Berry's World
Saturday, October 18, 2003

If you’re like me, you're white, a little over 6'1, and you would be hard pressed to change your own oil. You are also frustrated due to the sparseness of posts on Passenger Pachyderms. Frankly, Nichole has become like an evil drug dealer. She goes and gets me hooked, and then when I'm jonesing for a Fat Alan update, she's nowhere to be found. Well, I won't stand for it a second longer!

Oh, who am I kidding? Just like with my coke dealer, no matter how mad I get, whenever the next post shows up, all will be forgiven.

Like many Americans, I've long had a strong admiration for Winston Churchill. I have an English friend who enjoys throwing Churchill in my face whenever we talk politics, and my only comeback is to imagine how great he really would have been if only he had been all American rather than merely half.

Watching the PBS documentary tonight, I picked up another amusing tidbit about Churchill that I hadn't heard before. When ending his calls with President Roosevelt, Churchill would say 'KBO'. His secretary dutifully wrote 'KBO' at the end of each call until a General told her she didn't have to write that down and asked her if she knew what it meant. When she answered in the negative, he told her what 'KBO' meant:

'Keep buggering on'.

Something that tickles me no end is the amount of comments that show up at the busy blogs, like The Daily Kos or CalPundit, or Atrios. Take this post (for fairness sake, I just took the latest post at Kos). It concerns General Wesley Clark, which, admittedly, is a pretty hot topic right now. However, at the time of this typing, there are 173 comments attached to it.


What I can't for the life of me figure out is what is going on in the head of the173rd commenter. Do they think that anybody, and I mean ANYBODY reads beyond the first 10 or 20 comments? OK, maybe on a rainy day, somebody gets bored and reads maybe 50 or 60 comments. But 173rd?

And does commenter 173 think that their special take on the topic hasn't been posted at least 3 times in the previous 172 comments? Of course it has, but commenter 173 is like the rest of us and didn't read them all.

October 5th, 2003--California Attorney General Bill Lockyer (D) says that due to the myriad charges made by women in the state, recall candidate Arnold Schwarzenegger should volunteer for a state investigation, whether or not he is elected.

October 7th, 2003---California Attorney General Bill Lockyer (D) votes for Arnold Schwarzenegger (R).

Since it's almost the Thanksgiving season, I thought I would share one of the things I am thankful for. Number one on my list is that there will soon be a halt to the media stories about David Blaine. Blaine is the pinhead who is suspended in a see through box and going without food for 44 days.

Blaine, who claims to be making an 'artistic statement', is just plain weird. By the way, what kind of statement can he be making other than he is desperate for publicity? Of course, as weird as Blaine is, his girlfriend's family history is even more bizarre, although, you do have to give her some props for throwing an egg in the face of a guy who threw a half dozen eggs at Blaine's box.

In this kind of situation, I think the people of England should be entitled to vote that Blaine stays up there another 44 days.

After his nationwide appeal for a new laptop was fulfilled within minutes last week, Atrios kicked it up a notch by adding a two bedroom house to his Amazon wish list, and a generous reader made the blogger's dream come true by purchasing it for him this afternoon. The two bedroom, two bathroom, twin car garage house is located in the beautiful city of Coatesville, Pa, and the Atrios clan is expected to move in within a month.

Atrios was his usual gracious self when informed of the windfall. "Yeah, I got the house, but what about the Bentley Continental? Didn't somebody get me the Bentley?" asked a bemused Atrios. "I swear, if those tightwads don't come through on the Bentley I'm going to have to threaten to quit blogging."

While the Bentley Continental remains on Atrios' wish list, it is expected to be purchased and presented to Atrios within days.

CalPundit points to a story in the LA Times detailing efforts to reverse the law allowing illegal immigrants to obtain drivers licenses. CalPundit is against it, mainly, because he's anti-initiative. Despite the bleating from people in favor of reversing the law which was signed into being late in Gray Davis' prematurely terminated term as Governor, this is really about something else.

This is about some white people not wanting brown people in their state.

Listen to the arguments being made by the folks supporting the reversal: they boil it down to 'national security'. They point to the fact that the terrorists who attacked America on 9-11 used drivers licenses to board their ill-fated flights.

The driver's license and the matricula consular (an ID card issued by the Mexican Consulate) "are nothing but free passes for terrorists, folks," (Barbara) Coe said. "They're chuckling. Thirty bucks and they're home free."

Coe is one of the co-authors of the blatantly racist Proposition 187, the successful ballot initiative that barred illegal immigrants from public schools, clinics and other services.

That argument falls flat on it's ass when you learn that of the 19 highjackers of 9-11, a grand total of ZERO entered the country illegally, and they were all known to the Immigration and Naturalization Service who did nothing about them.

So, now we have had drilling in Alaska, cutting taxes, and out and out racism draped by the curtains of 'national security'.

If you get your news from the internet, you might get the feeling that God is really, really busy. For example, He’s got to decide when Pope John Paul should hang up the spikes:

VATICAN CITY, Oct. 18 — An emotional Pope John Paul said on Saturday he intended to stay on as head of the Roman Catholic church “as long as God wants” and said he and Church leaders should proclaim their faith to their “dying breath.”

And He keeps his hand is presidential politics:

"George Bush was not elected by a majority of the voters in the United States," Army Lt. General William G. "Jerry" Boykin told an Oregon congregation. "He was appointed by God."

Of course, once He elected President Bush, He decided to manipulate the President’s puppet strings:

"God told me to strike at al-Qaida and I struck them, and then He instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me, I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them."

But, He is not only involved with major events. If you wondered why Lee Simpson, who is carrying a cross across America, decided to head to Florida, well there’s an easy answer:

"This is the route God told me to take,"

And, apparently, He likes his music. Why did former heroin addict Billy Aaker start the hard rockin’ Christian-music band Sacred Faith?

"This all started because God told me to after I got clean off heroin," Billy Aaker said. "This loud voice came in the room, man. And He said 'Sing for me.'"

Now I’ll be the first to admit that I’m not the most religious person in the world, and I’m not saying that God didn’t have the above conversations, but the God I envision isn’t this much of a busybody.

For those of you who lost all hope when Jerry Springer decided that, despite his grassroots support, he would not seek the position of Ohio Senator, lift your heads up. Jerry is pondering a run got Ohio's Governor in 2006! The only down side is that he would end his TV show if he decides to run.

