Worseday

Even an honorable non-drinking-type holiday like MLK Day has its hangover, as the rest of the week gets shoved into the brain compactor. On that first workday of this week, I saw a great way to put it from the always well-spoken troubleagain, who termed it "Tonday."  That worked, so I took the concept and ran it out. Yesterday would be Woozeday, today becomes Worseday, but tomorrow remains Friday.  You don't mess with the Friday.

I had pretty wicked insomnia around 2-3 a.m., so I got the obligatory glass of milk and stayed up reading what there was to read at that hour. Which, for the most part, is everything there is to read at this hour.  On the sprots pages, though, I was confused. The Sabres had a game against the Kings last night, and the local fishwrap had nothing about it online. Not even a wire service report. Damn dying newspapers, laying off reporters and night editors to update the website. What WAS the score, anyway?

0-0, you moron. They play in L.A. tonight.

Oh. My bad.

"Bad" is hardly the word to describe how they've been playing, though. Four games into a seven-game cross-country road trip, they've claimed seven of the eight possible points and are just two points behind San Jose for the Presidents Trophy lead (if you even up the games in hand). Despite no big-money signings over the summer, they've brought up some kids who are lighting up the ice, if not the actual lamp, just about every night. They've come back from major deficits and held once-leaky leads with alarming regularity.

Despite all that, half of the local population is bitching about them, and 95 percent of the national sports community doesn't give a flying puck about them, or anything else in the sport.

Your loss, hosers. We're hardly losing any of them nowadays.

Another day, another dollar. Lots of them. And a bigger, fatter idiot.

It was bad enough I had to deal with the news, late this morning, of the Supremes' latest trawling into the waters of Activist Judging. But to then have to hear the peals of glee about it from behind the golden EID (Excellence in Doctorshopping) Microphone, voiced by noted Constitutional scholar Rush Limbaugh? The words made me good and sick, but seeing them on the transcript was even worse:



My problem isn't especially with his take on the decision itself. In fact, I kinda like the way he put it, because his paraphrasing actually contained a stronger populist message than the opinion itself : that the First Amendment prohibits government action that limits speech based on how rich, how big, how fat, how much of an idiot you are. As soon as I heard it, I instantly thought, Well, if it doesn't matter "how much money you have or how big you are," then wouldn't you be in favor of the Fairness Doctrine to permit even the poorer, smaller, thinner, less idiotic voices to be heard on public airwaves as well?"

But nooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

Of course he's not. In fact, right next to that exact section of his paraphrase was his website ad implying that the Fairness Doctrine would stifle him, rather than opening up the public airwaves to other views. When it's HIS speech (or rather, his right to make money off it) that's at stake, El Slushbo is all in favor of restrictions that permit the overwhelming majority of broadcasters to air his views while turning away from any obligation to present the other side on the frequencies given to those broadcasters FOR FREE more than 80 years ago.

But then, the ol' Dittohead is all in favor of Constitutional rights when the rights in question are his- like blocking access to his medical records on Bill of Rights grounds while being thoroughly supportive of Dubya's efforts to take those rights away from everyone else in the name of Keeping America Safe.

I'm off to watch Idiocracy now. After the past couple of days, it seems an especially appropriate choice.