AdamSmith

Et non conjuge equibus.

...in the White House, that is. Pineapple with cottage cheese. Being prepared by his longtime valet Manolo Sanchez (right) and a White House staff member. From this fascinating, if you grok such stuff, web site of floor plans and interior photos of the White House: http://www.whitehousemuseum.org/overview.htm

You must have me confused with someone else.

Only 23. Hmmph! But then, any list that starts with To Kill a Mockingbird... "It's interesting that all the folks that are buying it don't know they are reading a children's book." -- Flannery O'Connor

I think the hijack complaint referenced in the OP is a specific instance of a general question -- conceivably the central question -- for community forums such as this: What is the most effective and constructive way to influence the content and subject-matter behavior of fellow posters? By telling them how and what you wish they would post? Or to lead by doing, posting the kinds of things yourself that you want to see more of? Which do posters here find more effective and appealing?

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/wordofmouth/2014/feb/06/food-waste-solutions-cuttlefish-testicles-pigs-heads

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/02/06/national-republican-congressional-campaign-using-fake-democrat-websites-to-lure-voters/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/film-news/10579899/Harvey-Weinstein-Meryl-Streep-movie-will-make-NRA-wish-they-werent-alive.html

Russell Brand: Philip Seymour Hoffman is another victim of extremely stupid drug lawsIn Hoffman's domestic or sex life there is no undiscovered riddle – the man was a drug addict and, thanks to our drug laws, his death inevitable Russell Brand The Guardian, Thursday 6 February 2014 10.05 EST Philip Seymour Hoffman: 'The troubling message behind his death, which we all feel without articulating, is that it was unnecessary and we know something could be done.' Photograph: Jamie Simonds/Bafta/Rex Philip Seymour Hoffman's death was not on the bill. If it'd been the sacrifice of Miley Cyrus or Justin Bieber, that we are invited to anticipate daily, we could delight in the Faustian justice of the righteous dispatch of a fast-living, sequin-spattered denizen of eMpTyV. We are tacitly instructed to await their demise with necrophilic sanctimony. When the end comes, they screech on Fox and TMZ, it will be deserved. The Mail provokes indignation, luridly baiting us with the sidebar that scrolls from the headline down to hell. But Philip Seymour Hoffman? A middle-aged man, a credible and decorated actor, the industrious and unglamorous artisan of Broadway and serious cinema? The disease of addiction recognises none of these distinctions. Whilst routinely described as tragic, Hoffman's death is insufficiently sad to be left un-supplemented in the mandatory posthumous scramble for salacious garnish; we will now be subjected to mourn-ography posing as analysis. I can assure you that there is no as yet undiscovered riddle in his domestic life or sex life, the man was a drug addict and his death inevitable. A troubling component of this sad loss is the complete absence of hedonism. Like a lot of drug addicts, probably most, who "go over", Hoffman was alone when he died. This is an inescapably bleak circumstance. When we reflect on Bieber's Louis Vuitton embossed, Lamborghini cortege it is easy to equate addiction with indulgence and immorality. The great actor dying alone denies us this required narrative prang. The reason I am so non-judgmental of Hoffman or Bieber and so condemnatory of the pop cultural tinsel that adorns the reporting around them is that I am a drug addict in recovery, so like any drug addict I know exactly how Hoffman felt when he "went back out". In spite of his life seeming superficially great, in spite of all the praise and accolades, in spite of all the loving friends and family, there is a predominant voice in the mind of an addict that supersedes all reason and that voice wants you dead. This voice is the unrelenting echo of an unfulfillable void. Addiction is a mental illness around which there is a great deal of confusion, which is hugely exacerbated by the laws that criminalise drug addicts. If drugs are illegal people who use drugs are criminals. We have set our moral compass on this erroneous premise, and we have strayed so far off course that the landscape we now inhabit provides us with no solutions and greatly increases the problem. This is an important moment in history; we know that prohibition does not work. We know that the people who devise drug laws are out of touch and have no idea how to reach a solution. Do they even have the inclination? The fact is their methods are so gallingly ineffective that it is difficult not to deduce that they are deliberately creating the worst imaginable circumstances to maximise the harm caused by substance misuse. People are going to use drugs; no self-respecting drug addict is even remotely deterred by prohibition. What prohibition achieves is an unregulated, criminal-controlled, sprawling, global mob-economy, where drug users, their families and society at large are all exposed to the worst conceivable version of this regrettably unavoidable problem. Countries like Portugal and Switzerland that have introduced progressive and tolerant drug laws have seen crime plummet and drug-related deaths significantly reduced. We know this. We know this system doesn't work – and yet we prop it up with ignorance and indifference. Why? Wisdom is acting on knowledge. Now we are aware that our drug laws aren't working and that alternatives are yielding positive results, why are we not acting? Tradition? Prejudice? Extreme stupidity? The answer is all three. Change is hard, apathy is easy, tradition is the narcotic of our rulers. The people who are most severely affected by drug prohibition are dispensable, politically irrelevant people. Poor people. Addiction affects all of us but the poorest pay the biggest price. Philip Seymour Hoffman's death is a reminder, though, that addiction is indiscriminate. That it is sad, irrational and hard to understand. What it also clearly demonstrates is that we are a culture that does not know how to treat its addicts. Would Hoffman have died if this disease were not so enmeshed in stigma? If we weren't invited to believe that people who suffer from addiction deserve to suffer? Would he have OD'd if drugs were regulated, controlled and professionally administered? Most importantly, if we insisted as a society that what is required for people who suffer from this condition is an environment of support, tolerance and understanding. The troubling message behind Philip Seymour Hoffman's death, which we all feel without articulating, is that it was unnecessary and we know that something could be done. We also know what that something is and yet, for some traditional, prejudicial, stupid reason we don't do it. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/06/russell-brand-philip-seymour-hoffman-drug-laws

