If the world is safer now that Saddam Hussein is caught, why are we still at yellow alert?

My friend J and her husband M have a theory that all Seattle local news programs are mandated to have at least one animal story every night. Today there were three.

1) there's a big fat oil spill in south Puget Sound near Tacoma. Call if you spot some slicked sea animals. I'm worried about the oysters!

2) two baby cougars whose mother was shot were fedexed to Memphis.

3) a brown bear that was eating garbage in the Centralia; after weeks of this, animal control showed up to tranquilize the bear and take it away. The news leaked out and a crowd formed. When the bear ran up a tree to escape the crowd, they shot the bear in the head. Now people are mad at animal control for killing it. They should be mad at their own dumb asses, for forming a crowd and spooking the bear. Dumbasses.

When I run for public office, I will put specific limitations on my attack ads. First of all, no announcer with a quivering, melodramatic rhetorical question meant to insinuate that the other candidate is lame. How middle school. If the other candidate is lame, my attack ad is going to say 'My opponent is lame.' Rhetorical question insinuations are for assholes. Seriously.

Second my attack ads will focus on my opponents actual faults; not on sound bites taken out of context meant to embarrass them in the eyes of the decadent and superficial voting public.

Of course, I'll lose the election, because the electorate is decadent and superficial.

Is it hillarious or what, the anger that the republicans show after Kerry brought up Cheney's lesbian daughter. I do wish he used her first name, but whatever. Here's the point: she is openly gay, and Kerry did not say anything controversial. So where does the anger come from? Duh. The republicans are embarrassed about Cheney's openly gay daughter.

How dare Kerry expose the Cheney family's homophobia! The nerve! My friend D has a theory that when complacent white americans are challenged in a way that they can't argue their way out of, they "resort to manners." How rude!

Once my friend was complaining about how Native Americans in Washington have a the right to collect shellfish from private property, due to a treaty signed over a hundred years ago. He said, yah, they should stop letting them collect shellfish; if it was my property, I'd shoot them.

So let's forget for a moment that white americans who own waterfront property are not there for the shellfish harvest; and let's put aside for now the fact that the vast majority of the waterfront property owners who are affected by the Native American harvest have arranged a personal understanding with the tribes in terms of their conduct on their properties. I didn't use those arguments on my exasperated republican friend. Instead, I just laughed and said that the United States of America is incapable of honoring a treaty with Native Americans. This country has no honor.

His response? You're rude! No, I'm not rude, son, you've just run out of arguement.

Bill O'Reilly is trying to say that the Andrea Mackris' sexual harrassment lawsuit is politically motivated, since her lawyer has donated to the Kerry campaign.

Esa gente no tiene verguenza. They will say anything, and the public is too stupid to lose respect for these people. Failing to lose respect for shamless public figures is a form of stupidity.

Tom Brocaw just defined 'latino' and 'hispanic' to America; he said "In California, Latino; in the Southwest, 'Hispanic' is the preferred term. Sigh. Because of Tommy's non-definition definition, millions of Americans will accept this handed-down-by-a-white-man definition as "politically correct." Then when they are corrected by an actual latino, they will cite Tom Brocaw as the law-giver. You watch.

Hmph.