Who Knew That Micheal Kinsley Reads Naked Villainy?

Micheal Kinsley ought to pay me royalties. Of course, he writes better than your humble servant of the soil. He’s probably one of them fancy book-larnin’ types.

UPDATE: Sorry for the original erroneous link. It is now fixed. That is what happens when you work on your class blog and a friend’s blog at the same time.

Seekrit Note to Sadie: You know that it’s not mud.

Love Shack

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader just laughed and laughed and laughed when he thought about all the dignitaries in Busan, South Korea for the Asia/Pacific Economic Summit staying in love motels.

On your Maximum Leader’s visit to South Korea (many moons ago) to visit the Big Hominid he learned about the ‘love motel.’ If one is not acquainted with the subtleties of hotel grades in a foreign country it is easy to see how a “love motel” could be mistaken for a “regular” hotel. Heh.

Carry on.

Blind

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader feels he’s neglected you all a little bit. It has been something of a madhouse at the Villainschloss of late. Long story. The details of which he will sheild from your innocent reader eyes. Trust him. It is for the best.

Anyho… He sat down yesterday evening to write the Men’s Club post only to discover that this internet connection was down. Your Maximum Leader called his ISP and discovered that someone had unplugged the main server or something at the local office. He roundly chastised them and threatened flogging… And in the meanwhile decided to play some Rome:Total War…

So this morning he alighted to discover internet functioning… And something else! Midriffs.

Well one midriff exactly. Ally’s midriff. Sadie and Phin over at Apothegm have created for the lovely Ally! Go on over and check it out.

Excursus: You know, dear minions, that Apothegm gave Naked Villainy it’s new hip look. They are da bomb. As some people might say. Call Apothegm if you need to pimp out your blog.

And congrats Ally on a great new site.

Carry on.

Landlord Quiz

You have three people who want to rent your house. You talk to them on the phone and they fill out a rental application.

To which person do you rent your house?

a) Family of four. Father is retired military. Makes north of 90 grand a year working for a defense contractor. Has a security clearance, one of the conditions of which is the requirement to pay rent on time.

b) Young guy with pregnant wife. When he asks about the rent, you tell him it is $1600/month and that you want the equivalent of a month’s rent as a deposit, as well as the first month’s rent in advance. He says, “So that’s what, $3400? He fills out the application and makes $11/hour at McDonalds.

c) Fifyish couple moving to the area for new jobs in academia. They have sold their house and want to live in the area for a year before they buy. They had paid off their mortgage on the house and aren’t used to making monthly payments, so ask if it is okay to go ahead and write a check for the whole year’s rent in advance.

Who do you rent to? Explain your answer.

All Praise the Big Hominid

You know the Big Hominid is a good teacher.

Why?

Because he is always thinking and evaluating the success of his lesson plans.

See here for an example of what good teachers do every day.

Notice

I have noticed that many of our friends in the blogosphere have taken to referring to the Maximum Leader and his minions, collectively, as the “Naked Villains.”

Please stop immediately.

For the record, Mike is the Naked Villain.

Your humble Smallholder remains fully clothed in flannel and denim at all times. Sometimes I’ll take off the seed company hat, but that is as far as I’ll go.

Furthermore, Mike is the villainous one. Your humble Smallholder is a paragon of virtue.

Just remember:

Maximum Leader: Perfidious Blowhard.

Smallholder: Font of Truth.

Carry, as they say, on.

National Treasures

The Bush administration and the Republican Congress are destroying national treasures at an alarming rate.

But forget about drilling in ANWR. Forget about delisting a dozen endgangered species. Forget about opening Yellowstone to snowboarders. Forget about assinie western range rental policy.

There is an even greater tragedy.

I call on Bush and the Republicans in Congress to immediately save our greatest national treasure.

Those of you who watched “My Name is Earl” last night*, you know what I’m talking about. Jaime Pressly looks like crap. Whatever she is doing to herself must be stopped, even if it requires military intervention.

Good God! How can we face out children and admit that we allowed our leaders to stand by while the greatest hottie of the age turned into the cryptkeeper!

I hold the Bush administration personally responsible. I think this may qualify as a high crime and/or misdemeanor.

* Yes, Sadie, the Smallholder does occasionally partake in lowbrow entertainment. Three guesses why I picked that show…

Heh.

Jiggly tartlet indeed.

Smallholder doffs his seed company hat towards Phoenix.

The Wanderer

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader has a number of different things to do today, so this may be his only opportunity to blog today. As this might be his only post he will touch on a number of different topics. Pay attention.

First off, we are into the budget season in Congress. This time of year always amuses your Maximum Leader. You see the budgets were supposed to be completed last month. Congress (both the House and Senate) appear to have the whole legislative year to talk about the budget and prepare; but they don’t. Instead they wait until after the last minute and the work like crazy to get a budget passed. One could speculate (perhaps quite rightly) that part of the budgetary mess our Republic always finds itself is due in no small measure to the budget writing rush.

