Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

November 27th, 2002:

Negative advertising works

Everyone who paid attention agrees that the Texas Governor’s race was very negative this year. A new poll suggests that Tony Sanchez got the brunt of the fallout from that:

On a scale of one to five with five being the most favorable, Perry’s average favorability rating among those blaming him for the negative campaign was 2.53, while Perry’s rating among those blaming Sanchez was 4.25.

In contrast, the average rating of Sanchez among those who blamed him for the negative campaign was 1.54 while Sanchez’s rating was 3.6 among those who blamed Perry for the negative campaign. Among those blaming both candidates equally, the average favorability rating for Sanchez was 2.65 while Perry’s average rating was 2.94.

Make of that what you will. It’d be interesting to see the numbers broken down by party as well – I suspect Republicans gave Sanchez low ratings whether they thought he was more negative or not, and the same is true for Dems and Perry. Nonetheless, this is something to file away for future reference.

Live Nude Ghouls

Via Greg Wythe comes this hilarious story from the NY Post, that bastion of Murdochian righteousness in the Big Apple:

The staff of the Liquid Assets lounge in South Plainfield says a gaggle of go-go loving ghouls invaded their burlesque hall after the club’s owners spotted an otherworldly image on a security video last summer.

The ghostly visages, which look like specks of light dragging pale wispy tails across the screen, are not birds or video glitches – and they can’t be explained by the company that installed the equipment.

Paranormal investigators who have examined the video claim the strip-house specters may be the spirit of a dead dancer or the souls of Prohibition-era gangsters.

“I’ve been in the field for 20 years now and this is to me without a doubt a ghost,” said self-described “ghostbuster” Jane Doherty. “The way it’s moving clearly shows it has a consciousness.”

This go-go ghost story goes beyond just the images on the tape.

Doherty said she’s felt one of the spirits hanging out in the club’s “Champagne Room,” peeping on people getting lap dances

I can just hear John Edward explain this to his wife: “No, really, honey, those lap dances were for reseach purposes!”

Turducken goes mainstream

Today’s Chron has this NYT wire story about the history of turducken, the chicken-in-a-duck-in-a-turkey confabulation that Paul Prudhomme claims to have invented. It’s a pretty good overview, with some history of stuffing one type of food into another, and they only get precious about quaint Southern folks at the very end. Good thing I just ate lunch, or I’d be hungry about now.

Department of “Duh!”

Botox injections have been linked to Immobile Eyebrow Syndrome:

In the new study, published last week in the Archives of Facial Plastic Surgery, researchers from the Indiana University Medical Center examined 29 patients who had received Botox injections in their foreheads.

The research found that the shots did not change the resting position of the eyebrows except in a few patients who habitually kept them raised.

But in almost all the patients, eyebrow movement was limited by the shots, said the study’s lead researcher, Dr. Mimi S. Kokoska. While the restrictions were less than half an inch, that can be enough to limit expression and to change the appearance of the brow, making it seem flatter or “droopier,” she said.

You mean there might be unpleasant side effects resulting from injecting poison into your face? Whoda thunk it?

Well hey, if those eyebrows become a problem, there are solutions available if you want them.

Blogosphere Navel Gazing: Electric Boogaloo

I’ve tried, I really have, to give a rat’s ass about the latest controversy surrounding Little Green Footballs, but I just can’t quite bring myself to do it. It’s so much ado over nothing at all. So naturally, I’m going to write about it.

LGF is on my blogroll. I don’t read it much any more, but it’s there. LGF added me to its link list a long time ago, and I’ve gotten a steady amount of traffic from that ever since. If all this makes me a bad person, then so be it. The Rittenhouse Review didn’t link to me before their new policy was instituted anyway.

I link to and regularly read a lot more left-leaning and centrist sites than right-leaning ones. I like what they have to say, and I feel solidarity with kindred spirits. I read a few right-leaning and libertarian blogs (there are only so many hours in the day, after all). If you think I’m cocooning or insulating myself, well, you’re entitled to your opinion. Go write a blog entry about it, maybe some day I’ll read it.

