HomeReviewsInterviewsStoreABlogsOn Writing

sarah and todd Palin

Really? I can’t see how this story is true, they were so supportive of each other. Seemingly, at least.

Any other reports on this story, other than from the AlaskaReport.com?

I’m not really sure how to feel about this story if it’s true, because I can’t imagine anything harder than a divorce playing out in the public eye, no matter who you are. She’s a human being at the end of the day. Not my kind of human being, admittedly, but a human being just the same.

Mind you, if they both had affairs, then her hypocrisy definitely has to be called into question, with all her ‘family values’ talk and all.

Jesus,there will be a manic feeding frenzy amongst the media. *Shudder*.

I bet she’s truly regretting launching her family into the limelight last September.

I Bet He’s Not The Only One…

Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Posted in: American Politics


A lot of people seemed rather surprised about REPUBLICAN governor Mark Sanford cheating on his wife, but I’m not exactly sure why.

He will not be the only high profile politician giving it to somebody other than his wife. He’s a politician for God’s sake. All that power? Of course it’s bound to go to their heads (pun intended).

Some politicians start unnecessary wars, others cheat on their wives. I know which I prefer.

By the way, what kind of wife could read the following, and take the bastard back?

During an emotional interview at his Statehouse office with The Associated Press on Tuesday, Sanford said Chapur is his soul mate but he’s trying to fall back in love with his wife.

Unbelievable. I’d be very tempted to take a rusty knife to his bits if I was her.


As much as I hate the extreme left-wing nutters, there seems to be a malevolence to the extreme right-wing nutters, that the lefties have no chance of competing with.

This story about the racial slurs darted at Malia Obama made my stomach cramp. (more…)


There’s been all kinds of speculation as to why Sarah Palin of the #AbstinenceFail fame really quit.

She of course blamed the media. Well, why the hell not, those bastards are responsible for most heinous crimes, dog-darn it.

Me, I think she just wanted to see herself on the front pages again. It’s been a long dry spell for her with no crazy media interest after all.

Other pundits think that she may be quitting in order to try to run for president next time around. Can you imagine?

Anyway, I’d also like to know how the Alaskan people feel about her quitting as governor.

Do they give a shit, and are totally heartbroken, or is this a case of ding-dong, the witch is dead?

Enquiring minds would like to know.



Colour me surprised. Not.

WASHINGTON – Medical bills are involved in more than 60 percent of U.S. personal bankruptcies, an increase of 50 percent in just six years, U.S. researchers reported on Thursday.

More than 75 percent of these bankrupt families had health insurance but still were overwhelmed by their medical debts, the team at Harvard Law School, Harvard Medical School and Ohio University reported in the American Journal of Medicine.

“Using a conservative definition, 62.1 percent of all bankruptcies in 2007 were medical; 92 percent of these medical debtors had medical debts over $5,000, or 10 percent of pretax family income,” the researchers wrote.

“Most medical debtors were well-educated, owned homes and had middle-class occupations.”

The researchers, whose work was paid for by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, said the share of bankruptcies that could be blamed on medical problems rose by 50 percent from 2001 to 2007.

“Unless you’re Warren Buffett, your family is just one serious illness away from bankruptcy,” Harvard’s Dr. David Himmelstein, an advocate for a single-payer health insurance program for the United States, said in a statement.

“For middle-class Americans, health insurance offers little protection,” he added.

Remember my call for universal healthcare? When I read stats like these, I’m really not convinced that the current healthcare system in the US can be sustained for much longer.

I still maintain that the people who are against universal healthcare, are the ones who have adequate health insurance.

Can you imagine having to file bankruptcy because you were unfortunate enough to get cancer? Talk about a double whammy.

I’ve noticed that good old Dick has been shooting his mouth off, left, right and centre. Now we finally know for sure, who was behind the majority of George Bush’s heinously bad decisions.

Keith Olbermann’s special comment on this last week was right on:

Dick Cheney, in case you haven’t heard it enough sir, you are a twat who needs to shut the fuck up, and resign yourself to the fact that you are an irrelevant fool who needs his head sticking in a toilet full of piss and shit, and whipping until you cry uncle.

You are a terrorist in a suit, who just happens to be born American.

Pox on you, you son of a bastard.

