Let's dance like it's 1958 in Idaho.

That's nice and slow. I think you can all learn that, and I think it would be nice if kids today learned that dance, maybe in gym class. I think it would help them in many ways. And feel free to dress like that, even unironically.

I found that because YouTube suggested it after I watched this 1965 clip from the TV show "Hollywood a Go-Go" with Del Shannon singing "Runaway" and the "Hollywood a Go-Go" go go dancers were dancing around him doing some dance that represented running away, even though their forward motion only took them in a circle so they never got away. It's faster and more frenetic dancing, but I think you might be able to figure out the moves, even though we never get to see the feet.

Seemingly bridging the time gap between the first and second video — and also suggested by YouTube — here's Little Eva singing about the brand-new dance "The Loco-Motion." I say "seemingly" because it looks early 60s and the "Runaway" dance looks later 60s, but in fact, both clips are from 1965. A lot of old and new intersected in 1965. Personally, I was 14 years old, and I was rooting for progress. I watched "Hollywood a Go-Go" and "Shindig" (the show Little Eva's on), and I tuned in hoping to see British invasion stuff like The Kinks or folk rock stuff like The Byrds. I would have regarded Del Shannon as an intrusion from the pre-Beatles era. "Runaway" was a hit in 1961. It was one of the singles we played at slumber parties when we were children.

"The Loco-Motion" was a hit in 1962. Little Eva — Eva Narcissus Boyd — was a maid who also worked as a babysitter for Carole King and Gerry Goffin: "It is often claimed that Goffin and King were amused by Boyd's individual dancing style, so they wrote 'The Loco-Motion' for her" — but maybe that's not true. Little Eva doesn't look too interested in dancing in that "Shindig" clip. The notorious song "He Hit Me (It Felt Like A Kiss)" was based on what Little Eva told Carole King about her relationship with her boyfriend. That song was originally recorded by The Crystals — produced by the not-yet-a-murderer Phil Spector — and in recent years, it's been covered by Courtney Love and Grizzly Bear — with some unknown degree of irony.

"Monsters: Planned Parenthood tells teens ‘look your best’ after being beaten with these make-up tips."

Twitchy is aghast... after not getting it.

Do I really need to explain? Maybe I do, because those people are so dumb... or maybe only playing dumb. Let me take an intelligence test over here. You've got to watch the video first: here. Now, here's the test:

Did Twitchy understand the video it condemns as shameful?
	No. They really are that dumb.
	Yes, but they're pretending not to so they can slam PP, their usual agenda.
	Yes, and the ad actually is monstrous.
pollcode.com free polls

"Jovan Belcher’s grieving teammates on the Kansas City Chiefs refused to blame guns for his horrifying murder-suicide."

So begins an article at The Daily News. Interesting construction "his... murder-suicide." Normally, when you say "his murder," the possessive pronoun refers to the murder victim, not the murder." "[H]is horrifying murder-suicide" seems to strain to hide Belcher's agency in killing 2 human beings. One senses that The Daily News would like to do the very thing the teammates aren't doing: blame the guns.

"If you have daughters, you should (have a gun),” Chiefs defensive lineman Shaun Smith said Monday. “You have to protect yourself. You work so hard to get to where you at, I'll be damned if I’ll just let someone take it from me.”

If you acquire wealth, you become a theft target!

Linebacker Brandon Siler, who had Thanksgiving dinner with Belcher, also had no problems with guns.

“Well, a majority of people own one, especially in the places where they're legal. Most of the time they're for self defense or sport,” he said.

Speaking of self-defense and looking at the picture at the link, showing the huge size difference between Belcher and the woman he killed, even if your concern is domestic violence, why would you blame guns? There are any number of ways he could have killed her. A gun would have been the one way she could have defended herself.

And, by the way, I'm not swallowing the story that Belcher traveled from the murder scene — his home — to the football facility for the purpose of thanking his employers for giving him "a chance" in life. That's management's story, and it works as PR. It essentially requests that we sympathize with the murderer. I invite you into a thought experiment: Why else might Belcher have relocated?