Now it's toothpaste airplane bombs. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/winter-olympics/10620817/Sochi-2014-US-issues-warning-over-toothpaste-bomb-plots.html

Oh my!

As I said, pardon the commentary!

Who's ya monster?

This counts as literature, right? Pardon the commentary. 17 Shakespearean Insults We Should Start Using Again Feb. 5, 2014By Christopher Hudspeth Shutterstock 1. Away you three-inch fool! This sentence is a vicious attack on a man’s confidence and in modern times it’d sound something like “Get out of my sight you tiny penis having chump!” Words can hurt. Sticks and stones will break your bones but an itty-bitty penis comment will eat away at you like cancer. If you’re looking to land a devastating blow, this is your balled up, brass knuckle decorated fist. 2. I must tell you friendly in your ear, sell when you can, you are not for all markets. How cold blooded would it be to tell a friend to settle for whatever they can get. This is the same as saying “No offense, but you should probably date anyone who is interested because you’re not exactly a catch.” Ouch, you may as well save some syllables and say “Beggars can’t be choosers, ugly.” 3. You scullion. You rampallian. You fustilarian. I’ll tickle your catastrophe. 2014 adaptation: “You trick. You mark. You mark ass trick. You trick ass mark. You punk bitch. You skip scap skank. You scallywag. You ho. You heffer. You hee haw. You hoolie hoo. I’m going to laugh when you get the horrible karma you deserve in life.“ 4. Villain, I have done thy mother. This is a straight to the point mom joke, and not so much a witticism as a “I banged your mom, deal with it, you candy-ass jabroni.” type statement. 5. I will bite my thumb at them, which is a disgrace to them, if they bear it. *Holds up middle finger* COME AT ME, BRO. Yeah, that’s what I thought, pussy! 6. Tempt not too much the hatred of my spirit, for I am sick when I do look on thee. That’s the equivalent of saying “Look, don’t test my patience because I already can’t stand your existence.“ 7. They lie deadly that tell you you have good faces. “I don’t know who lied and boosted your ego, honey, but you aren’t cute.” 8. Thou art the son & heir of a mongrel bitch. Let’s face it — this is ten times better than our watered down, lazy “Son of a bitch.” With this phrase, you’re not just the son of a bitch, you’re the heir of that bitch. Also, that bitch isn’t a regular bitch, it’s a mongrel bitch. 9. Thou art unfit for any place but hell. Translation: You belong in the underworld or at a DMV, anywhere else is more pleasant than you deserve. 10. Away you moldy rogue, away! This is like a quick “Scram, scumbag!” This brief statement has great potential if you’re looking to shoo away a pickup artist at the bar or a pesky Internet troll. It’s well under 140 characters, which makes for a perfect response to any obnoxious tweets sent your way. 11. I do desire we may be better strangers. Oh snap, basically this is saying “We don’t need to be friends and to be honest I’d rather we don’t interact at all, ever.” It’s a fairly blunt statement, but sometimes thou must keepest it real. 12. I wonder that you will still be talking. Nobody marks you. Nowadays we would say “Are you seriously still talking? Feel free to stop because no one’s listening.” That’s fine, but the Shakespearean way sounds a lot cooler and it’d be awesome to see a group of bros at the bar trade in their STFUs for a solid, “Nobody marks you.” 13. The devil damn thee black, thou cream-faced loon! Where got’st thou that goose look? Modern version = Get a tan you pasty betch*. You look like a Twilight character who worked a 1,200-hour** shift at a bakery*** that has no windows or any type of opening for so much as a glimmer of sunlight to get in. *Mispronunciation of the word “bitch” that is commonly used today. **Twilight vampires don’t need sleep, so a 1200-hour bakery shift would be a cakewalk. ***Because bakers get covered in flour. 14. Thou art a boil. A plague sore, an embossed carbuncle in my corrupted blood. A wordy way of saying, “You’re a leech.” I drop this every time someone conveniently forgets their wallet when the check arrives, or asks to use my laptop. 15. A fusty nut with no kernel. You know what this is hinting at – it’s like saying someone’s a few channels away from the deluxe package. A few episodes short of a season. A few letters short of a complete sente 16. Methinks thou art a general offence, and every man should beat thee. I think thou wast created for men to breathe themselves upon you. “You’re horrible and you deserve the worst.” This sounds like a retro version of what internet commenters say about Kanye West or Justin Bieber, but I think we should save this kind of verbal lashing for greatest offenders and worst enemies. Also, it’s super fun to say “methinks” so at the very least, consider adding that word to your vocabulary. 17. More of your conversation would infect my brain. Basically: “Talking to you is making me dumber by the sentence.” The thought of having a discussion with someone so unintelligent that their words are giving your brain cells a fast acting flu that kills them almost instantly is one thing, but to tell a person their talking is responsible for the virus is another. Doeth thou command soothing ointment for thy blistering Shakespeare burn? http://thoughtcatalog.com/christopher-hudspeth/2014/02/17-shakespearean-insults-we-should-start-using-again/#BOroAXCiVDXcULGi.01

