Movie posters of lore...

The other day while going through some old documents of a relative I came across some old Peoria Journal Star copies from 1987.

Wow.

What a stark reminder of how movies used to be advertised back then. Forgive me, but it has been so long that I can't recall if it was Thursday or Friday when new releases were advertised, but I do remember one of those days when the new movie ads would come out. I recall when the one section of the paper would be filled with new movie poster ads.

I really looked forward to that day. And then, does anyone else remember when the ads would blare, "HELD OVER."

Of course, now days it is just a few picas of space of the movie title.

A new direction...

I have grown weary with traditional politics. Through no fault of my own, as I've aged, it has become clearer how not only I, but others, need to really focus on the things that are important in life.

We need to get away from silly bullshit and grab onto the things that really make us happy and content.

Don't get me wrong, I'm still for blasting assholes who live in ways contrary to the way the admonish others to live, but still think, the new direction should be about enjoying life.

It is a short ride and we should make sure we ensure it is the most enjoyable ride that we can make it.

Screw Jon and Kate and Plus 8

I don't know about anyone else, but the attention this show is receiving is really pissing me off. I don't watch this garbage, but for some reason my kids have grown attached to it. From my understanding, it started off as an interesting show about a couple with eight children. Now it seems to have turned into a soap opera with adult content.

Evidently, on Monday, these two whiny hacks are going to make some sort of statement about the future of their marriage and next, countless American parents will have to discuss this crap with their children because two, infantile parents can't get their shit together.

And think of what this says about the integrity of Jon and Kate and family values and their lack of concern of them.

This show should have been canceled at the first hint of marital trouble, but like with all America media, if blood shows, it's prime time.

Fascinating man and Dept of I've Told You So....

The current issue of the New Yorker profiles a crime reduction program created by a man named David Kennedy (you can go to the link and and see a short video, but have to register at the New Yorker to read the entire article online. It will be worth it).

Not too long ago, this man the findings of this man and his program were written about in Newsweek magazine.

(One branch of Kennedy's program has been named "CeaseFire" but from the New Yorker article, this is not the same "CeaseFire" program the city of Peoria has been utilizing. The article briefly compares the two and points out the differences - so, Billy, don't be yammering to take credit for bringing the topic of "CeaseFire" to the city of Peoria).

After reading the article, it seems like this man is a custom fit for Peoria.

As for the Dept of I've Told You So - for anyone who has followed this blog for some time, my views on the creation of so-called, problem solving "Blue Ribbon Panels" is well know. They are mostly worthless and are created mainly to stroke the egos of the few people involved.

People in this area bitched and moaned about Peoria County State's Attorney Kevin Lyons not participating in Mayor Ardis' "Blue Ribbon Panel" on crime. He clearly stated how it was a waste of time and he was correct.

I mention this because David Kennedy does involve people in his program from all walks of life and the difference between his "Blue Ribbon Panel" and the typical "Blue Ribbon Panel" is that his people know what the hell they are doing. It is a true "Blue Ribbon Panel" and not a grouping of people selected just because their egos need some stroking.

So that is why I state, "I've Told You So."

Read the piece, it's worth it. And it's worth sending to any influential person in this area.

A heart breaking story...

Check out this story from Texas Monthly. Still Life by Skip Hollandsworth about the life of a young, high school football star who years ago was paralyzed during a game. It details his and his family's life afterward. A wonderful story that should stay with you.

Also, check out other articles by Hollandsworth. He's a pretty darn good writer.

Isn't it so "funny"......

Well, another of the moralistic, Defense of Marriage, conservative male figures is in some trouble over, well, a little bit of lack of morality and indefensible acts of marriage.

It seems conservative Republican Sen. John Ensign seems to have a common affliction that so many other conservative politicians seem to have and that is keeping their pants up.

Now, why is this so funny? Well, for a couple of reasons it is. For one, here is just one more self-proclaimed, moralistic jackass again not living up to the standards he preaches and demands upon others. Yes, this man is another one of the Defense of Marriage crowd that just can't seem to live up to their own standards. Not only that, new details are emerging every day about how he may have been being extorted for his affair. Hm. I always thought that this sort of "blackmail" was only supposed to happen to gay people?

Seriously, though, as long as someone does not preach or demand others live to a certain ideal and no one is being harmed and acts are of a consensual nature, I don't care if they sleep with the same sex, both sexes, animals or knotholes in fences and trees.