I’d suggest we start a #JailCheney Twitfest on Twitter, but I’m not sure how many KKB readers really give a shit either way.


Yet respected news corporations think that Michelle Obama’s bare arms at her husband’s inaugural address to congress is headline material?



This article pretty much sums up my thoughts on Bare-arms-gate.

Warning, political post ahead, so those who have no interest in the political landscape, may want to look away now.

Is it mere coincidence that after a black Democrat gets into office, the Republican party votes a black man in as its leader?

I think not. I don’t believe in happy coincidences I’m afraid.

Although, to be fair, Michael Steel at least seems to understand that in order to move the party forward, they’ll have to reach out to the groups that the GOP have traditionally snubbed.

Not like that candidate who had to resign from a whites-only club, so that he could run in the first place. Oh the irony.

I guess the proof will be in the pudding, if the party ends up electing the anti-choice, anti-gays, gun-toting, moose-hunting, Sarah Palin, as their nominee to run for President the next time around. If this happens, then nothing will have changed.

I am surely hoping they do elect her though, because then Obama will definitely be a shoe-in for a second term.

It sure does seem that black is the new black, doesn’t it? *g*

Andrew Sullivan wrote a piece in The Times the other day, and it has to be the most articulate, almost poetic, analysis of Obama that I’ve read. Entitled Can Barack Obama fix it? Yes he can, the article looks at what makes President Obama tick, and takes a look at his stance on different political questions.

The column starts:

Magnanimity in victory: that was Churchill’s advice. And since his precocious victory last November, Barack Obama has walked that Churchillian walk. It is not common in politics, especially after a meteoric rise past every prejudice, every smear and every Clinton, but Obama has an old soul’s perspective and an intellectually secure man’s confidence. Perhaps he has too much confidence — except that every time his friends feared that in the campaign, he proved them wrong.

From the shallow brittleness of George W Bush to the supple strength of Obama is a revolution in temperament and style not seen since Jimmy Carter gave way to Ronald Reagan 28 years ago. It signals the kind of administration that now looms before us: a conciliatory, inclusive, pragmatic form of liberalism. It’s a liberalism eager to learn from the insights of conservatives, and it is pioneered by a president-elect shrewd enough to know that generosity of spirit means more leverage and influence, not less.

This was my favourite bit:

When you listen to him rattle off all the dimensions of the broader conflict, you are aware that this is a president who does not see the world in black and white or in with-us-or-against-us terms. He sees it as a series of interconnected conflicts that can be managed by pragmatic solutions, combined with a little rhetorical fairy dust and willingness to offer respect where Bush provided merely contempt. This is not a panacea. But it is not nothing either.

It’s quite a long piece, but definitely worth reading every word.

I have every faith that Obama is the right man, at the right time, for the job at hand, and America is lucky to have him.

Thanks muchly to Dawn B for sending me the article.

The wife of my cyber pal, Scott, (Scooter’s Chronicles) has been having some major health problems for a while now. She’s been getting migraines that are so debilitating, they leave her unable to function normally.

Scott and his wife have seen doctor after doctor, in an effort to get some kind of handle on Marcia’s illness. They’ve also had major problems with their health insurance providers, and have been very worried about how to pay the growing doctor’s bills.

The UK healthcare system isn’t perfect by any means, and God knows, we bitch and moan about it enough, but I think I hate the thought of relying on health insurance to pay for care that I should be getting due to being a tax payer and all.

Of course, over here, we pay a lot more tax than you guys do, and that’s what helps pay for our brand of universal healthcare.

I know that the current climate isn’t conducive to tax increases, but I think it’s definitely something to be looked at for the future. I know that your new President-Elect is certainly looking at ways of reforming your current healthcare system, and there are some really great examples in Europe for him to draw from.

Anyway, what are your arguments for and against universal healthcare. I’m interested to know, because so far, I only have the opinions of Kondracke, Krauthammer and Barnes to go by, and quite frankly, as they’re all Fox News contributors, that isn’t saying much.


How is it that in America, such important political positions can simply given to any old Tom, Dick and Caroline?

At least with Sarah Palin, people had a choice as to whether or not to vote for her and McCain.

