Coincidence?

How coincidental that the guy who made that anti-Muslim film trailer and posted it on You Tube was arrested for "parole violations."  There were, I read, "eight violations" of the guy's terms of parole.  But, they were only discovered after the film trailer appeared??????  Doesn't that seem just a little tough to believe?  So much for free speech in this country....

Funny, how a guy can put a crucifix with Jesus on it in a beaker of urine and call it art and it is defended as freedom of expression.  A guy can smother a representation of Mary in dung and call it are and it is defended as freedom of expression.  As despicable as this junk is--and I won't call it art!--I agree it is protected, no matter how offended Christians are.  This nut case in California deserves the same freedom of expression, unqualified support in firm terms from the Obama Administration and State Dept.  BTW, why doesn't the President condemn the Broadway play, "The Book of Mormon?"  Gee, I wonder if Christians started killing themselves and Mormons started rioting, would that bring any reaction?  No, I don't think so....  Hypocrisy reigns.

BTW, does anyone believe the Presidential polls, that is, anyone other than Kool-Aid drinkers?  OK, Obama may be ahead of Romney (and I stillt think Obama will win--dread, dread) in the polls, but by 10 and 12 points?  C'mon!  Tell me that isn't a biased trick trying to seal an election victory. 

I wrote about media accuracy or inaccuracy a while ago.  I mentioned the "Pinocchios" awarded by the Wash Post for the most blatant of lies, er, misspeaking.  It was great to read something from the Post itself the other day that criticized the "fact checker" himself for being, if not dishonest, at least deception and/or disingenuous.  One of the examples was spot on--starting with a false premise.  As my math buddies often said, "Start with a false premise and you can prove anything."  There are reasons why newspapers are dying and the national TV networks are losing viewers.  One of them is stuff like this--lots of people don't like being lied to or deceived.

Several sports writers were critical of the NFL for the replacement officials.  I didn't see the big bad call from the other night.  I don't care.  I almost wrote to each of these sports writers, who wrote as if the replacement officials and the cry-baby responses from players and coaches was as big as World War 3.  C'mon.  I, for one, couldn't care less about the "integrity" of the NFL.  I don't care who wins.  The NFL, like so many of the professional sports, has become like the WWF, more entertainment than competition.  The NBA is the best example.  But let's get real serious..."integrity" and the NFL?  I turned on the Lions Sun and there was a review of a play, a reception by a Lions receiver.  He cleanly caught the ball, near the sideline, but clearly had both feet down in time and was never bobbling the ball.  He was tackled out of bounds, still not bobbling, still with those feet in bounds. When he hit the ground, he lost the ball and it was called "incomplete."  I wondered why.  The network brought on "an expert," a former NFL overseer of officials.  He said it was the right call, because "a reception is a process."  I had a process, too--I turned off the tube and quit watching.  Mowing the back grass was preferable to watching this "process."  By the way, why is it not a fumbled when a back is tackled and loses the ball when he hits the ground?  If the ground can't cause a fumble, how can it cause an incomplete pass?  I guess carrying the ball isn't a process.  And people still watch this stuff??????