But when these moralistic assholes get up and demand people live a certain way that they don't, well, they get what they deserve. Especially when these jerks write legislation dictating standards when it comes to American lives.

Oh, and get this last one Ensign: guess who he demanded resign after light of his own affair was made public? Yep, the Clenis.

God, I'm a liberal but...

In a recent Peoria Journal Star article, residents of the Taft Homes were remarking about their concerns of the future of their public housing. One resident made this comment,

"This is like a home to me. Once you get out there, it's hard," said 44-year Taft resident Debber Irby, who hopes she is not one of the residents who is relocated. "Things are changing every year, and you have to live with the changes and not sit in the same ways. (Residents) can start by getting involved."

Notice, the person is a 44 year resident of the Taft Homes.

Another person quoted in the article points out that residence in the Taft Homes was not meant to be permanent.

As I age, I can understand how people become economically more conservative in their views. Many of us do work hard for our money and it become very hard to remain compassionate when one hears how a 44 year old person argues he or she should remain subsidized. Especially, when this same person admits how things are changing and one should not have to live with the changes and not sit in the same ways.

Really, I am all for helping out those in need. I am all for providing avenues for those in need of help, because we all benefit from the more that are helped. But on the other hand, I can understand how people are upset about a person stating it's okay to live a life in public housing.

Evidently, Luciano has immersed himself in his work....

Is there anyone else out there that still does not believe the local media does not take care of its own?

It seems as if poor, ole PJS columnist Phil Luciano has went on a binge of immersing himself in his "work." Evidently, from the number and pace of his recent columns in the PJS, increased writing apparently is his coping skill from his recent tavern escapade. Not that I'm knocking that. What I'm trying to do is point out the hypocrisy of the local media when it comes to behavior like this and the coverage of their own.

Does anyone else out there really believe if any other locally, well-known person had done the same sort of thing Luciano had done, that the same sort of media vacuum would exist for them?

Imagine if our well-tanned mayor went off half-cocked at his local tanning salon because his tanning time was mistakenly cut short. Or if Gary Sandberg went into a pet store and became upset because the store was out of his preferred parrot feed. Do people think items such as these would go unnoticed?

Hell, I think it's fair to state, the first person to write a column about such things would be that of Luciano. (And don't get me wrong, I do not think Luciano should write a column about his own incident because our obviously temper-free local prosecutor surely wouldn't use that against him, now would he?)

It just comes down to, while the media is fond to say most things are for the right of them to report on for the public to know, those things that are not for public consumption are items that involve them and their lives.

Contradictions...

-Last night, Keith Olbermann of MSNBC made an interesting point when it comes to the recent assassination of a doctor who performed abortions.

By use of past video, he showed numerous examples of FauxNews' Bill O'Lielly in the past, calling for the head of this assassinated doctor. O'Lielly was seen calling this man "Tiller the Baby Killer" and all sorts of other names.

Then, he illustrated how O'Lielly is also fond of making claims that he or verbal bomb throwers like so many of those found on FauxNews, have no control over the behaviors of people. And then, Olbermann, again using past statements and evidence, showed how people like O'Lielly made other comments that mere spoken words of people can influence the behavior of others.

So which is it? On the one hand these people blab on about "free will" and out of the other side of their mouths they moan how talking about sex will make young people want to have sex, while talking about drug use will educate. So which is it?


-On to Obama's selection of Sonia Sotomayor for consideration to the Supreme Court. In a very lengthy speech, too long for most conservatives to bother reading, she is talking about race, ethnic background and judges. In this speech she points out that while some have pointed out white Supreme Court justices have made landmark rulings regarding discrimination that have been beneficial to minorities, these justices have made these decisions after the case was argued before them by people of color, like Throgood Marshall.

In her lengthy speech, there is this line,

“… I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”

Of course, white people who can't read beyond that of a cartoon caption or anything more than two complete sentences, are taking the meaning of this single sentence to mean this woman believes ALL Latina women know better than ALL people in ALL circumstances.

This clearly is not her intent. Oh, but wait, it gets better.

With this sentence, white male conservatives, you know, the Number One Whiners in America, now claim there is proof this women is anti-white by a recent court case she sat before. This court case involves a white fire fighter who busted his ass to get promoted. This fire fighter is a truly admirable person and took enormous measures to get promoted.

