the wide weird world of sports

Over at Nothing but Love/golfblogger, we read that the cost of an annual pass to Glacier National Park has been increased to $50.

Now I have some opinions about this, excuse me very much.

I’ve always believed that public lands should be free to the public. Here in my neck of the woods, folks have been known to protest this very issue. And I think a state fishing license should be free for anyone in the state in which they live and pay taxes. I’m more than happy to pay as a guest in another state. My logic is self-evident, yes?

Hunting licenses shouldn’t be required at all. Hunting should be illegal, except for Native Americans, on Tribal lands. And don’t tell me it’s a sport. It’s a savage, pointless, stupid anachronism. It’s not a sport unless both sides know they’re in the game and have an equal chance to win.

Ooh, here’s a better idea: proxy hunters to play this “sport” for the animals. While the hunters are hunting for animals, an equal number of people are hunting the hunters, on behalf of the animals. So if I say, “I play for the bears,” you can take it literally. No, you can’t switch sides. And yes, points would be given to both sides for the quickest, most humane kill. That would be so very interesting, don’t you think? It’s made for television!

Reminds me of an old joke.

Two guys are hunting in the woods. They hunt all day, and don’t find any game. At dusk, they’re tired and having drifted a short distance apart, they’re crunching through the brush. In his exhaustion, one man accidentally shoots the other.
He rushes his buddy to the hosptial.
He sits in the waiting room, reading Field & Stream.
In a short time, the doctor comes out, looking grave.
“How’s my friend, doctor?”
“Well, he’s dead. But he might have made it. We might have saved him, if you hadn’t field dressed him and strapped him to the hood of your pickup.”

religion without love

There is no religion without love, and people may talk as much as they like about their religion, but if it does not teach them to be good and kind to other animals as well as humans, it is all a sham.

– Anna Sewell, writer (1820-1878)

w’s bad week

Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy really. The big cheese is having one of those weeks that most of us can’t help but relate to. (With?) I mean, I can relate. Mama said there’d be weeks like this.

But even George the Lesser’s mama couldn’t have predicted how this one would go down.

Tuesday, W got his lunch eaten for him by members of his own party. They dropped by to tell him that the war is a serious political downer for the GOP, that people in their districts are mentally prepared for defeat there, and that somebody needs to admit to US that Iraq is hosed. And it can’t be the Shrub, because he’s lost credibility. [Paging Petraeus — is there a general in the house?]

“Davis, a former chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, also presented Bush dismal polling figures to dramatize just how perilous the party’s position is, participants said. Davis would not disclose details, saying the exchange was private. Others warned Bush that his personal credibility on the war is all but gone.” [Washington Post]

Wednesday Bush was in Kansas, bringing spiritual comfort to those effected by the terrible tornadoes there. And I imagine he feels like he’s been through a twister himself, facing the immediate resignation of his best war buddy, Tony Blair. This development really surprised me. Maybe I missed some foreshadowing in the news. Wow.

Prime Minister Tony Blair announces when he will step down on Thursday, 10 years after winning power in what was hailed as a new dawn for Britain that has since been darkened by the Iraq war.

Blair, U.S. President George W. Bush’s closest ally over Iraq, leaves office out of favor among voters for sending British forces to join the 2003 U.S.-led invasion. [Yahoo! News]

So it’s a 1-2 punch for our humble Decider. Spanked by Republican legislators and then this Blair thing. Like the Tanto telling the Lone Ranger “you’re on your own, Kemo Sabe,” and riding off into the sunset. Like I said, it couldn’t happen to a nicer guy. And to me, it couldn’t be more entertaining.

Speaking of entertaining, John Stewart says, “Finally, Iraq has become the country we thought it was when we invaded.”

all that is good and right

[You can click the image to make it bigger.]

I have to admit that I’ve done this. I’ve deleted e-mails that were so badly unformatted, such an indulgence of my time and attention, that I couldn’t be bothered to read them. None of you who read my blog are like that. But sheesh, some people…

what is it about her?

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Queen Elizabeth II is loved, not only in Britain but also in that nation's former North American colony.

A CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll released Monday during the queen's six-day U.S. visit finds that eight in 10 Americans have a favorable view of the British monarch. 

 
Maybe the good folks across the pond would let us borrow her for a while, just to cheer us up. Bush's approval rating his somewhat less than Her Majesty's 80%; in fact, Bush's rating has dropped to 28%. Which is baffling in itself, that 28% of US still think he's worth a damn.

So maybe we need a queen, huh? And if we merged with Canada, we could have back bacon and health care. This might be a good time to put it to a vote, before the democrats take a dump in their proverbial mess kits, and the whole things shifts the other way again.

where are you on the pew?

NEW YORK – A broad survey about the technology people have, how they use it, and what they think about it shatters assumptions and reveals where companies might be able to expand their audiences.

The Pew Internet and American Life Project found that adult Americans are broadly divided into three groups: 31 percent are elite technology users, 20 percent are moderate users and the remainder have little or no usage of the Internet or cell phones. [Yahoo! News]

Want to take the quiz and find out where you hang on the tech ladder? It’s interesting and quick. I am, it seems, an omnivore.

blog titles

I had a lot of ideas for a new blog name. I tired dozens, many based on obscure and arcane terms of art, literature and science. And it wouldn’t have bothered me to find that they were all taken and being used by other bloggers. Fair is fair.

What I found is that most of them were taken by people who haven’t made a post in years. Many by folks who never blogged at all; they just nailed down the address, made a first post which was blank or said something like “hello world.” Then nothing, for one to three years. I tried many for which there was no blog at all, just the blogger bar across the top, and a blank page. Still, the server wouldn’t let me use the address.

I’ve started several misbegotten blogs, then abandoned them for various reasons. But I always delete the blog from my account. Why hog the blog if I’m not using it? The URL based on my last name is being held by a girl with a similar first name, but no relationship with my last name, who set up her blog in December 2004 and never posted once. Hmm. Think maybe she just screwed up when she registered? Probably.

Of course, there are other blogging sites. And most internet services – for example Yahoo Groups message boards – will delete your stuff if you don’t use it in 90 or 180 days. But Blogger is just letting these things sit out there, and I think that sucks blog.