If you do feel the need to write about any of this, try not to be pompous and overbearing, even if you make up for some of it with unintentional comedy:

When I took a look at what sites were actually listed there, most of the ones I recognized are best described as “the usual suspects”, and there was a clear ideological similarity to them. Any site which links approvingly to Warblogger Watch, This Modern World, Ted Barlow, Tapped, Sullywatch, Shadow of the Hegemon, Smirking Chimp, Media Whores, Eschaton, and Counterspin Central is applying a distinct filter to the choices. (Which is RR’s privilege, of course.) I also found links to Brian Linse, Patrick Nielsen Hayden (and Teresa), and Avedon Carol, none of which do I consider extremist voices.

Emphasis mine. I don’t know if Ted’s reading blogs during his hiatus, but if so I hope this gives him a chuckle. Assuming, of course, that an extremist such as he is capable of expressing humor. (Rubbing your hands together while cackling doesn’t count.)

Where was I? Oh, yeah. It’s my blogroll and I’ll link who I want to. Link or link not, there is no “symbolic gesture”. If this discussion is in any way responsible for the Nic Cage-Lisa Marie Presley divorce, then the terrorists have already won.

T-Day in Texas

Scott Chaffin shares some Thanksgiving memories of his grandmother. Check it out.

David Rushing update

Well, the good news is that the Chron finally addressed the David Rushing issue. The bad news is that they did so in a completely candy-assed way.

What they did was print three letters to the editor which one assumes are supposed to give some “balance” to Rushing’s viewpoint. The letters themselves…well, see for yourself. Here’s Letter Number One:

Old politics won’t work

Regarding David Rushing’s Nov. 19 Outlook article, “Political Poison: How John Sharp killed the Texas Democratic Party”: Rushing must not have been paying attention during the last election because Ron Kirk and Tony Sanchez won their primaries.

Does he prefer a return to the old “Dixiecrat” Party of George Wallace, where only white Protestant males need apply? This thinly veiled racist appeal to the politics of old just won’t work. Here’s a novel approach: Why not change the message?

The concerns of conservative and moderate Democrats have been ignored and replaced by those of the radical left. It’s small wonder the Republicans continue to gain more votes in Texas.

David R. Martinez, Houston

Does anyone understand the point this guy is trying to make? He starts off disputing Rushing’s thesis, then he recapitulates it. And what’s up with this assertion that the state Democratic Party has been taken over by “the radical left”? Anyone who thinks John Sharp and Ron Kirk are radical anything probably thinks Tom DeLay is a mainstream moderate.

Moving on to Letter Number Two:

Not over white voters

David Rushing is misguided if he thinks Texas Democrats failed because they lost white voters. Remember college history: In wartime, a president’s party usually wins most elections. Saying that Texans will not support an inclusive party makes them appear racist.

Michael Whitlock, Stafford

Unfortunately, the Democrats did fail with white voters, and this was a major factor, probably the biggest factor, in their defeat. Only Sharp drew better than 30% of the Anglo vote. Back in March, after the primaries, the hope was that they could get at least 35% of the Anglo vote – they needed that much to be competitive. 35% of the white vote would probably have carried Ron Kirk to victory, and would have made the Sanchez-Perry race much closer.

There’s no question that the ticket did poorly with white voters. It was not, as Rushing contended, because the Democrats were “openly hostile” towards them. You can’t counter one wrong fact with another and hope to win the argument.

On to Letter Number Three:

His bias was obvious

When I looked up David Rushing’s credentials, I learned he is a long-time member of the Young Conservatives of Texas and that this organization is powerful in state universities and very influential with Gov. Rick Perry.

How many people read Rushing’s article and thought it was unbiased?

Geraldine Allen, Sugar Land

Finally, the crux of the matter – the fact that Rushing attempted to pass himself off as impartial or possibly sympathetic to the Democrats. He deliberately misrepresented himself in his byline, and in doing so gave a distorted picture of his perspective. This is the only letter that really matters, and it gets printed last. Jeebus.

It’s stuff like this that makes people across the political spectrum dislike and distrust our hometown paper.