Tim Russert: Our issues this Sunday: For most of the summer and the fall, Washington has been abuzz because self-proclaimed ‘Ambassador’ Joseph Wilson has made wild accusations that his wife, who he claims works or worked for the CIA, has been ‘outted’ by revered columnist Robert Novak. Department of Justice officials have had to take time away from chasing terrorists to look into the matter. President Bush has even been asked about it. Now, Washington insiders are speaking out:

(Videotape, July 6, 2003):

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay: "No one's covering anything up. No one's obstructing anything,"

(End videotape)

Russert: And this:

(Videotape, October 14, 2003):

Syndicated Columnist Robert Novak: “I’ve said all along, it was a typo. This is a typical Washington scandal. The Democrats want to create something to take the country’s focus off of the good news coming out of Iraq.”

(End videotape)

Russert: Why would someone who loves his country, as ‘Ambassador’ Wilson claims he does, want to slander some of Washington’s key insiders? We’ll ask him. Why is ‘Ambassador’ Wilson sliming one of America’s great columnists? We’ll ask him. And finally, why won’t ‘Ambassador’ Wilson release his tax returns, voting records, credit records, and college transcripts? Again, we’ll ask him. And in our political roundtable, why has ‘Ambassador’ Wilson thrown away his remaining credibility by making such scurrilous charges? Insights and analysis from David Broder of The Washington Post, Ron Brownstein of the Los Angeles Times and Dana Priest of The Washington Post. But, first, ‘Ambassador’ Wilson, welcome to Meet the Press.

Wilson: Um,…Good morning, Tim, nice to be with you.

Russert: ‘Ambassador’ Wilson, you saw the opening. Some pretty serious charges being leveled at you. How do you respond?

Wilson: To which one, Tim? You’ve really thrown the kitchen sink at me here.

Russert: I notice you didn’t answer the question, ‘Ambassador’. OK, I’ll play your game. What is the basis of the clear and obvious personal grudge you hold against Robert Novak?

Wilson: Well, I really don’t have anything against Mr. Novak, I’m simply…

Russert: Didn’t you say you wanted to see Robert Novak ‘frog-marched’ out of the offices of the Chicago Sun Times?

Wilson: No, I said I wanted to see Karl Rove frog-marched…

Russert: So you admit that you used the phrase ‘frog-marched’?

Wilson: Yes, but I was speaking about…

Russert: So, now it’s Novak and Karl Rove you want frog-marched out of their respective offices?

Wilson: No, I originally said that I wanted…

Russert: Let’s move on. ‘Ambassador’ Wilson, can you prove that your wife ever actually worked for the CIA?

Wilson: Well, I think that by now it’s common knowledge that she does work for the CIA. I didn’t bring her pay stubs if that’s what you are looking for.

Russert: So, even though you were coming on the most watched program in the history of all mankind, you didn’t think that you should back up your defamatory charges in front of the American people? A bit disrespectful of you, wouldn’t you say?

Wilson: Hey, I think we are way off course here.

Russert: Perhaps you should have considered that before you started slandering anybody who got in your way.

Wilson: I haven’t slandered anybody. I have brought to the attention of the American people that a crime was committed by somebody in the White House, and I expected the press to be able to get to the bottom of it.

Russert: ‘Ambassador’ Wilson, let me ask you the question that everybody wants me to ask. Have you cheated on your wife? Character’s an issue. Have you strayed outside your marriage?

Wilson: What in God’s name…

Russert: We’ll note for the record that like Bill Clinton, another famous adulterer, you refuse to answer. ‘Ambassador’ Joseph Wilson, we thank you for sharing your views.

Wilson: What, that’s it?

Russert: Coming next, the political roundtable. Key analysis on ‘Ambassador’ Wilson’s credibility, an update on Governor Schwarzenegger’s soaring approval ratings, and discussion of the repeal of the 22nd Amendment, allowing President George W. Bush virtually an unlimited number of terms in office. It’s all coming up next on Meet The Press.
Friday, October 17, 2003

I doubt anybody felt any sympathy for Halliburton when they announced they would report lower than expected results in the third quarter. In fact, I would imagine that most people would be at a loss to explain how a company that is perpetrating one of the most massive frauds on the United States could actually not be swimming in money.

Leaving aside the fact that they are the recipients of 'no-bid' contracts that will reap billions of dollars for the company, Halliburton is also, basically, stealing money from you and me.

Take the gas they are transporting to Iraq, (This ain't tricky so don't think you need to run for a calculator). Halliburton buys a gallon of gas in Kuwait for about 70 cents. They move it into Iraq and sell it for about 4 cents. And they bill the United States taxpayers about $1.59 for that gallon. And this is just one scam we know of.

Hey, I know less about business than, well, anyone, and even I know that it takes a special brand of stupidity to have this type of profit margin and still not have the accountants doing cartwheels.

The sad thing is that, despite President Bush's lipservice about 'corporate responsibility', until we see some of these thieves doing hard time in federal prisons, nothing will change.

I've been accused of being blindly loyal to the Democratic Party. This may be due to the fact that I consider myself a 'yellow dog Democrat'. That means that in an election between a Republican and a yellow dog, I'll vote for the yellow dog. In fact, I've never voted for a Republican in my life, although regular readers know that I came very close to voting for Green Party candidate Peter Camejo in the recent recall election.

I don't think I am 'blindly loyal' to the Democratic Party, but I have my eyes wide open when it comes to the Republican Party. Unlike a vast majority of Republicans, I think that occasionally some things are more important than money. That being said, I find myself in a position where I agree with the Republicans on an important issue.

Of the 80+ billion dollars being sent to Iraq, some 10 billion dollars is being debated as to whether it should be a grant or a loan. I'm a big believer in the 'you broke it, you bought it' school of thought, and therefore I'm going to stand with the Republicans and say the money should be a grant, and not a loan.

So there. I've found an issue where I stand with the Republicans. Of course, it took the Republicans turning around on the issue of foreign aid for it to happen.

Writing a blog with a somewhat political bent, I have found myself with a respect problem. Sometimes when writing about a political topic, I find myself referring to a political candidate or elected official by their first name. As in "Joe Lieberman said..." or "Bill Clinton used to..."

This is a problem for me since I was raised by my parents to only call somebody by their first name after they invite you to do so. I can still remember a friend of my dad's coming over and after being introduced to Dave Gordon, I blurted out "Nice to meet you, Dave." The evil eye from my dad quickly caused me to say 'Oooops, sorry. Nice to meet you, Mr. Gordon."