Of course the more that Putin is boxed in, the more dangerous he becomes. How violent will the revolution finally be? And what will come after? Ah, to be able to hear Nixon diagnose the current scene and prognosticate.

It's official. Local punditry for now seems divided on whether other likely Democratic challengers would have a better chance of unseating the Republican incumbent, or whether that's a lost cause in any event given the district's makeup, or whether the elements of celebrity as well as righteous-cause-making that Aiken will bring are in fact Democrats' best bet for offsetting the district's not entirely overmastering tilt toward voting Republican. Clay Aiken launches bid for Congress Posted by CNN's Paul Steinhauser and Steve Brusk (CNN) - Singer Clay Aiken of "American Idol" fame is running for Congress. Aiken announced early Wednesday that he'll seek the Democratic nomination to challenge Republican Rep. Renee Ellmers in North Carolina's second congressional district. In a video put up on his campaign website, Aiken criticized the partisanship that smothers Congress, saying "I am not a politician. I never want to be one. But I do want to bring back, at least to my corner of North Carolina, the idea that someone can go to Washington to represent all the people, whether they voted for you or not." Aiken also highlighted his personal story, sharing that he grew up in a home torn apart by domestic violence, and how that inspired him to be a voice for the powerless. And he touted his work as a special education teacher for students with autism. "The years I spent as a special education teacher for students with autism was my first window into the difference that a person can make in someone's life," Aiken said. Aiken said he was fortunate to find success in the entertainment industry, but cautioned that "for most Americans, there are no golden tickets. At least not like the kind you see on TV. More families are struggling today than at any time in our history. And here in North Carolina, we've suffered more than our share of pain." He also took a shot at Ellmers, criticizing her votes on the government shutdown and funding for the military, which is extremely important in a district that neighbors Fort Bragg, one of the largest U.S. Army bases in the country. Aiken said that Ellmers went to Washington to "vote against the best interests of North Carolina military families and those who depend on the military for their jobs. To do it when you know it's wrong is even worse." Aiken, 35, claimed that Ellmers voted the way her party leaders told her to, saying that "in the end, convinced me that if I didn't try and do something about it, then I couldn't complain if no one else did." Ellmers, when asked about Aiken in a recent radio interview on WMAL , said "currently his performing career is not going so well, and he's very bored." Aiken, who gained national attention when he came in second to Ruben Studdard in the second season of American Idol, joins two other Democrats who have already declared their bids for Congress in the district. Can Aiken win? The second congressional district is located in the central and eastern parts of North Carolina. The two-term Ellmers won 56% of the vote in her 2012 re-election, but she slightly underperformed the GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney, who beat President Barack Obama 58%-41% in the district. The GOP held seat was not one that national Democrats were targeting in this November's midterm elections. "I think this will become the highest profile, non-competitive race in the country. If Aiken wasn't running as a Democrat in a Republican district in President Obama's second midterm, he might have a decent shot," Nathan Gonzales, deputy editor of the non-partisan Rothenberg Political Report, told CNN. "Being on American idol doesn't change the fact that he's a Democrat in a Republican district." http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/02/05/clay-aiken-launches-bid-for-congress/?hpt=hp_t2

