Whadda ya know, Eskimo?

From Juliet Lapidos, of Slate's XX Factor, rubbishing reports that Sarah Palin thought that Africa is a country:

I don't believe for a second that Sarah Palin wasn't aware of the fact that Africa is a continent ... I'd also like to point out that none other than George W. Bush once referred to Africa as a "nation."

So, class, to recap: No way it's true, no one could be that dumb. And even if it is true, it's a mistake anyone could make -- even someone as scholarly and worldly as George W. Bush.

BWAHAHA! *Wipes eyes*. Juliet, you slay me babe.

Stupid headline of the day

Courtesy of Canoe (it wouldn't be the first time, either):

You mean like in the developed world? In 2008? Uhhh.. yes?

Next question?

Pedantic, me

It's a pet peeve of mine: when people pronounce Iraq as "eye rack". Do you also pronounce the name of that boot-shaped country as "eye tally"? Listen, it's "ih rock" or "ee rock". If you're going to invade and occupy it, and can't be bothered to learn where it is on the map, at least pronounce the name correctly, alright?

I'll show you a big head, Todd

News from the Clinton campaign:

in recent days the Clinton presidential campaign's "official" song -- You And I sung by the Canadian diva [Celine] Dion -- has been replaced at campaign events by Blue Sky, from the Colorado-based band Big Head Todd and the Monsters.

Well, at least they stuck with a big head theme.

The policeman's balls

It takes some cojones and not a little hypocrisy for a man like this to go blazing around country roads in his Audi:

One of Britain's most senior policemen was yesterday banned from driving after pleading guilty to speeding at 90mph. Meredydd Hughes, the former chairman of roads policing at the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo), was caught on a speed camera exceeding the 60mph limit on the A5 near Wrexham, north Wales, in May.

I mean, one doesn't want to enjoy this too much; even off-duty policemen get caught speeding. Speed cameras in Britain are supposed to be conspicuous, to deter speeders (as opposed to just catching people out and/or being obvious money spinners). Never mind for the moment that the camera that got me was hidden behind an overpass at the time (since moved in front of the overpass). However, this man wants hidden speed cameras. To make more money, err, to catch more people out, umm... "slow down traffic":

As Acpo's chairman of roads policing, Hughes argued in favour of “less conspicuous” speed cameras as a way of slowing down traffic.

In that case, up yours buddy. Enjoy the bus.

I think I know the answer

Terrible story today, about a kid killed at a house party in my old neighborhood in Calgary, Canada:

Blood-curdling screams filled the air in Queensland late Saturday night after a teen was murdered at a house party, struck in the face with a pickaxe during a fight. ...Lisa Poole, who lives two doors from where the murder took place, rushed outside when she heard the commotion, and someone asked her if she knew CPR. "I said 'why,' and she said, 'because I think he's dead'. I saw one boy laying there with a pickaxe stuck through the front of his head and some blood on the ground."

That's pretty awful, but at the end of the article it says:

Forsen said an autopsy is scheduled for today.

I think I can save them the expense and trouble: Cause of death? Pickaxe in head.

This day has 21 minutes

In celebrity gossip news (hey, it's on CNN at least) celebutante Nicole Richie's 4-day jail sentence for DUI lasts 82 minutes:

Her time at the Century Regional Detention Facility was spent getting booked, including taking a mugshot and submitting her fingerprints, Holley said. She didn't reach her jail cell.

In related news, "actress" Lindsay Lohan was also sentenced:

Lohan was charged with seven misdemeanor drunken-driving and cocaine charges for two arrests in the last four months. Attorney Blair Berk arranged a plea bargain and Lohan was sentenced to one day in jail

Based on Richie's experience then, sounds as if Lohan probably won't make it past the queue in the lobby.

Wave of rumination

British Press Fears Wave Of Terrorism!

Alternative view:

British Press Looks Forward To Lots Of Big Headlines About Fears Of Terrorism!

If you've spent much time with the British press, you'll know how often we are regaled with headlines about FEARS and STORMS (controversies) and PANICS and those sorts of things. Sells lots of newspapers I guess. Last year the newspapers were all in a tizzy about an alleged wave of youth knife violence, for a couple of weeks. Every mugging became front page news. Then it was quickly forgotten in the wake of some celebrity news or something -- but not before the politicians could respond with some draconian new knife laws (they had to DO SOMETHING!).