Because of that, I am announcing that I am going to make a special effort to be respectful to the subjects that I write about. I will refer to the President as President Bush and not George W. Bush. I'm sure I will occasionally slip up, and you can feel free to correct me when I do.

I know this may sound rather goofy, and it may very well be, but I'll feel better trying to be more respectful. Further, bringing even a tiny bit more respect to the political discourse can't be a bad thing, right?

Ashton Kutcher has thrown his considerable political muscle behind North Carolina Senator John Edwards. In what is a surprising political coup, Edwards can now count on the support of millions of 16 and 17-year-old girls in the 2004 Presidential election.

Considering how deperate the movie industry is for bad ideas, how long until the Cubs' 'Foul Ball' incident is turned into a movie?

Don't worry, it's in the works.

The Boston Red Sox continue to learn who they shouldn't mess with. Since they STOLE a World Series appearance from my beloved Angels in 1986, they have yet to return to the promised land.

Beantowners, how do you like Dave Henderson now?
Thursday, October 16, 2003

Tim Dahlberg of the AP considers the totality of the Kobe Bryant case and comes to the earth shattering conclusion that both Kobe's and his accuser's reputations will take a beating.

I should have come up with that one.

Oh, that's right, I did. A mere 3 months ago.

Glenn Reynolds thinks I have been a little tough on Kevin McCullough, and asks if I am in the same kind of 'tizzy' over what he feels is a misleading passage in Maureen Dowd's column. I tried to explain that there is no reason for me to be upset with Dowd, as I was almost sure she was a Democrat.

All kidding aside, Instapundit has a good point.

Here's what Dowd wrote:

The president has tried to shake off the curse with a P.R. push to circumvent the national media and get smaller news outlets to do sunny stories about Iraq.

The P.R. campaign shamelessly included bogus cheerful form letters sent to newspapers, supposedly written by soldiers in Iraq.

Dowd seems to imply that President Bush is behind the phoney letters being printed in newspapers all over America. From everything I've read, the letter writing scam was dreamed up and implemented by a battalion commander in Iraq, and President Bush has no culpability whatsoever.

Like anybody who makes an error, Dowd should correct it.

Los Angeles Councilman Jack Weiss has introduced legislation to ban smoking on public beaches. Weiss claims that smoking on the beach causes a health hazard due to 'second hand smoke'. All due respect to somebody who has risen to the exalted position of 'Councilman', but Weiss has clearly gone mad. Smoking outside allows the smoke to dissipate and not be breathed in by a second party. Of course, if Weiss realized this, he wouldn't get any face time on the local news.

Kevin McCullough is heard 2 to 5 p.m. EST on 570 WMCA and 970 DJ in New York City. Kevin is a past recipient of the Marconi and Tesla broadcasting awards, an internationally syndicated columnist, and the author of the upcoming book, "Men That Every Man Should Be!" Kevin recently sat down with me to discuss the current state of presidential politics in America.

ME: Kevin, thank you for taking time to talk to me.

MCCULLOUGH: No problem, it’s my pleasure.

ME: So, Kevin, you seem to think that there are some serious problems in the Democratic Party. What are they?

MCCULLOUGH: Well, just take a look at the Democratic candidates for President. You have a closet homosexual in Howard Dean, a convicted child molester in Wesley Clark, a current welfare recipient in Carol Mosley Braun, a guy who leads a car theft ring in his off time in Al Sharpton, and a registered Nazi in John Kerry. If that group of anti-American liberals doesn’t tell you that the country is heading to hell in a hand basket, nothing will.

ME: Those are some pretty serious charges. Do you have any documentation to back them up?

MCCULLOUGH: Clearly everything I’ve said has been well documented, but covered up by the mainstream media. I know for a fact that Tom Brokaw stole the arrest and conviction paperwork on Clark from my backpack. By the way, Clark was never in the military. Have you ever seen any proof he was a general?

ME: You mean aside from the uniform I’ve seen him wear?

MCCULLOUGH: Uniform, schmooniform. My 7-year-old nephew wore a more authentic army outfit on Halloween.

ME: Well, they always introduce him as a General on CNN.

MCCULLOUGH: Those commie pinkos wouldn’t know a military man if he came up and bit them in the ass, which is clearly what Clark would like to be doing to every small boy in America.

ME: You mentioned that Howard Dean is a ‘closet homosexual’, but isn’t he married?

MCCULLOUGH: (Laughs) That’s a bigger beard than Sebastian Cabot wore on Family Affair. Let me tell you, if Dean is elected, he will make homosexuality mandatory in several states.

ME: Wow, you seem kind of tough of homosexuals. Isn’t conservative icon Andrew Sullivan homosexual?

MCCULLOUGH: Oh, he is not, That’s more of your liberal media spin.

ME: You mentioned that Carol Mosley Braun is currently receiving welfare. Do you have any proof of that?

MCCULLOUGH: Well, she’s black right? Case closed.

ME: But, not all African Americans are receiving welfare, right?

MCCULLOUGH: Oh Keith, you’re so naïve.

ME: But what about Sharpton. You claim he is running a car theft ring.

MCCULLOUGH: Well, he’s so busy with stealing cars and dealing drugs he doesn’t have time to fill out the welfare paperwork. Trust me, if he needed the money, he’d be living off of welfare.

ME: Kevin, I have to tell you, this seems awfully unbelievable to me.

MCCULLOUGH: That’s because you don’t read NewsMax, or WorldNetDaily. If you ever paid attention to the actual journalists in this country rather than your CNN or NY Times you’d know the truth.

ME: You mentioned that John Kerry was a Nazi…

MCCULLOUGH: Yeah, and we have the proof of that too, but what burns my apple is that while Kerry runs around the country saying Sieg Heil at every opportunity, all the mainstream media wants to talk about is Arnold Schwarzenegger saying he admired Hitler. Even somebody like you has to see the double standard, right?

ME: Not really, no. It seems like you just made up these charges so that you…

MCCULLOUGH: That’s it, this interview is over. You’re no better than that criminal Terry Gross.

