USA Today: Bush's disapproval rating worst of any president in 70 years

Story here.

That's a pretty sweet percentage there. A 28% approval rating. NICE!

Mission accomplished, Mr. President. I hope you're (you are) proud of the 28% who are too blindly loyal (or have been made rich by your policies) to see the reality of the situation in this country.

Don't let the door to the oval office hit you on the ass on the way out.

George Bush is a funny guy

George Bush is Funny - Watch more free videos

re: Another Victim of Enviros' "Good Intentions:" The School Lunch Program

Original post here.

She links to this article, regarding the rising cost of school lunches, and claims that the increase is "another victim or enviros' 'good intentions'". However, there is nothing in the article to prove or even imply that the rising cost of school lunches is due to environmental concerns of any kind, as Victoria accuses in her headline.

Moreover, "In the last 11 years, the Bend-La
Pine School District has only raised lunch prices once." Hmm ... if we
make it twice in 12 years, that doesn't sound so bad, actually.

Indeed, she has taken it upon herself to assign the blame not to price-gouging oil companies or to the administration that has done little to control the rising price of a barrel of oil. No, of course not. Those to blame are those who don't want domestic drilling.

Kids can't eat cheaply because those damn environmentalists don't want to keep digging for oil in new places.

I like cheese. Cheese comes from cows. Cows create methane when they fart. Farting cows live on farms that raise herds of other farting cows because of consumer demand (such as my own) for cheese. However, cow farts contribute to global warming. Therefore, my enjoyment of cheese is the cause of global warming.

Sound ridiculous? That's her kind of logic. Take one piece of information and bring it to the furthest, most impossibly ridiculous conclusion.

Hooray!

re: Fan Brags: I Grabbaed Chelsea's, umm, err, bottom

Original post here.

Oh, just say 'ass', OK? That's what the quote was. Get over it.

Victoria wonders out loud, "One wonders now if Chelsea’s mother will be as upset over someone bragging about “grabbing Chelsea’s ass" (note: hey! She used it! I thought there was no potty language allowed!?) as she was when MSNBC’s David Shuster suggested she was “pimping out” Chelsea?"

The difference, not that someone grabbing someone like that is appropriate (without permission, of course), is that David Shuster made his comments on a television program, and the quote in question now is from "someone". Who knows who. But it wasn't on television.

Also, "pimping out" Chelsea Clinton was an accusation levied against Hillary Clinton; the statement above was a statement of fact (or a boast), devoid of any opinion or accusation.

There's a huge difference.

I question Victoria's motive for posting this, as it carries no political weight or heft whatsoever; it was simply a chance to "get a shot in" on the Clintons.

re: VT Show Listener #5: "Global Warming My !$$!"

Original post here.

Clearly not understanding that Global Warming is a trend over a period of years and not a snapshot of an individual day or days, there is a picture of frost / snow on the ground on Aurora a few days ago.

Snow in mid-April does not disprove Global Warming.

In fact, I'm not going to try to prove or disprove Global Warming at all. I think that we all need to be aware of the dangers of our environmental negligence, but I am not a climatologist and I dare not attempt to "prove" anything one way or another.

The point is, her post shows a lack of understanding (surprise!) regarding what Global Warming actually implies.

Why does this blog exist?

Victoria and I have a bit of an on-line "history", one might call it.

Primarily, she posts what I consider to be poorly thought-out-arguments, illogical diatribes, snarky comments about Democrats/liberals/so-called RINOs, and bits and pieces cribbed from Michelle Malkin.

In return, I have posted many comments on her site. And surprise, surprise ... many have been deleted (accidentally, she has claimed on occasion) due to content, length, or "potty language".

I find these excuses odd and oddly timed, of course.

Complaining about lengthy retorts seems to give convincing argument the short end of the stick, I think. Sometimes in order to prove a point, one needs more than a paragraph or two. Granted, most of her following on her blog seems to have the attention span of a gnat with ADD, and asking anyone to read more than a short few sentences might blow a few mental gaskets, but that's neither here nor there, I suppose. That's what you get when Fox Noise Channel rots your brain with 30-second sound bites.

And as far as "potty language", I have called her out several times on her own pages regarding her hypocrisy. I have had a post deleted, for example, for using the word "goddamn", only to show that one of her listeners (a conservative!) used it in a post that wasn't deleted. Then, regarding a comment that Rev. Wright made, she used the very same word in her own post.

Now, I realize that him saying it makes the story part of the "news" that she is reporting, rather than me, your humble blogger, a nobody on the national news scene.

But still ... her claim was 'no potty talk, period'. Unless you're (you are) on her side, apparently. Just today, we're treated to "Global Warming my !$$!" and "... what a horses ass" (which should be "horse's", but whatever).

Then there was the time I posted a picture of what I imagined Klaturd looks like. That post was deleted, though there was no foul language whatsoever.

There was another post in which I threw out the theory that Klaturd lived in a trailer park. That was deleted too, proving that nobody can take a joke any more. Oh yeah ... no foul language in that one.

Then there was a post in which a gentleman named Lew Waters, with whom I've made every effort to remain civil, responded to my list of 10 reasons why the Bush administration has been a disaster. As a retort to his response, I specifically replied - on point - to each of his counter arguments. This lengthy post was *also* deleted. And, here's the big surprise, there was no foul language.

So, since I've been accused of "bogarting" Victoria's blog (a drug reference, so I can only assume that Victoria is high when she posts sometimes), and I can't write anything there without being deleted, and I couldn't write anything there of consequential length, and I couldn't write anything using language that adults tend to use when they're compassionate about a subject, we're here.

Welcome to the world of iknowhowtospell, a regular Joe who has had enough nonsense from one of the voices on Portland's 18th rated radio station.

Yeah, I'm picking a small fight, but it'll be fun (for me, if for nobody else).

In this blog, I will occasionally:

• respond to her specific posts,
  
• debunk her half-truths, misinformation, and outright lies,
  
• post proper rules of grammar, to help failures like Klatu,
• and post other thoughts pertinent to the news of the day

In keeping with the rules that Victoria has established, comments may be deleted for no reason. I may connect point A to point B for absolutely no valid reason. Who knows?