Cynical? Moi?

Einstein, one not-stupid fellow

Never mind about about general relativity:

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."

Think of the little ones

Concern for the defenseless little ones in peoples' homes when the smoking ban goes into effect this summer. Smoke Ban Is A Threat To Pets:

Millions of pets are at risk from the smoking ban being made law in England in less than two month's time, an insurance firm has warned.

Unable to light up in pubs and restaurants from July 1, more smokers will puff more cigarettes at home, says More Than.

And that means putting pets at more risk of secondhand smoke, it claims.

Yes, it does. More pets are going to be at risk! We need a new animal charity to lobby for pets' right to a smoke-free environment. Something about this is niggling at me though. What could it be...? Oh, there it is on the last line of the article:

There are also fears that children could suffer if people stay at home to smoke and drink, instead of going to pubs.

Right, I forgot about those little guys.

[ Trivia: Did you know that in the UK, people give more money to animal charities than to children's charities? ]

The national hankie

There's an article by Christopher Hitchens on Slate about last week's shootings at Virginia Tech in America. It's a little hardhearted, but I agree with the general point. The point is to question the need everyone seems to feel to "whip out the national hankie" (in America and elsewhere) when strangers die tragically:

The grisly events at Virginia Tech involved no struggle, no sacrifice, no great principle. They were random and pointless. Those who died were not soldiers in any cause. They were not murdered by our enemies. They were not martyrs.

And getting to the point:

It was my friend Adolph Reed who first pointed out this tendency to what he called "vicarious identification." At the time of the murder of Lisa Steinberg in New York in 1987, he was struck by the tendency of crowds to show up for funerals of people they didn't know, often throwing teddy bears over the railings and in other ways showing that (as well as needing to get a life) they in some bizarre way seemed to need to get a death. The hysteria that followed a traffic accident in Paris involving a disco princess—surely the most hyped non-event of all time—seemed to suggest an even wider surrender to the overwhelming need to emote: The less at stake, the greater the grieving.

Back in 1997 I marvelled at the over-the-top grieving for Diana (even while -- I sheepishly admit -- I stayed up late to watch the funeral back in Canada). I wondered for the first time why people seemed to need these triggers; these moments of spontaneous national emotion. Watching the film The Queen recently, I wondered if poor old Elizabeth II didn't get a raw deal, at the time, being pilloried for attempting to demonstrate the famous British stiff upper lip.

Why do we find events like Diana's accident, or the Virgina tech massacre, so much more emotional than other, equally tragic deaths? How many people are murdered each day in America? How many soldiers and civilians die in Iraq each week? (U.S. soldiers dying in by ones-and-twos in Iraq and Afghanistan barely makes the U.S. headlines any more). How many people die in road accidents each day? Do we stop paying attention when the deaths stop being sensational? Since these less famous deaths are no less tragic or senseless, why are they so much less important to the public? Or, more to the point of Chris Hitchens, why are the Virginia Tech murders so much more important?

Is it simply because they're sensational and unusual? I really don't want to be insensitive, but maybe we should ask ourselves: Is it that, deep down, we all love a good tragedy now and then?

As in uggly?

These things, "Ugg boots", are all the rage in England at the moment. They could be elsewhere, too, I don't know (I'm going to California next week, so I'll keep my eyes open).

OK, seriously, who thinks this is attractive footware for women? Cute? Sexy? Elegant? Sophisticated? Sporty even? No, absolutely not, no, no, and no.

They're clunky, ugly, and cheap looking. They 'age' badly as they get a little worn and wet/dirty (they're sheepskin suede as I understand it, which is difficult to take care of anyway).

There's a somewhat cute chick who works in my building, but when I saw her wearing a pair of these, well... Honey, they make you look like some kind of homeless eskimo. Get some proper shoes. Something, anything but these.

Seriously, I rarely get worked up about fashion. But I hope this particular trend fizzles in a hurry. Just when I thought we'd escaped the season of long, long, pointy witch-shoes. Bring back the witch-shoes, for goodness sake.