(Writer's note: Partial retraction on my above interview with Kevin McCullough: I incorrectly quoted both myself and Kevin McCullough. The lack of accuracy occurred because I did not wait to review the audio of the media session in which Mr. McCullough and I didn’t interact. Upon reflection, I should have waited for the original audio so as to quote the parties involved as accurately as possible. Based on the audio of the media session, it is clear that McCullough and I never actually spoke to each other.)
Wednesday, October 15, 2003

So I tune in for The West Wing tonight and it's not on! That mindless Law and Order: Criminal Intent, starring the cherubic and utterly dull Vincent D'Onofrio, is on instead. I hate to pick nits here, but is it too much to ask that NBC show what they say they are going to show?

You have to believe that the Cubs fan, who will be forever known as 'the foul ball guy', has got to be nervous, don't ya? How long until a brain-dead Chicago native issues the first death threat?
BOYCOTT (some but not all of) HOLLYWOOD

I've been wandering around a rather silly and simpleminded website called Boycott Hollywood, mainly because I was amused that they are pleased that one of Hollywood's biggest stars, Arnold Schwarzenegger, was elected Governor.

It turns out that Boycott Hollywood doesn't really want you to boycott Hollywood, but only boycott certain parts of Hollywood. Sound confusing? Well, not really when you consider that they helpfully offer a list of Hollywooders they like, and another list of Hollywooders they don't like.

Among the Hollywood types you can feel free to be fond of (referred to as Hollywood Patriots):

Dennis Miller, James Woods, Bruce Willis, Drew Carey and so on.

Of course some Hollywood Patriots may have never actually stepped foot in Hollywood. Such as:

Charlie Daniels-country music singer, Buzz Aldrin-astronaut, George Brett-former Kansas City Royal, Jeff Kent-current Houston Astro, Jim Bunning-former NY Yankee and current U.S. Senator from Kentucky, and, of course, Tiger Woods-golfer.

Is it possible that Boycott Hollywood doesn't have the same definition of Hollywood that the rest of the thinking world does?

The other day, Glenn Reynolds, or Instapundit as he is known by his intimates, posted a rather scurrilous attack on the character of actor Ed Asner, based upon the musings of both Andrew Sullivan and Kevin McCullough. After reading through the basis for Reynolds' attack, I posted this lengthy rebuke suggesting that there was something about the story that just seemed wrong. I even sent a note to Reynolds alerting him to the possible problem.

Well, I never heard back from Reynolds, however, McCullough is now recanting his original story (scroll to the bottom of his column). McCullough claims he 'mis-quoted' BOTH himself and Asner, and feels that he maybe should have waited for a transcript of the exchange. Ya think?

Reynolds, by the way, is quick to place all of the blame at McCullough's doorstep, and refuses to accept any culpability. Come on, Glenn. You wouldn't put an unreliable witness on the stand, so shouldn't you look into the reliability of what you put on the blog?

UPDATE: I got an e-mail from Reynolds today who says that a problem with MSNBC's mail system prevented him from getting my original note, and I believe that. He chose not to address the issue of whether he should have been more careful to check the reliability of his accusation prior to posting it.

Back in the late 80's, I was hooked on the program Wiseguy. In fact, there were about 6 of us at work that were such big fans of the show that we felt had the right to call it 'Wiseass'. As in, 'You watch the Wiseass last night?' Our company's productivity took noticeable dips every Thursday morning as most of us would spend 2 or 3 hours dissecting the plot and character development of the previous nights episode.

I mention this as the first season of Wiseguy is now available on DVD, and NPR's The Treatment discussed the series with writer Eric Blakeney today.

So, I thought I might offer my own Wiseguy story. During the first season of Wiseguy, the late Ray Sharkey played an extremely memorable character named Sonny Steelgrave. Sharkey , by the way, was originally cast as David Addison on Moonlighting, before being replaced by Bruce Willis. On Wiseguy, Steelgrave was the mob boss who undercover federal agent Vinnie Terranova, played by Ken Wahl, was trying to bring down.

So, after discussing how much we liked Steelgrave at work, I decided to call Sharkey. I called the offices of Stephen J. Cannell and got the name and number for Sharkey's agent. I called the agent and did the only thing I could think of that might work; I lied.

I told Sharkey's agent that I was writing a story for the Sunday magazine of the Columbus Dispatch and wanted to interview Sharkey. The agent's main question was whether this was going to be a cover story. 'Of course it is!' I told him. So, he takes my home number down and says he will talk to Sharkey and see if he wants to do it.

A couple of days later, I answer the phone and it's none other than Ray Sharkey! I tried to ask him some questions that I thought a writer might ask, but eventually I was just asking the silly questions that a fan would ask. After about 10 minutes I think Sharkey started to catch on. Mainly because he said 'This isn't for an article, is it?"

'Oh, no. I lied about that. I just really like you on Wiseguy and wanted to talk to you.' I said.

There was dead silence for about 10 seconds, and then Sharkey broke out into laughter. He was awfully nice about things and talked to me for a few more minutes before saying he had to go.

Sharkey died of aids in 1993, and a lot of negative stories came out about him after his death. Whether they are true or not, I don't know, but I'll always remember the conversation we had.

How many times do you look at the TV listings and lament that there is nothing worth watching? Sadly, tonight there seems to be an embarrassment of riches as there is all kinds of good TV on tonight.

At 8PM, CBS has 60 Minutes II with a feature on the honesty (or lack thereof) of Colin Powell, and a talk with Howard Dean concerning his Presidential run.

At 8PM, NBC has Ed. 'Nuff said.

At 8PM, PBS has a 3 hour documentary on Churchill.

And, of course, at 9PM NBC has The West Wing.

Frankly, I have no idea what to do.

Of course, I'm speaking of the Cubs fan who tried to catch the foul ball who is being blamed for every problem in Chicago since Mrs. O'Leary's cow started the Great Chicago Fire 130 years ago.

I wouldn't hold anything against the guy. I mean he is a huge Cubs fan, by all reports, and he wants the Cubs to win. But how many baseball fans would quick-witted enough to stop themselves from going after that foul ball? Not many, says me.

Hopefully, the fans of Chicago will be as classy as Moises Alou:

Alou, the Cub leftfielder, says he hopes The Fan won't have to regret it for the rest of his life. Alou says, though he was upset at the time, he feels bad for the guy now.

But, for some reason, I doubt it.


What's the most powerful blog on the net? Well, while I would like to say Berry's World, I think it might just be Hoffmania.

Today Hoffmania complained that Media Whores Online was still MIA, and within hours MWO was back up with new material.