Unfortunately, under a current law, the test was thrown out and then the legality of the law questioned in a lawsuit filed by the firefighter. Through the court process, the legality of the law was argued and the judges involved agreed the law as written was legal. So the law was upheld.

So, Judge Sotomayor, along with other judges, agreed the legislative crafted law was legal and upheld the law and to do so, she is now called "anti-white."

But if she were to have stricken the law, guess what? Oops...she would have become a dreaded "judicial activist" that the conservatives just hate.

So which is it? Because she did not become a "judical activist" she is anti-white?



where she believes a she

Screw "Concealed Carry" - Let's go all in - Everyone should show 'em

I just love it when craven politicians with good tans, like our mayor, throw out oodles of meat to the rabid meat eaters when certain topics become newsworthy. His recent comments about how Peoria should be a pilot city for "concealed carry" is just one more of his ventures into the land of public popularity.

Frankly, even though I own more guns than most people, I'd still like to see fewer guns out there on the public streets. Still, this debate over "concealed carry" is just one more debate driven by emotion filled people based on illogical thoughts, who then toss out wild ass opinions left and right without daring to really look at this subject with the reasoned brain filled of evidence and fact.

Again, instead of using examples of incidents more likely to occur, we find ourselves in a debate driven by people throwing out "24"-like scenarios to make their point. Too often, those fond of the mythical days of the old west have dreams of being in that saloon when Black Bart comes to town so he or she can put one right through his ticker with his or her handy firearm.

But enough of that. If we are going to start arming people, then let's screw "concealed carry." Pass a law where if a citizen carries a firearm in public it has to be out in open. Let's put them out there plain as day. People around here talk about fantasies of deterrence caused by the knowledge of no one knowing who has a piece and who doesn't. Shit. Let's remove all doubt. Let's go all in on this one. Not only that, think of the boost in the economy. More people will have to buy holsters. No more tossing that handgun in the purse or tucking it in a person's plumber's crack. Hell, holster manufacturers can start a new craze of accessorizing holsters. We can have the Merle Norman Special Holster that doesn't ruin the curve lines. The Air Jordan Holster that is light and less bulky. The Lugz Special. Hell, how about the Field and Stream holster with stamped figures of ducks and deer into the leather for the family sportsman.

See, I would rather know exactly who was carrying a firearm when I'm out there shopping for a variety of reasons. Mainly, so I know who to stay the fuck away from because the firearm skills of most Americans are pretty atrocious.

Hell, just ask Dick Cheney's former hunting buddy who was shot in the face by Cheney.

Bad Pro-Life/Pro-Choice numbers

Remember not long ago how a lot of the media was reporting the US had reportedly became more pro-life than pro-choice? Gallup had reported in a survey, 51% of those polled stated they were pro-life, while only 42% stated they were pro-choice.

The typical response to surveys like this is to merely repeat the numbers, rather than examine the numbers and ignore any sort of methodology issues. Now it is being reported that Republicans were over-represented in the poll and the numbers not properly weighted to deal with this over-representation.

Really, is it possibe for white, male conservatives to whine any more?

I have never seen a group of self-promoting tough men cry and whine more than the white, male conservative crowd. Where is Arnold when it's obvious this group of pansies needs a good old fashioned slap across their "girly-men" faces?

Everything from economics, to sexual matters, to politics is fair game for this group of crybabies, when it comes to how unfair the big, bad world is to them. And to top it off, the way they make it sound, their privileged class is one of minority status and they've been victims for years.

What even makes all of this more disgusting is in the age of YouTube and Google, every single time they open their mouths about some sort of white, male, conservative victimization, a glaring example is found of them doing the exact same thing!

For example, they cry because a Latina woman remarks about her life will add more insight to her decisions than that of just a white male. Oops. Can't say that now, can she? Well, look to the Internet and guess what? Yep, a male conservative judge has uttered the same type of statement.

Now, these crybabies are bitching because Obama picked a Latina woman for the next Supreme Court position just because she was a Latina woman. Oh, and like Bush didn't select Clarence "Never ask a question" Thomas because he was a black male?

And hell, let's throw in some good ole torture whine, too. Has anyone else noticed that the biggest promoters of torture are among the biggest pussies as well? What is up with that bizarre shit? Dick Cheney.....Rush Limpball....Lindsay Graham....Sean Hannity....et cetera. What kind of major disconnect do these pussies have? Didn't their mommies love them enough?

As others like to say, I'd like to give these asses some cheese with their whine, but they'd probably cry about that, too.