A libertarian says that “Congress should supply the tax monies needed”; an atheist takes up arms in the War on Christmas… on the side of Christmas; WTO protestors chow down at McDonald’s before hitting the streets to stop globalization; the Christian Defense Coalition, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), and Matt Moore all agree that the Patriot Act should not be renewed.

Today’s dose of total anarchy brought to you by Reason’s Hit and Run, the world’s Best Group Blog.

Popularity: 2% [?]

This is only a test of Rae’s new EE trackback system.

(More posts soon, I promise. I’ve set up individual Atom feeds for entries that are very useful for tracking comments, so I’ll be posting a howto.)

Popularity: 2% [?]

But rather than getting one of these to help the Insta-Wife park his new SUV perhaps Glenn could just hang a tennis ball from the ceiling.

Popularity: 2% [?]

As long as you don’t use the word as a verb, whatever you do to your meat is fine by me.

Popularity: 2% [?]

The review I wrote of Serenity was based on the free press screening that Universal invited bloggers to attend. I think this was the first time a major movie studio let bloggers into a screening, and I think it’s a great idea and (hopefully) the start of a trend. I love going to free movies before they’re released.

Since this was the first, there were definitely some kinks. This Blogcritics post outlines all of the issues that bloggers had with the event. Most of the problem was with the ambiguous wording of the email the PR firm sent to invited bloggers (well, most invited bloggers. I didn’t get the email, more on that later).

Congratulations! You are one of the lucky bloggers to be chosen and confirmed for the screening of SERENITY for the time, date and the number of guests that you have requested. Please note, this confirmation DOES NOT guarantee you a seat at the screening.

To significantly increase your chances of getting into the screening, you MUST do the following:

· You MUST include the film’s synopsis on your blog (synopsis below) and you MUST link your blog to the SERENITY website (which has the trailer and production notes) http://www.serenitymovie.com and featured artwork. After you have screened the film, please discuss it on your blog. Please provide us the links to all of your blog posts on SERENITY at serenity@gracehillmedia.com
· Print out and bring a copy of this confirmation.
· Arrive at the theater AT LEAST 45 minutes before the show begins.
· Upon arrival at the theater, please find a UNIVERSAL PICTURES representative and inform him or her that you are part of the SERENITY BLOGGER BONANZA. The Universal rep will then instruct you as to what to do next.
· DO NOT bring in a camera or a cellular phone that takes pictures. They WILL be confiscated, and you will NOT be allowed into the screening.
· Have a great time!

Like I said, I didn’t get this email. Perhaps my spam filters trashed it, it certainly reads like bad spam. If I’d known there was going to be an email, I would have looked for it in the junk folder, but the webpage I was sent to after signing up said, basically, you’re on the list: Just show up with ID and without recording devices, skip to the front of the line, and enjoy the show.

Several parts of this email are obviously poorly worded. But is it by design, or just stupidity? Certainly the sentence, “This confirmation DOES NOT guarantee you a seat at the screening,” makes no sense at all, but it could be intended to be nonsensical. Perhaps they were just poorly organized and didn’t know how many seats would be available, so they figured they’d use the word “confirmation” to get people to show and then add a bit of weasel language at the end. That way they’d have an excuse when everyone who didn’t get in got angry. It also makes no sense that they would confiscate your camera phone and kick you out of the screening. Doesn’t it seem like one or the other would be enough? I also seriously doubt that a private company is even allowed to confiscate my property.

It’s completely, totally ridiculous to expect a blogger to post their synopsis and artwork. Link to the website? Fine, I did that anyway, and you can follow that to read as much synopsis and look at as much artwork as you like. Plus, the synopsis was really lame and badly written. Check out a (slightly) edited version at dorkafork’s place. And when did they expect me to post the synopsis? I’d assume as part of my review after I’d seen the movie, but the email states that, “to significantly increase your chances of getting into the screening,” you must post the synopsis, artwork, and link. So did they want me to write about the movie before I saw it? I just don’t know.

Luckily, none of that mattered. It wouldn’t have anyway, I’m not principled enough to skip a free screening over little quibbles like this. I still wouldn’t have posted their synopsis, but I don’t think that changes anything. What are they going to do, not invite me to the sequel which might not even get made, anyway?

The “Blogger Bonanza” was a good idea, poorly executed (and poorly named. Bonanza?), but hopefully it helps word-of-mouth on the movie anyway. That way they’ll try again, and be less heavy-handed and better organized next time.

Popularity: 3% [?]

Jokes that involve Ashton, Demi, CINDY!, and Jesse Jackson do that to me. I’m just childish that way.

(I think you should suggest new pickup lines for Jesse to use on CINDY! in Andy’s comments. Extra points for rhyming preacher cadence.)

Popularity: 2% [?]

All this outrage over the use of the word “articulate” to describe a black man who is, in fact, articulate is ridiculous (but unsurprising) coming from a guy that used the phrase “the filthy Wolfowitz” to describe a Jew. At the time I was willing to assume that Oliver was just being stupid, but now I think maybe I should hold him to his own standard and call him a racist. Which is worse, describing a man who almost certainly showers daily “filthy,” or calling a man who articulates his ideas very well “articulate?”^†

Interestingly, the woman who started all this is a former co-worker of Oliver’s at Media Matters. According to Willis unethical and illegal opposition research by a Democrat is “dumb,” but Republican describing someone as articulate is, in some alternate (yet reality-based!) universe, “dumber.”

Also interesting: Willis’s archives only go back to April and the “filthy” brouhaha occured in March. Not only that, but Google doesn’t seem to have cached any of his related entries.

I was going to confine this to a comment on Oliver’s blog, but it seems to have never made it out of moderation (again… interesting). I don’t think it was inflammatory enough to warrant deletion, but it’s his blog, he can do what he wants. I’ll let you judge for yourself:

All this whining about a single, misinterpreted word from a guy that once used the word “filthy” to describe a Jew. Odd that your archives seem to stop right before that post, Oliver.

If you remember, I defended you back then, describing your use of that word as an inadvertent slip and not racism. Perhaps you should cut Ed some slack, or perhaps I should go back and describe your words as racist regardless of whether you “had any racial intent or not.”

In his entry Oliver admits that he doesn’t do much blogging about race because he’s not very good at it. For once, Willis and I find common ground.

(Links, and lots of ideas, via protein wisdom)

Popularity: 2% [?]

It’s been around since May, but I may have just found a new favorite blog. What can I say, I’m a sucker for Gawker Media, corporate whores of blogdom that they are.

Popularity: 6% [?]

Our old friend Gandhi is over at Goldstein’s defending a guy who called Jeff a “Jew prick” in email.

I agree. “Jew prick” is tasteless, racist and completely unnecessary.

On the other hand, you and your disciples spout venemous insults, gratuitous lies and hateful invective non-stop on this blog, so what do you expect?

Yes, because if you make light of terrorists, murderous dictators, suicide bombers, and their fellow travelers you should just expect virulent Jew-hatred in return.

But Gandhi’s not an anti-Semite. So somehow justifying the phrase “Jew prick” is a way of bravely standing up to the Zionist interests that control America.

Popularity: 2% [?]

Asbestos.

Popularity: 4% [?]