With a theory of my own, I asked Meade that question yesterday, and he said something that hadn't occurred to me. Belcher shot his Kasandra Perkins in front of his mother. He had an audience. And he sought out an audience —  head coach Romeo Crennel and general manager Scott Pioli — for the suicide. He chose spectators for his self-killing. Having horrified his mother, he went for new spectator-victims, individuals most likely to suffer to see him die. If he thanked them, he was saying you've invested your work and your trust in me and now watch me destroy that.

My theory was different. After the murder, Belcher thought: What do I do now? How can I get out of this? He went to management in the hope that they could bail him out somehow. He was in a terrible jam. Come on, enfold me, protect me. You've got all those ingenious defensive plays on the field, do something for me now. Protect your investment in me. You've done so much for me already. You've given me a chance in life, and a chance is what I really need now. You pulled me up out of nothing. If anyone can help me now it's you.

Football is by far Americas favorite spectator sport.

Rasmussen Reports that 53% say football.

Only 16% for baseball, 11% for basketball, and 6% for hockey. Nothing else gets as much as 5%.

And, despite all the liberal hand-wringing over the violence of football — with all that brain-damage and post-Super-Bowl wife-beating — the preference for football is greater in women than in men. (57% and 50%.)

"Romney Photo Spurs Domestic Abuse Incident."

"Suspicious that his live-in girlfriend was planning an affair, a Tennessee man confronted the woman after spotting a photo of an unknown guy on her Facebook page..."

Lowell Turpin, 40, “angrily demanded to know who the male was,” reported Anderson County Sheriff’s Department investigators.

Crystal Gray, 38, “replied that it was a picture of Mitt Romney.”

Despite being informed that the man on Gray’s wall was the presumptive Republican presidential candidate (and not some hunky, severely conservative sidepiece), Turpin apparently was not placated....

"Father's death made Obama realise he could do more with his life than smoke pot Michelle tells Jon Stewart."

A Daily Mail headline. Details:

On the Daily Show, Stewart joked that the stories about the president as a young man resembled the 'script of a Cheech and Chong movie.'

While the First Lady didn't directly address the claims in Maraniss' book, she did say that her husband underwent a change during his college years.

Mrs Obama responded by saying: 'By the time he was in college, like so many young people, he realised that he could do more with his life.'

'He had a mother that was always saying you're so gifted, you're so talented, slap him on the head, "get yourself together."'

Watch the clip at the link. After she gets that far and Stewart tries to push her farther, she says "I'm not taking the bait," and Stewart says "Don't worry. It's organic."

By the way: "slap him on the head" seems to take domestic violence as a joke.

Woman in Chippewa Falls drives car into her husband after an argument about today's recall primary.

According to Police Chief Wendy Stelter:

Officers found the couple had a dispute over who Amanda Radle was voting for in today’s recall primary election for governor.

As she was trying to leave the residence, Jeffrey Radle stood in front of her vehicle in the dead-end alley. That prevented her from leaving.

Amanda nudged Jeffrey with the vehicle numerous times. Jeffrey would retreat and then reestablish his ground. At one point, he climbed onto the hood.

Finally Amanda Radle attempted to drive around her husband. Jeffrey Radle reportedly jumped in front of the vehicle and was struck.

Who was for which candidate? And did anyone get to vote? I'll just guess Amanda was for Falk, and Jeffrey was for Barrett. You might think Jeffrey was for Walker, but a vote for Falk will help Walker, as noted here.

ADDED: I am totally getting into The Chippewa Herald. I took the survey "What do you do when a tornado siren sounds?" (my answer: "none of the above"), and now I'm reading "Couple losing faith in true government representation." And I'm fascinated by this bright-pink owner of a "Custom Weaponry" shop who's "struggling to keep up with demand."