It just goes to show that nobody, and I mean NOBODY, wants to be on Hoffmania's bad side.
Tuesday, October 14, 2003

On a purely personal note, I wanted to mention what a pleasure it was to see Julia Sweeney guest star on tonight's Frazier. (Full disclosure: I've had a somewhat bizarre little crush on Sweeney for several years now.)

I was never a big fan of that whole Pat phenomenon, but as a man who lost his mother to cancer, I root for anybody who is diagnosed with that filthy, horrible disease.

I haven't seen her one woman show, "In The Family Way", and as I said, Pat was lost on me, but I'll never forget the absolutely, milk-through-the nose hilarious story Sweeney told on NPR concerning her younger days as a waitress who tended to play fast and loose with cash that eventually made it's way into her pocket under the title 'tips'.

Good for you, Julia! Here's hoping we see more of you.

This was posted the day after the recall election:

Schwarzenegger Celebrates, Davis Concedes

Californians banished Gov. Gray Davis just 11 months into his second term and overwhelmingly elected action hero Arnold Schwarzenegger to replace him Tuesday - a Hollywood ending to one of the most extraordinary political melodramas in the nation's history. "I will not fail you, I will not disappoint you, and I will not let you down," the victorious actor vowed.

As of 10/8/03 at 12:51 a.m.:

Arnold Schwarzenegger with 2,771,265 votes = 47.8 %
Cruz M. Bustamante with 1,884,339 votes = 32.5 %
Tom McClintock with 770,430 votes = 13.3 %

(stats via The California Secretary of State website.)

With Schwarzenegger and McClintock's votes combined, the Republican Party took 61% of the election in California. That does send a message, doesn't it? I watched Davis give his concession speech on FoxNews and kept waiting for him to thank the LATimes for their efforts.

Congratulations to the people of California, and to their new Governor and his family!

Where was this rather ordinary message posted? Right there at Boycott Hollywood, of course.

While watching The Chris Matthews Show on Sunday morning, I thought I heard Peggy Noonan take her personal brand of idiocy to staggering heights, and I've been waiting for the transcript to be posted since. It's up, and I heard her correctly. The panel is speaking of Schwarzenegger's assurance to Tom Brokaw that he would address the groping charges:

MATTHEWS: He told Tom Brokaw of NBC he'd deal with the charges of workplace misbehavior--that famous groping issue--after the election. Let's listen.

Mr. SCHWARZENEGGER: Soon as the campaign is over, I will--I can get into all of those kind of specifics and find out what is really going on. But right now, I'm just really occupied with the campaign.

MATTHEWS: As a journalist, Norah, isn't that the kind of issue that he's going to have to deal with? I mean, looking at it?

Ms. O’DONNELL: I think he will have to deal with it if the press continues to bring it up as an issue about his character. Character flaw. However, as a legal matter, it does not appear that any of these women will press charges or can press charges any longer, and so, legally, there isn't anything to keep the story going.

MATTHEWS: But politically, he made that commitment to Tom.

Mr. PAGE: Exactly. Exactly. We're talking about a broken promise here.


Mr. PAGE: He did make that commitment to Tom. We have it on tape. They can always play it back until--you know, he has not put that behind him because he did make that commitment.

MATTHEWS: Peggy. You're being quiet here. Does Arnold Schwarzenegger aggressively have to address this issue or can he say, `old news' and get away with it?

Ms. NOONAN: I don't think he can say `old news' as a number of people think he did the other day in leaving a news conference when he was pressed on this issue. I got to tell you. I got some mixed feelings on this. For one thing, you can tell the people of California just want him to do his job and work. They want to push this thing forward. One doesn't get any sense when one is out there, as we were, that they want to keep talking about this issue. However, he did promise to discuss it more in the future, and I think he also did say that he wanted to speak to the women involved in the allegations.

Mr. KLEIN : This is comical.

MATTHEWS: Well, I didn't hear that.

Ms. NOONAN: I suspect that he should. But I'll tell you one reason I don't think--even though you can play that tape of him saying `I'll talk about it later' over and over, I think the power--I think the media and the Democratic Party spent the 1990s saying, `None of this matters. You can do anything to women. We'll beat them up. We'll put private eyes on them if they come up and say that anything has been done.'

Mr. KLEIN: Wait a second. Wait, wait.

MATTHEWS: Wait a minute.

Ms. NOONAN: Excuse me. The media and the Democratic Party...

Mr. KLEIN: You can beat them up?

Ms. NOONAN: Well, as a matter of fact, Bill Clinton was literally charged with that. He was charged with worse things than Arnold. Of course, he was.

I've read a lot of reasons why people voted for Arnold Schwarzenegger in the recall election, and almost all of them are reasonable and to be respected, even though I disagree with them.

Marjorie Perloff of Pacific Palisades, however, shows that democracy comes with a price. That price is that even stupid people get to vote. In a letter to the LA Times, Perloff says she was totally against the recall until the groping charges against Schwarzenegger came out.

Think about that.

She wasn't going to vote for Schwarzenegger until he was accused of sexual harassment.

One can only imagine that if Schwarzenegger had killed somebody, she would have worked on his campaign.

OK, would you believe me if I told you that California Governor-Elect Arnold Schwarzenegger was having a mountain named after him?

Alright, what if I told you that the mountain wasn't in California, but was in Georgia?

Alright then, what if I told you the mountain was in Tbilisi, Georgia, which is in Asia?

As Paul Harvey likes to say, 'It's true'.

Point your browser to

After implying yesterday that I was a semi-expert in certain matters of trivia, several e-mailers demanded, not asked mind you, but demanded that I post a question or two for Berry's World readers (both of you) to answer. OK, but we'll start with a couple easy ones. Put your answers in the comments, and the winner will be announced tomorrow.

1) Uma Karuna Thurman was married to Gary Oldman, and after a divorce, married Ethan Hawke. She was discovered while acting in a school play entitled 'The Crucible'. While most men in America would give up certain body parts to get to know Uma in the biblical sense, outside of Pulp Fiction and apparently Kill Bill, she is not exactly known for being in great movies. While never having appeared on Seinfeld, Uma's phone number was featured in one episode. What Seinfeld character made a date with Uma Thurman?

2) The Ricardos and the Mertz' drove from New York to Hollywood, California. Along the way they had several wacky adventures, including a stop to square dance with Tennessee Ernie Ford, and a stop in Ethel's hometown to put on a variety show. After I Love Lucy was off the air, it was disclosed that William Frawley and Vivian Vance hated each other with a passion. Frawley went on to star in My Three Sons, while Vance starred in every Lucille Ball vehicle. What movie was Ricky Ricardo set to star in when the two couples reached Hollywood?