More details of the local delights... http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1947828-wealth-of-issues-face-2014-sochi-winter-olympic-athletes-fans-and-journalists?utm_source=cnn.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=editorial&hpt=hp_t2

And further to RA1's remarks about a private plane not being the best place to smoke it up... Bieber’s pilots had to wear oxygen masks to block the weed By Alex Dickinson February 5, 2014 | 7:53am Modal Trigger Officers and police dogs search Bieber's jet on Friday. Photo: Christopher Sadowski ; Splash News (inset) The leased jet Justin Bieber and his entourage flew to the Super Bowl was so full of weed smoke that the pilots had to wear oxygen masks, according to a bombshell new report. And Bieber and his father Jeremy were so abusive to a flight attendant that she had to hide in the cockpit. NBC News, citing an official report of the incident, reports the captain of the flight warned the passengers several times to stop smoking weed. “The captain also stated he needed to request that the passengers stop their harassing behavior toward the flight attendant and after several warnings asked the flight attendant to stay with him near the cockpit to avoid any further abuse,” the official report said. “The flight attendant stated the passengers, including Bieber and his father, Jeremy Bieber were extremely abusive verbally and she would not work another flight with them.” Sources told NBC the pilots had to wear oxygen masks because they risked inhaling the marijuana and failing any later drug tests. The flight from Bieber’s native Canada arrived at Teterboro Airport in New Jersey Friday and was promptly searched after authorities noticed a strong smell of marijuana. The 19-year-old pop star spent several hours in custody but was released after drug-sniffing canine cops came up empty. None of the flight crew were willing to file charges against their passengers, NBC reported. http://pagesix.com/2014/02/05/inside-biebers-pot-plane/

Hah! Justin Bieber denied entry to Sapphire strip club Justin Bieber isn’t even welcome at New York strip clubs. After he was turned away from a slew of Super Bowl parties, including ESPN’s Friday night bash, and days after a photo emerged of the teen star and friend Khalil Sharieff licking a stripper’s nipples, Bieber was barred from the Sunday Sins party at Sapphire New York on the Upper East Side. A spy heard organizers of the bash, hosted by promoter Ruben Araneta and DJ’d by Cassidy and Todd Smolar, discuss whether they should allow the 19-year-old in. “They decided he wasn’t worth the trouble,” our source relates, adding, “A party promoter asked the club about setting Bieber and his crew up with a few tables, but management said no because he is underage and his current negative press is not good for their venue — even though Bieber spent $75,000 at a strip club in Miami last week.” http://pagesix.com/2014/02/05/justin-bieber-denied-entry-to-sapphire-strip-club/ List of NYC clubs banning Justin Bieber keeps growing ... and growing The 19-year-old Bieber and his entourage were turned away from his favorite New York City club 1 OAK during Super Bowl weekend. The Canadian pop star really has to break a sweat to figure out where he is allowed to party NEW YORK DAILY NEWS Get used to it, Biebs. Justin Bieber and his entourage were turned away from his favorite New York City club 1 OAK during Super Bowl weekend, but the Chelsea hot spot is just one of many Big Apple hangouts where the 19-year-old singer is banned. The 19-year-old Canadian pop star is also not welcome at the VIP Room in the meatpacking district, Up and Down and the Sapphire Gentlemen’s Club. Bieber does not appear to be welcome at any future DirecTV events in the city. And the list may continue to grow. Bieber was turned away from at least four Super Bowl parties, including the DirecTV Super Saturday Night bash at Pier 40. “While Bieber may be one of the biggest stars in the world, most clubs don’t want the hassle of having him inside anymore,” a nightlife source told Confidenti@l. “He is radioactive until he stops being so volatile. No one wants the bad press that follows him everywhere he goes.” So if you want to enjoy a night out in New York City, it's very simple: check out our map to find out where Bieber WON'T be. http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/confidential/list-nyc-clubs-banning-bieber-growing-article-1.1601914

Compelling meditation on addiction by Russell Brand: http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2013/mar/09/russell-brand-life-without-drugs