UPDATE: Apparently, Jeffrey was for Walker, and Amanda was for "one of the women candidates" — presumably, Falk, as I originally guessed. Falk was the crossover preference of Walker supporters. Jeffrey was so wrong in so many ways.

"So your little son starts to act a little girlish when he is four years old and instead of squashing that like a cockroach..."

"... and saying, 'Man up, son, get that dress off you and get outside and dig a ditch, because that is what boys do,' you get out the camera and you start taking pictures of Johnny acting like a female..."

... and then you upload it to YouTube and everybody laughs about it and the next thing you know, this dude, this kid is acting out childhood fantasies that should have been squashed....

Dads, the second you see your son dropping the limp wrist, you walk over there and crack that wrist. Man up. Give him a good punch. Ok? You are not going to act like that. You were made by God to be a male and you are going to be a male....

Why is NPR celebrating a man who practices and promotes child-beating?

"I have more than a thousand rules: specific detailed rules about how how to sleep, how to cover yourself with a quilt... If you don't follow the rules, then I must beat you."

So says a man who is celebrated on NPR. 

For each violation of the rules, such as sleeping in the wrong position, the penalty is to be hit with a feather duster on the legs or the palm of the hand. If it doesn't leave a mark, then it won't make an impact, Xiao [Baiyou] says....

Xiao's method involved all of the children watching each punishment. Any transgression of the rules by a younger sibling would also earn a beating for the older siblings, for failing to be a good model. Despite the sometimes daily beatings, Xiao sees himself as the best dad in the world and repeatedly claims his unorthodox methods "have no shortcomings."...

"In China, beating kids is part of their upbringing. It's not violence. It's not against the law," he says. "If this kind of beating is legal, scientific and in the interests of the kids, then fine. I'm all for beating, since it's effective."

Why does NPR present this man in a positive light? I'm not quite sure. Maybe because he's Chinese. Cultural relativism... a cloak of "diversity" makes everything look charming (on NPR).  Maybe because his technique got 4 kids into his country's most prestigious university. NPR listeners cream over that "top school" business. Maybe because "Tiger Mom" was a popular cultural figure last spring, so the male version — called "Wolf Dad" — seemed like another audience pleaser. Maybe because, deep down, NPR listeners really do love corporal punishment, and all these stories about rescuing kids (American kids) from even mild forms of "bullying"  — which NPR runs all the time — have begun to cloy.

"Tech-savvy disabled teen, being beaten for using a website not approved of by hyper-luddite father who's a FAMILY LAW JUDGE..."

"... films it and uses that footage as retaliation to (probably) destroy his career? If you gave me that plot as a TV movie, I'd tell you it was too much."

(NOTE: Clicking the link will not take you to the video, but you will find a link to the video. I clicked through, but instinctively turned it off after about 5 seconds, without seeing any of the beating.)

"Domestic abusers to wear GPS tracking ankle bracelets that text message victims on whereabouts..."

A new program on Staten Island — called Domestic Violence GPS Initiative — operated by a security firm in Atlanta. It will begin by attaching these devices to "a few dozen" individuals who have been found guilty of a domestic violence offense and who have repeatedly violated protective orders. The victim gets a text if the offender crosses into the "exclusory zone."

You need some skepticism to go with that empathy.

"Madison's con artists"... and the students who respond to them.

One student, who asked to remain anonymous, said "Misty Gaines" approached her on Library Mall saying she was depressed, three months pregnant and in an abusive relationship.

The student, a sophomore, said she fell for the story and ultimately, "under pressure," gave Gaines $100 for a hotel, believing Gaines when she said all the Madison shelters were full.

$100! Was that her parents' hard-earned money she handed over?

When a book falls into my hands, I open it up and read a sentence — and maybe that ends up being the only sentence I read.

Today's book just came in the mail. It's "The End of Straight Supremacy: Realizing Gay Liberation," by Shannon Gilreath. The sentence happened to be:

Feminists have persuasively shown the connection between sexualized violence, which, if we are being generous, might be the kind of "idea" First Amendment mucks are apparently concerned about (violence in the head), and real violence, inflicted through sex in the home or in the street, against women.