LEGAL DISCLAIMER: If two or more contestants answer all questions correctly, winner will be determined by random drawing. Winner of Berry's World Trivia Contest wins absolutely nothing. By entering, all contestants agree to give Berry's World full power of attorney in any and all legal actions involving Berry's World. Must be 18 or over to enter. Contestants in Utah or North Dakota add 10%.

I am sad to admit that I have never been to Mardi Gras, however, I have seen enough 'Girls Gone Wild' infomercials to understand that some women will flash their mcguffeys in exchange for a string of beads.

Now, I've noticed, at the end of The Jerry Springer Show when audience members are SUPPOSED to ask insightful questions of the guests, some women will also lift their tops for beads.

What I'm wondering is this: Are these special beads? Is there a blackmarket for these beads that I don't know about? What's up with these beads?

The Daily Howler is howling over a book review by Larry McMurtry, and boy, does the author of The Last Picture Show and Lonesome Dove have a filthy mouth.

But what tickled me was why McMurtry thought Richard Nixon was driven from office:

"The press chased off Richard Nixon over the cover-up of a trivial burglary..."

Golly, when you put it that way, it doesn't even sound criminal.
Monday, October 13, 2003

With 13 months until the election, President Bush is already in full media-bashing mode. Today he offered:

"There's a sense that people in America aren't getting the truth," he told Hearst-Argyle Television. "I'm mindful of the filter through which some news travels, and sometimes you just have to go over the heads of the filter and speak directly to the people."

If we're already getting this, how long until we hear that thunderously unsuccessful rallying cry:

"Annoy the Media. Reelect George Bush."

If I tell you something that somebody else said, that's hearsay. If I tell you that somebody told me that somebody said something, that's double hearsay.

Courts in this country don't allow, in most cases, even simple hearsay. Mainly because it's not very reliable. Of course, a weblog isn't bound by such rules regarding reliability, but one would think a law professor would still try to avoid it, right? Not in the case of Glenn Reynolds.

Reynolds blogged today that actor Ed Asner defended Joseph Stalin as 'hugely misunderstood', and further points out that Asner was 'specifically asked about figures he respected.' Where did Reynolds get this tidbit? Andy Sullivan, of course. So, where did Sullivan get it? From Kevin McCullough in a column on WorldNetDaily.

Well, after tracking this down, I find two interesting things. First, Reynolds statement about Asner being 'specifically asked about figures he respected' is misleading at best, and an out and out falsehood at worst. According to McCullough's column, Asner was allegedly asked:

"In your long and distinguished acting career, going back to your earliest days in Chicago all the way up to present days working with Will Farrell on 'Elf', you have had the chance to do almost anything you could ever wish to do. But if you had the chance to play the biographical story of a historical figure you respected most over your lifetime, who would it be?"

'What figures in history do you respect most?' is the question Reynolds seems to be implying that Asner was answering, not a far more complex query concerning who the actor would want to play.

Now, the answer:

"I think Joe Stalin was a guy that was hugely misunderstood," said Asner. "And to this day, I don't think I have ever seen an adequate job done of telling the story of Joe Stalin, so I guess my answer would have to be Joe Stalin."

A key word missing from his answer is respect. And I also would assert that this answer is not a defense of anybody. It sounds like an actor discussing a role he wouldn't mind playing.

Yeah, but, the question 'specifically' mentioned a figure he respected, I can hear you saying. But, is it possible that the 74-year-old actor didn't quite catch the whole question? I mean, the question went on and on like Texas, so the idea that an old man didn't hear every word can't be outside the realm of possibility, can it?

Further, is it possible that the question wasn't put to him exactly that way? Kevin McCullough is not exactly known for being fair and balanced (the true meaning of the phrase, not Fox's), and WorldNetDaily is not exactly known for its evenhandedness. For example, McCullough says you should not believe a word that comes out of Joseph Wilson's mouth because, among other things, 'He (Wilson) is obviously obsessed with his own self-importance', and 'Wilson has a weak affinity for U.S. interests.' Seriously.

I know I'm wearing my cynicism on my sleeve, but I have one more, better reason to doubt McCullough's claim: Go to Google and type in "Edward Asner" Stalin. You know how many news stories show up? 3. The original WorldNetDaily story, a letter to McCullough's weblog at, and story defending Rush Limbaugh on (In defense of NewsMax, at least they took the time to find out that Asner was talking about roles he wants to play.) My point is, if Asner had made such an inflammatory statement, wouldn't it be big news? Wouldn't it make it into at least one mainstream media outlet?

So, did Asner say Stalin , as a figure he respected, was 'hugely misunderstood'? I have no idea.

Should Reynolds have looked into the matter further before posting a misleading message on his blog? Absolutely.

Hmmm, maybe another terrorist attack? Being laid off? Losing your health insurance? President Bush being reelected? North Korea getting sloppy with a nuke or two?

Actually, from all the reading I've done today, Americans are most afraid of being called at dinnertime!

Americans in unison screamed out for protection, and our lawmakers got right on it. You could almost hear the murmurs coming out of the beltway. "Forget al-Qaida, never mind Iraq, we have to stop those telemarketers!" I was ready for Condi to say "We don't want the next phone call at dinner time to be a mushroom cloud".

So, the Do Not Call List was born, and has now been in effect for nearly two weeks. Do you feel better? Do you feel protected? Do you think that there has ever been a bigger boondoggle in the history of legislation?

Yes, I am part of the small but scrappy Anti-Do Not Call List crowd. On behalf of the three of us, I'd like to point out that you Pro-Do Not Call List folks have lost your minds!

Did we really need Federal Legislation and the President's signature to prohibit a lawful company from calling potential customers? Are telemarketing calls really such a menace that we should put up to 2 million under-employable Americans out of work? Has anybody ever just not answered the phone?

Oh well, practical thinking and common sense aside, America is safe again. No hard working, God fearing American will ever again have to go through the torture of the phone ringing just as they are shoveling another forkful of meatloaf in their mouths, right?

Not exactly.

You can still have dinner interrupted by a call from a charity. Or a fraternal organization. Or if you have an ongoing relationship with that company. Or a political candidate. Or a veterans group.

There's even more, but I have to run. The phone is ringing.