Ms Kennedy seems like a really lovely woman, but for the love of God, that seat has just been vacated by Hillary Rodham Clinton. Love her or hate her, it’s like comparing a rhinoceros to a pussycat for cripes sake. Yes, one is cute and shiny, but I know who I’d prefer to be with, if there were a pack of dogs after me.

I don’t get why the people of New York can’t simply vote again for a new senator. At least they’d have nobody to blame when the shit hits the fan, and it all ends in tears.

Anyhoo, let’s hope the New York governor stops smoking that wacky-baccy in time, and chooses somebody who at the very least is able to speak to the press without channelling Sarah Palin.

Actually, somebody who speaks, period, would be a step in the right direction.

Just sayin’.

By the way, is anybody other than Fox news paying attention to the Illinois governor scandal? Are you guys as bored by this story, as this Brit girl is?

I didn’t find the guy who threw the shoe at President Bush amusing in the slightest. I’m sure there will be Democrats all over the US, who think he got his just desserts, but I thought the so-called journalist who threw the shoes, was utterly pathetic. Fortunately for him, he was able to make his protest, without fear of torture and death hanging over his head.

I’m not a George Bush fan, far from it, but I don’t believe he’s an evil man. I think he fucked up royally, but I do believe he thought he was doing the best thing for his country, when he took you guys into war, just as I believe that Tony Blair thought he was doing the right thing also.

Dubya deserves to be verbally pilloried for his catastrophically bad political choices, but throwing shoes at him, says more about the dickhead journalist, than George Bush in my opinion. Besides, I suspect that the man just wanted to make a name for himself.

OK, who thinks he deserved to get the shoes thrown at him?

For the past year and a half, many of us heard about the rumor that (then) Senator Obama was not a US citizen and, therefore, was not elegible to become President of the US, as per the constitution’s requirement that a candidate be a “natural born citizen” (so, no President Schwarzenegger, sorry).

Proof of his nationality in the form of an original birth certificate from the State of Hawaii was provided. Election day came and history was made.

Applause. Get ready for a new day. Move on.

But wait, not so fast there, buddy! Fat lady hasn’t sung yet.

Apparently there are people out there willing to indulge the fantasies of morons who contend that a birth certificate is not enough proof of citizenship by birth.

Seriously, people, what the fucking hell? Hello? Anyone in there?

Repeat after me: Birth. Certificate. From. The. State. Of. Hawaii.

How more “natural born” can you be than that, I wonder?

Talk about situational ethics indeed. Thank God Alan Colmes actually grew a pair for a minute or two.

Urrrggggh. What an idiot.

I totally LOVED Michelle Obama’s election night dress!

Apparently she got slated in the press for it though:

Mrs Obama wore a red and black scoop-neck dress by Narciso Rodriguez for the historic moment, a decision that has sparked instant debate among the fashion-focussed. Some branded it an eyesore, others said it was a simple mistake. Most agreed Ms Obama had suffered a rare lapse of taste.

“I voted for Obama, but I didn’t vote for that dress,” Jessica Bettencourt told the New York Times.

Amazing, I thought her dress rocked on a grand scale.

How can Fox News get away with having journalists like Sean Hannity represent them?

In the above clip, Hannity, defends that crazy bitch Ann Coulter, re her stance on the 9/11 widows.

This next clip however demonstrates his hypocrisy, when author, Christopher Hitchens criticizes the late Reverend Jerry Falwell, (a man that Hannity apparently knew and liked), regardless of the reverend’s offensive and hate-ridden rhetoric.

Sean Hannity: “I am asking for human decency, and and if you don’t think it has an impact on his family to use even the phrases tonight that he’s vulgar, fraud and a crook. I think you are incredibly mean, incredibly thoughtless..”

So basically, Sean Hannity calls for human decency from Christopher Hitchens re Reverend Caldwell, yet lets Ann Coulter get away with her comments about the 9/11 widows. This from somebody who called out Barack Obama on his relationship with Jeremiah Wright?

I rather like seeing Sean Hannity put in his place, and made to look like the petulant, hypocritical fool that he is.

Anyway, I’ll leave you with this guy, who came to the same conclusion that I did about Sean Hannity’s hypocrisy.

What an arsehole. Another perfect example of the kind of extremists that organised religion has managed to spawn. Urrgggh.

