Todd's Mischief Blog

If you haven’t seen it, I recommend watching the film Temple Grandin . It is based on the real-life experiences of a woman diagnosed with autism at a time when it was considered practically a psychosis. Rather than have her institutionalized, Temple’s mother insisted on doing everything she could to give her daughter a normal life. While her family and mentors eventually realize that there is no “normal” for people like Temple, they do enable her to become a successful professional and a world leader in not one, but two entirely different fields. I like the movie for a number of reasons. First of all, the movie almost stands alone as inspirational where most sources on autism offer heaps of pessimism. Having a daughter with autism, you can bet I appreciate that. Also, through Temple’s hyper-literal and often naïve point-of-view, some very profound observations are made. Her experiences offer some of profound revelations as well. My favorite scenes revolve around Temple’s d...

In psychological theory, projection is when a person denies his or her own characteristics and then ascribes them to other people. Liberals do this all the time. Media Matters for America has made a habit of leaking Fox News editor, Bill Sammon’s emails that supposedly “expose” the bias that drives the network. They apparently find no irony in the fact that their entire existence is predicated on a bias against Fox News. Let me take a step back before I introduce the emails. Anyone who regularly listens to Rush Limbaugh is familiar with his media montages wherein numerous reporters and commentators from various networks and formats are spliced together, collectively saying precisely the same thing over and over. This is why the mainstream media is oftentimes referred to as an echo chamber. The montages, while humorous and entertaining, deftly illustrate the point that the vast majority of the media is not only scripted, but is running off the same script. Guess what Media Matters accus...

There’s enough national anthem to go around. I learned something surprising yesterday. I had no idea, but apparently the national anthem is to be sung in a certain style. I’m still a little vague as to what that style is, but I do know this much: it is reverent, it does not involve any “ghetto yodeling” (whatever that is) and anything that is not in that style is an affront to the nation. Of course, this knowledge would never have come to me if it weren’t for Christina Aguilera’s unfortunate lyrical snafu when performing “The Star Spangled Banner” for Super Bowl XLV. But every cloud has a silver lining, because I learned that she only got the words wrong from singing an improper version of the song. Well, that and because she’s a talentless, egotistical hack who didn’t bother to practice and hates America anyway. Or something like that. I am glad to have received this information because, like Jimi Hendrix carelessly strumming his guitar, I’ve been haphazardly singing “The Star Spangl...

Christina Aguilera did not ruin the national anthem. I, for one, feel bad for Christina Aguilera. What should have been the highlight of her singing career (yes, even above five Grammys) has instead become a launch pad to criticize her beyond her lyrical flub and into her singing-style, preparation, and even her patriotism. I'm sure she is feeling beyond embarrassed, today. For any American singer, being requested to perform the “Star Spangled Banner”—a notoriously difficult piece besides being the national anthem—is a great honor at any event. For the Super Bowl, the most viewed television program annually, the honor is magnified beyond calculation. Whatever one thinks about her music or singing style, Christina Aguilera takes her musicianship seriously. So it is an honor that I doubt she took lightly, as is being supposed by so many. By all accounts, she was devastated after botching the performance. But in the moment, she did what any good performer is trained to do: she kep...

I’m not sure how to frame this, so I’m just going to come out with an idea. Really, it’s a prediction—or maybe it’s a question—or maybe it’s both.  Whatever it is, it occurred to me while Glenn Beck was issuing his oft-repeated plea for conservatives and patriots to remain peaceful while so many are agitating for violence. But I think it could happen that some leftist, socialist demonstration in the vein of  this protest  erupts into something widespread and violent. Maybe it will begin in one place and spread out virally. Maybe multiple, coordinated demonstrations across the country will all go at once. I don’t know. Clearly, Glenn thinks the same thing, as his other oft-repeated plea is to prepare in the way of saving food, getting out of debt, and so on. So, of course, the sensible thing to do is to hunker down. But what if the left-wing media pins the violence on the Tea Party? Consider that the media is already champing at the bit to blame  something  on th...

Yesterday I responded to an article that quoted heavily from the Washington Post on the subject of whether Rep. Gabrielle Giffords would lose her congressional seat. Let me it make clear that I was responding to claims made in the article, not attempting to interpret Arizona state law. More accurately, I was responding to the sentiments expressed in the claims. The Washington Post was getting worked up over nothing. It seems that the statute brought into question regarding whether Giffords’ congressional seat is considered vacant does not even apply to federal offices. Had the reactionaries who were so agitated by the statute bothered to investigate, they would have maybe held their tongues. Instead, their inner workings were partially revealed, displaying a preference to see American citizens unrepresented rather than risk losing a Democrat seat in congress. How’s that for ugly politics? Furthermore, they reveal their contempt for the rule of law first by not bothering to understand i...

Giffords could lose seat because of obscure statute Follow the link to read the story if you like. I think the astute observer of the media can guess without looking what the hubub is all about. I haven't listened to the radio today, but I expect this to be the talk all over by tomorrow if it wasn't already today. While I am filled with compassion for Ms. Giffords and the other shooting-spree victims and their families, my observations on the story will be to-the-point: First of all, in this case "obscure" means "a law Democrats don't like." Second, the Washington Post (see the article) proves how obtuse it can be in wondering whether not casting votes for three months can actually constitute a vacancy. Third, my response to Governor Symington: The provision was put in place precicely for cases such as this. If it weren't, there would be an exception for illness or injury, which would render the provision stupid. Also, in this case "injusti...