The Washington Post reports today that President Bush's 'No Child left Behind' plan isn't working as well as hoped. I couldn't disagree more, and this story proves it.

North Dakota State University's student government recently voted to keep 10 of the 200 student tickets to the NDSU/NDU football game. The student government will raffle off 190 tix to the regular, ordinary, run-of-the-mill, garden variety students, and the other 10 will be split up amongst the exalted, high-minded, elected members of the student government.

Further, after the vote, a member of the student government's executive committee attempted to get the school paper to keep the 10 ticket issue out of the paper.

Clearly, these students have learned quite a bit from the Bush Administration.

Like most people, I have my strengths and my weaknesses. If you're looking for a semi-expert on Seinfeld or The Simpsons trivia, I'm your guy. However, if you want somebody who can tell you how to fix cars, or understands economic and/or business principals, I'd look elsewhere if I were you.

Another subject that I don't feel well versed on is our long term goals in Iraq. For a subject like that, I turn to the likes of CalPundit, or Josh Marshall, or Robert Tagorda.

Tagorda publishes Priorities and Frivolities, which is one of the blogs I hit everyday, and he's also a writer who's been recently published in the San Francisco Chronicle and The American Spectator. In fact, if not for his love of the Los Angeles Dodgers and inexplicable affection for the 'brain' of Arnold Schwarzenegger, I would consider him one of the most reasonable bloggers on the net.

Robert and I have exchanged e-mails concerning our role in Iraq, and while he is thoughtful and convincing, he hasn't quite yet answered a concern of mine. That concern is this:

What happens after we leave Iraq?

I wonder, no matter how many local councils we set up, and no matter how may constitutions we write for the Iraqis, the day after we leave, can't they (and won't they) switch to whatever type of government they want? I mean, it is, after all, THEIR COUNTRY. So, after we're gone, couldn't they switch to an Iran-type government? And, if that's the case, how much money and how many lives do we want to invest before we allow the Iraqis to decide what sort of nation they want to be?

Robert patiently explained to me that we can't allow Iraq to become 'a safe haven for terrorists', which would make more sense to me if there were less terrorists in Iraq today than before we invaded.

Robert then steered me to this post, which is an interview with Josh Chafetz, who says that WE must write THEIR constitution so that, basically, they can't change it after we're gone. That makes sense, sort of, but I keep coming back to the idea that the Iraqis, and not us, should get to decide how their government will function. Hey, I'm a huge fan of democracy, but isn't it even remotely possible that the Iraqis don't want a democratic government?

Anybody that wants to clue me in, please feel free.
Sunday, October 12, 2003

Dr. Charles Krauthammer has a column in today's Washington Post that, basically, says that Iraq surely has WMD's but, surprisingly, Saddam Hussein hid them.

He takes a threory from Rolf Ekeus (apparently weapon inspectors who agree with the good Doctor are smart, and those that don't are dumb), combines that theory with the fact that David Kay's report that says while they haven't found the WMD's that we went to war over, they have found 'WMD-related program activities' and comes to the conclusion that Iraq does indeed have the WMD's we feared so much. It will just take a little time to find them, is all. (Josh Marshall knocks this softball out of the park in this post.)

What interested me was Krauthammer's reference to the U.N. Krauthammer doesn't care about the U.N. but some of us who 'have a weakness for legal niceties' will be interested to know that Kay's report shows a clear and convincing violation of U.N. Resolution 1441, and is a sure 'justification for the U.S. decision to disarm Saddam Hussein by force.'

Oh really?

From my read of 1441, the money paragraph is #12 which says:

12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;

Now I may be way off base here, but that paragraph says to me that when a report shows up that shows Iraq is in violation of the resolution, then the U.N. will convene to talk things over.

Here's where I get lost. Is Krauthammer saying that a report written AFTER the invasion can be used to show that 1441 was violated and therefore because 1441 was violated we then are legally justified to invade Iraq, which we have already done?

From 1942 to 1971, Jennings Randolph introduced legislation in both the House and the Senate to lower the minimum voting age from 21 to 18. It took eleven tries before it passed. In '71, it took the required 38 states just over two months to ratify the 26th Amendment, making it the fastest ratification in history, and made Jennings Randolph the "Father of the 26th Amendment".

Now there is a movement afoot to lower the minimum voting age even further. 18-year-old Laura Finstad is petitioning to lower the voting in her hometown of Takoma Park, Md.

"Young people have jobs, pay taxes, go to school to learn about government, and know about the issues," Finstad said. "We think 16 would be a fair age to be able to vote."

There are two very good reasons why young Miss Finstad is misguided.

First, if we allowed 16-year-old citizens to vote, they wouldn't do it. At least not in great numbers. Since the 26th was ratified, the 18-21 year-old voter turnout has decreased from 49.6% in 1972 to 32.4% in 1996, although the turnout did spike in 1992 to 41%. If 16 and 17-year-old voters could vote, the turnout would almost surely be even lower.

Second, most 16 and 17-year-old citizens are just too ignorant to have an informed opinion. I know, I know, I am totally and irrevocably biased, but deep down, inside, you know I'm right. Think about what you knew when you were 16 and 17. You, more than likely, were just like me and knew absolutely nothing about the issues of the day, or the candidates of the day. Now, everybody is going to say 'my nephew is 16 and he's on top of things...' or 'my neighbor's kid is 17 and he knows more than I do...', but the fact is, for every one 16 or 17-year-old that knows what is happening in the political arena, there are 50,000 that are absolutely clueless.

With all due respect to the memory of Jennings Randolph, I'd be all for repealing the 26th and returning the minimum voting age to 21. By the way, as an added incentive, if we repealed the 26th this guy couldn't vote.

Last week, President Bush commented on the Plame leak, and couldn’t go two questions without contradicting himself. At first he said:

But the Justice Department will conduct this investigation. The professionals in the Justice Department will be involved in ferreting out the truth. These are citizens who will -- were here before this administration arrived and will be here after this administration leaves. And they'll come to the bottom of this, and we'll find out the truth. And that will be -- that's a good thing for this administration. (Emphasis mine.)

To the next question he said:

Randy, you tell me, how many sources have you had that's leaked information that you've exposed or have been exposed? Probably none. I mean this town is a -- is a town full of people who like to leak information. And I don't know if we're going to find out the senior administration official. Now, this is a large administration, and there's a lot of senior officials. I don't have any idea. I'd like to. I want to know the truth. (Emphasis mine.)