On a lighter note, I bet he is beyond pissed that Obama will be his next president.

So, I was over at Beth’s the other day, when the link to this post caught my eye. The post was written by some broad called Dana Goldstein. It was entitled, The Indignities of First Lady-Dom.

Ms Goldstein writes:

Don’t get me wrong — I adore Michelle Obama. She will undoubtedly be one of the smartest and most accomplished first ladies in American history. She survived right-wing attacks to become a force to be reckoned with on the campaign trail this fall.

But tooling around on the transition web site last night, I couldn’t help but feel discouraged by the washed-up old gender ideologies reflected there. The president-elect’s bio is built around a story of pulling himself up by his bootstraps and forging a public service career. Michelle’s bio, on the other hand, leads with the comforting news that she puts her children first — no Hillary-style meddling in politics for this first lady! It defines Michelle Obama primarily by her personal relationship to others:

“When people ask Michelle Obama to describe herself, she doesn’t hesitate. First and foremost, she is Malia and Sasha’s mom.
But before she was a mother – or a wife, lawyer, or public servant – she was Fraser and Marian Robinson’s daughter.”

Sorry, but is this supposed to be a bad thing? The fact that she puts her children first, and has no intention of meddling in her husband’s work, is wrong somehow?

Goldstein continues:

Of course, this tone shouldn’t be surprising. The job of the first lady is, essentially, to fulfill arch-traditional wifely expectations. One’s career or academic successes are almost wholly irrelevant. It is, as Echidne of the Snakes writes, “the job with no paycheck.” And in that way, it provides the perfect opportunity for us to think about the unpaid labor done by every stay-at-home mom and wife:

What an utterly ridiculous and pointless column.

I can’t believe that she’s judging Michelle Obama for describing herself as a mother first and foremost. I’m pretty sure there are more heinous things in life, than somebody actually taking his/her job as a parent seriously.

As somebody who’s pretty career-oriented, as well as being a borderline feminist, if I had children, damn right I’d put them before my job. This doesn’t mean that I expect everybody to feel the same, but in my opinion, if you aren’t going to put your children first, why have them in the first place?

Michelle Obama is not going to be president, her husband is. What’s so hard to understand about that? Surely Americans don’t want a First Lady who’s going to be delegating from the wings?

And to those commenters who felt ‘uncomfortable’ about Michelle Obama’s alleged ‘Leave It To Beaver’ bio, get an effing grip, and belt up.

If more people were as dedicated to their children, the world wouldn’t be so effed up, and eight year old kids wouldn’t go round shooting people.


Yes, We *Still* Can…

Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Posted in: American Politics, Azteclady Speaks

In the past ten days or so, I have been sharing the following clip with pretty much everyone I know, mainly for two reasons.

First, this kid is eighteen. Yes, you read right, 18 years old. He reached voting age just in time for this presidential election. Listening to him, I have felt my hope for a better future being renewed. Here’s a wonderful example of the generation who came of age during this time.

Second, I think that the sometime acrimonious conversation  over race, discrimination against homosexuals or other minorities, the financial crisis, and other matters, would benefit a lot by remembering that we are just at the starting point.

So, without further blathering ado, here is Daniel Brown:

Is Ann Coulter For Real?

Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Posted in: American Politics

Bring back Sarah Palin, all is forgiven.

So I discovered Ann Coulter via Youtube the other day… and God love her, but she’s a fucking lunatic.

Ann Coulter on Hannity and Colmes

“How do we know that these men weren’t going to divorce these harpies?” Apparently that’s a question that Ann Coulter asks of the 911 widows, in her book. Classy bird.

Ann being interviewed by Katie Couric

Ann being interviewed by the BBC’s Jeremy Paxman

Jeremy looks as disturbed as I feel when I listen to her.

How is this woman any different from a muslim extremist?

Jews need to be perfected?

Coulter is a great example of why organised religion should be avoided at all costs. Man she makes Sarah Palin look like an ultra-liberal lefty.

Fair warning for those who have strong religious beliefs and who identify with any particular organized religion or church: what follows is a rant, and it may be (will likely be) insulting to your sensibilities. Unless you want your blood pressure raised, you would be better off skipping it. Thank you.

And with that out of the way…