Mucks? I guess that's short for "high-muck-a-muck." Which means: poohbah.

And my response is: Pooh. Bah.

"Feminism is all about taking control away from the individual woman..."

"... and putting it into the hands of women, as determined by . . . feminists."

Says Instapundit, ceding to some feminists the power to define feminism in leftist terms. I wouldn't do that. I mean, I understand his point, but why not fight over what feminism really is or should be? We could claim that real feminism demands individual empowerment.

This reminds me of that set of essays in Slate: "Who Gets To Be a Feminist?"  Perhaps I'm contradicting what I wrote there, but I don't accept "feminism" and "feminist" becoming pejoratives. I would rather say that's not good feminism than the feminists are hurting women. If they are hurting women, they are not promoting feminism as it should be. And I think they would agree with that abstract proposition: if it's hurting women, it's not what feminism should be.

"I feel like calling her back and smacking her around."

A Wisconsin recall candidate has a run-in with an overeager answering machine.

I don't know what's funnier. Clark's accidental recording or the gleeful exploitation of it by the other side:

“This disturbing and inappropriate comment gives us an unfortunate glimpse of what Representative Clark is like when he thinks no one is listening. Domestic violence is a devastating problem in our state , and abuse is on the rise. To be able to so freely threaten violence against a woman, even in jest, shows a tremendous lack of character.”

Everybody's a radical feminist.

IN THE COMMENTS: mccullough said:

Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules.

About that 4th amendment...

1. There's the new Supreme Court case, Kentucky v. King, described here by Orin Kerr, who thinks Justice Alito "did a pretty sharp job":

In this case, officers entered an apartment without a warrant after smelling marijuana inside, knocking, and hearing noises inside. The Kentucky Supreme Court had assumed that the police had exigent circumstances in those facts, but then concluded that the police had created the exiegncy [sic] — and therefore could not rely on it to make a warrantless entry — by in effect inducing King inside to react to the police outside and react in a way that created the exigency. In its opinion today, the Supreme Court disagreed...

2. There's what the Indiana Supreme Court said in Barnes v. State, and, again I'm relying on the wonder that is Orin Kerr:

In this case, the officer had come to the home in response to a domestic violence call.... The officers asked if they could enter the home, and the defendant’s wife pleaded with the defendant to let them enter. The defendant refused. The police then entered anyway, and the defendant “shoved [an officer] against the wall.” The officers then tazed the defendant and arrested him.

The defendant was charged with misdemeanor battery against a police officer, among other things. At trial, he wanted to argue to the jury that it was lawful to shove the officer because he had a citizen’s right to reasonably resist unlawful entry into his home. 

The court said there was no such right, noting "a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence."

I'm not ready to take a position on either of these cases, but I wanted to put them up for discussion. I'm about to record a Bloggingheads episode, and we may talk about these, but, then again, maybe not.

"Perhaps that sounds to you like an archaic feminist assertion - the kind of thing that hip women no longer say."

Rachel Henes — a social worker and "youth violence prevention specialist" — takes up the anti-pornography cause:

During countless classroom discussions, boys have told me that from a very young age, they have been taught that for a "real" man, sex is about the aggressive conquest of female bodies and scoring with as many of them as you can. While these ideas have long been around, they are more socially sanctioned now than ever before.

So what happens when individual risk factors become societal norms? And when pornography, because of its ubiquity and availability, effectively becomes sex ed?...

[Girls are] feeling depressed and worthless as they realize that real-life translations of porn don't make them feel sexy or powerful at all, since the sexual personas they're trying to emulate have been created by - and for - men.

Rachel Henes is...
	1. an unhip, archaic feminist.
	2. a social conservative who just doesn't call herself conservative.
	3. smart and correct and we should listen to her.
	4. a great wake up call to those "sex positive" feminists.
	5. a boring sex-phobe.
	6. all of the above.
	7. 1 and 4.
	8. 2 and 3.
	9. 1 and 5.
pollcode.com free polls

Caught in a rainstorm, ducking into a small-town libraray, I read the Utne Reader yesterday.