These sort of contradictions do nothing to slow the momentum of the scandal. In fact, I would bet that reporters hearing this sort of nonsense double their resolve to get to the bottom of things.

So, why is the President stonewalling on this very serious issue?

Because he's stonewalled his entire life and gotten away with it his entire life. This is the first time in three years that the press has, well, pressed the President.

Drug problem?---Not gonna talk about it.

Enron and Kenny Boy?---Never met Mr. Lay.

Groped women on a movie set?---Lies! But, I'm sorry. (Wait, that's Arnold)

Can't find Osama bin Laden?---Look, over there, it's Saddam Hussein!

I think that President Bush believes, or has been told, that this deal will go away if he ignores it long enough. This is a big mistake. If the president would just find out whodunnit, and fire him or her, he would probably, in this upside down political climate, get credit for being a stand up guy. Instead, as long as he ignores it, this story is going to drip drip drip out every day, making the President look more and more guilty of hiding the culprit.

I'm starting to think that when they make the movie of President Bush's life, somewhere in the second hour there will be a scene like this:

H. R. Haldeman: Eight words back in '72. 'I covered up. I was wrong. I'm sorry'. The American public would have forgiven him. But we never opened our mouths, John. We failed him.

John Ehrlichman: Dick Nixon apologize? That will be the day. Most of his armor would fall off.

And he'll have nobody to blame but himself.

What in the name of Don Baylor is going on in Boston? How many acts of complete stupidity did we see in yesterday's game? By my count, 5.

1) Manny Ramirez, after taking a pitch that was barely in the same zip code as Fenway Park, starts screaming at Roger Clemens, and takes a couple of steps towards the mound, emptying both benches.

STUPIDITY RATING (Out of 10): 6---Manny, the Red Sox haven't won a World Series in 85 years. When you are this close, you don't start something for no reason.

2) During the mini melee, 109-year-old Don Zimmer charges Red Sox starting pitcher Pedro Martinez and is promptly tossed to the ground. In the press, Zimmer is getting sympathy due to his advanced age, and Pedro is portrayed as the bad guy. In a laughable observation, New York’s Mayor Michael Bloomberg said Martinez should have been arrested! Let me tell you something, if anybody charges anybody when tempers are flaring, he deserves what he gets, and I don't care how old he is. As far as I'm concerned, if Zimmer's wife, or even grandmother had charged me like Zimmer charged Pedro, I'd have done the same thing.

STUPIDITY RATING: 8---(It should be a 10, but I'm taking off 2 points due to Zimmer's advanced age) What the hell was Zimmer thinking? He's a little long in the tooth to be attacking a professional athlete, and besides, what did Pedro do? He was in the dugout when the whole thing started. And you don't carry grudges into the playoffs.

3) Seeing a fight in the Yankees bullpen between relief pitchers and a groundskeeper, New York right fielder Karim Garcia hops the fence to get in on the action. During this amazing act of courage, Garcia hurt his hand and had to leave the game.

STUPIDITY RATING: 10---What the fell was Garcia thinking? Did he think that the 12 or 15 Yankees in the bullpen couldn’t take care of themselves? I’m hoping that Garcia is hurt and can’t play in the rest of the playoffs. Hey, stupidity has its price.

4) Paul Williams, a groundskeeper for Boston, pretty much took a beating from Yankee relief pitcher Jeff Nelson and Garcia. By most accounts, Williams was openly rooting for the Red Sox when the brawl started.

STUPIDITY RATING: 10---There are certain things that you just don’t do, and one of them is root for the other team when you are sitting in a major league bullpen. Now, I’m not saying that Nelson and Garcia should have whipped him like a three egg omelet, but come on! How did he think the Yankees might react? He’s a groundskeeper for God’s sake. The players have their livelihoods on the line, but no matter what, Williams would have been back cutting the grass. He should have shut the hell up and just watched the game. If he wanted to cheer, he should have left the bullpen.

5) The Boston Police Department are asking for ‘witnesses’ to come forward before they decide if they will press charges against Nelson and Garcia.

STUPIDITY RATING: 8---Let’s see, in a park with 40,000 Red Sox fans, how many impartial witnesses do you think are going to come forward to give an accurate description of the fight? They should do themselves a favor and let the whole thing drop. The only person that will have a legitimate complaint MIGHT be Williams and he can always pursue matters in civil court.

Thomas Boswell writes that because of yesterday’s shenanigans, most people will root for the Yankees. This is mainly for the manhandling of Zimmer. While I disagree about who’s to blame for Zimmer hitting the turf face first, I am rooting for the Yankees.

I’m not so much rooting for the Yankees as much as I’m rooting against Boston. Being a fan of the Defending World Champion Anaheim Angels, I hold a personal grudge against the Red Sox. I won’t go into the whole thing here. I’ll merely say: 1986.

Last week I said that I thought Rush Limbaugh was getting a raw deal over his comments on ESPN. This week I mentioned that I was not gleeful over the news that Limbaugh was a drug addict. I knew that the reaction among my fellow Democrats might be negative, but I never imagined that I would get an e-mail like this:

Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2003 12:20:43 -0400
From: XXXXXXXXXXXXX | This is not spam | Add to Address Book
Subject: Re: Limbaugh
To: "Keith Berry"

Dear Keith,

What in the hell is wrong with you? Reading your website the last two weeks, it's quite obvious that you are some sort of 'ditto-head'. You defend Rush Limbaugh so much I have to wonder if you are on his staff.

My Lord, first you say he has a right to make racist statements on ESPN, and then you say that it's OK for Rush to have illegal drugs FedEx'd to him at anytime. When did you sell your soul to the devil and become a Republican?

To be honest, your website sickens me, and I will NEVER read it again. Why don't you do yourself a favor and just quit. Nobody wants to read your pro-Bush propaganda.



PS: Your brother wants to know if you are coming home for Thanksgiving.


As soon as the campaign is over I will— I can get into all of the specifics and find out what is really going on. But right now I’m just really occupied with the campaign.

Governor-Elect Schwarzenegger to Tom Brokaw


At his press conference Thursday, Schwarzenegger was asked as he exited the room about the allegations of inappropriate behavior toward women that dogged his campaign in the final days of the gubernatorial race.

"Old news," he replied and disappeared behind a blue curtain.


Powered by Blogger

Weblog Commenting and Trackback by