is simple - a bad economy could help them regain the White House. Think about that. Instead of trying to take action to make the country better now, they would rather have it stagnate for two more years for their own benefit. Yet fools will support them for doing that. At this point the election is Obama's to lose simply because the GOP field is so weak but if continues to not "respect" Congress by letting them drive the agenda, he will deserve to lose.

Lego Sandcrawler
After all that politics, a much needed palate cleanser. Below is a video and at links above pics and details on a 9 month, 10,000 Lego mastserpiece. It creates the Sandcrawler from Star Wars: A New Hope with electronic doors, wheels and more. The detail and look is amazing.