I used to subscribe back in the 80s, when I loved it. But what is it now? I found the cover pretty amusing:



I can't find a bigger picture of that at the site. Too bad! They should show it off. It's funny — Obama biting into a sloppy cheeseburger and cringing as the angry Michelle waves a bunch of carrots much like wives in old comic strips used to wield rolling pins. And you know what it means when a First Lady gets after the President to eat carrots.

Of course, the article inside isn't critical of Michelle Obama and her eat-your-vegetables shtick. It's critical of Obama, but not because he eats cheeseburgers, because he "loves up industrial agriculture." We're supposed to identify with the angry woman swinging her lo-cal phallic symbols at her man. (At least they aren't cut up phallic symbols like the ones Hillary famously foisted on Bill.) The cheeseburger Obama prefers — like the onion rings Bill Clinton preferred — is a symbol, a symbol of what he loves. In Obama's case, according to the article, it's agribusiness. He "loves up" agribusiness, that big sloppy, gooey cheeseburger.

It's Utne Reader, that magazine for aging lefties, and the article assumes you're into the anti-business agenda. The magazine assumes you'll identify with Michelle and her vegetables and is oblivious to the possible revulsion you might feel to the angry face they've given her. You're supposed to think:  Yes, Obama, come back to your lefty roots. (Note: Carrots are roots.) Your policies need to kick big business in the ass and embrace the local and sustainable and holistic.

But I didn't get that far into the magazine. The library was closing and the rainstorm was ending, and we needed to get back to the Glacial Drumlin Trail. I only had time to read: 1.  a letter from the editor by a subscriber who was sending back an issue of the magazine because it had Sarah Palin on the cover and she didn't want to look at that ever ever ever (though presumably the articles inside assailed the Alaskan), 2. "On Being Fat and Running: Abandoning insecurity for a full life," by Brenton Dickieson, from Geez, and "Sentenced to Life: A man ages in prison and outlives society’s fears," by Kenneth E. Hartman, from Notre Dame. But none of those things are accessible on line, so I can't send Utne Reader some traffic and set up some discussion about that here.

The Hartman article is a reprint, and — unlike the Geez reprint about running while fat — the original is on line, so you can read it.

Prison is a young man’s world, a world of physical violence and posturing, a world of brute strength and primal, unfocused rage. It is not a place to grow old, although more and more of us are doing just that: growing old in prison.

But Utne Reader is not a young man's world — or a young woman's world. It feels like an old person's place. I felt too young for it... and I'm old. Or it's for those other aging Americans... the lefties.  I see these people in Madison all the time. Do they feel left behind? Do you think the day will come when "lefty" will seem to mean left behind?

IN THE COMMENTS: lemondog has a way to get to an enlargement of the cover. Here's a closeup screen grab that shows Michelle's face:



The artist is Jason Seiler. Nice work. I notice the cigarette over the ear now. Ha.

Using lemondog's method, I can get to that letter about Sarah Palin. If you page forward in the magazine, you'll find it. You can see the cover that upset the poor woman so. She complains:

When the media gives air space, page space, and cover space (albeit in jest or irony) to crazies such as Palin, they are complicit in her plan to lend credence to the climate of ignorance, sensationalism, and just downright muddled thinking that is passed off as a national discourse these days — and which she is one of the most visible muddlers.

Jeez, the mere image of Sarah Palin unleashes hysteria.

AND: The image of Michelle Obama drives other people nuts. Women's faces. They're so provocative.

The Giving Tree needed a sassy gay friend.

"What kind of a man is that? Hitting a woman when she’s holding a child in her hands? Breaking her teeth twice in the face! What kind of man is that?"

"Oh, you’re all angry now! You know what, you f*cking deserved it!"

The new Mel Gibson recording.