Anyhoo… It seems as though tax cuts are the hot topic du jour. As surprising as it may sound coming from your tax cutting Maximum Leader, this is not the time for new tax cuts. Your Maximum Leader is all for keeping the current taxes on everything as is. What is needed is spending control. At this point further tax cutting is diverting attention and political energy from budget cutting.

Your Maximum Leader will suggest to Republicans in Congress (and to the President) that their focus ought to be eliminating waste and cutting smallish programs that could stand to be cut. Outside of the realm of supply-side theory, the other reason that Ronald Reagan wanted to cut taxes was to “starve” the government into spending less. Reagan (and his team) made a logical (but wrong) assumption that if the government didn’t have money to spend it would at least try to stop spending growth. That didn’t happen. There was no outcry. There was no political price paid. So… Now Republicans have learned to spend better than the Democrats in the 1980s. The fiscal conservatives need to rise up and exert more control over the budget agenda in Congress. A strong untied block of Congressmen and Senators could push through a more responsible budget if they had the political will to do so.

And if the Republican Congress doesn’t start showing that it can do something about anything meaningful 2006 will not be a fun year.

Next up… The Smallholder made some fine comments about your Maximum Leader’s post about NH taxes on views in yesterday’s post. Allow your Maximum Leader to clarify a bit. He understands that houses with nicer views will be more expensive to buy than houses without nicer views. That doesn’t bother him. He understands that you will have variation in price based on location, views, and the quality of the neighbourhood. With variation in market price you will have variation in assessed value for property taxes. Neither does that bother him. But what is going on in New Hampshire is tax assessors going out to houses and doing an extra assessment on the view of the house and adding that assessed view’s value to the value of the house. This is done in a fashion completely independent of any market forces. And it also seems to be done only in areas (or to houses) that appear to fit a profile. The profile of “second home for rich Boston resident.” That is what appears to be wrong. Your Maximum Leader will try to learn some more about this and post further.

The Poet Laureate of the MWO made a fine comment about your Maximum Leader’s use of the “Below the Fold” feature of this blog and the placement of his traditional close “carry on” even when there is more below the fold. Very good points. Your Maximum Leader must confess that he likes to see the words “carry on” at the bottom of the main area of the post… Even if there is more below the fold. In the case of yesterday’s post, the paragraphs below the fold were something of an afterthought and inspired by - but not required for the enjoyment of - the main body of the post. In most cases where your Maximum Leader goes below the fold it is with material that he thinks is a nice addition to the post but perhaps not essential.

All that plus he wonders how many people actually click through and read below the fold…

Your Maximum Leader will second Robbo’s suggestion of putting French news babes on to replace Koppel. Frankly she could replace Greta Van Sustern in a better time slot. Your Maximum Leader wouldn’t even make Melissa learn English. She could just talk all she wanted in French. It might acutally make for better viewing.

Your Maximum Leader will also thank his Poet Laureate for his coverage of the French riots. Your Maximum Leader agrees that religion isn’t the major motivating factor, but it probably is a contributing factor. The French need to seriously review their immigration policies (for going forward) and figure out what they can do to assimilate the young disaffected French of North African descent. If assimilation is even possible…

Just like we’d say to Mr. Kotter… Welcome back.

Phoenix… Your Maximum Leader grows tired of waiting for that which he desires. Produce the dreamy Jennifer Love Hewitt immediately!

Lastly… If you happen to be a regular reader of the Worlds Greatest Tabloid you should be familiar with the bosomy ladies of Page 3. Well… Now gentlemen (and ladies who are inclined) you can play the “Guess the Model’s Bra Size” Quiz. The quiz is definately not safe for work. So don’t think about clicking through if you are in danger of losing your job if your boss comes by and sees breasts all over your monitor screen. If you are good with breasts on your monitor then clicky here. Your Maximum Leader got 4 of 6. (For those of you who wonder about these things.)

Carry on.

Pro-Life: Conservative or Liberal

Our friend Ally has a reflection on the how the liberals are “shocked, shocked I tell you, to discover” that Alito is pro-life.

She is absolutely right - this shoudl surprise nobody.

However, before the liberals get their collective panties in a bunch, they ought to look at Alito’ record. Unlike O’Connor, Alito rules based on a principled view of the Constitution - thus his dissent on Casey did not revolve around an attempt to impose his own personal beliefs but his attempt to meet O’Connor’s undue burden test.

Anyhow, lest you think that I am actually agreeing with Ally (’ware the flying pigs indeed!), the purpose of this post is to ruminate on whether the liberals and conservatives are being hypocritical with their abortion stances.

A conservative is typically suspicious of government power. They generally want to limit the federal government to the powers enumerated in the Constitution.

A liberal generally supports the use of government power to help the less fortunate and powerless.

Pro-life folks want the government to regulate one of the most important personal decisions you can make. While they wave the states’ rights banner in order to overturn Roe v. Wade, don’t doubt for a minute that, if they ever achieve the pipe dream of overturning Roe, that they won’t turn around and demand a national ban that will override the pro-choice legisislatures of blue states.

Pro-choice folks say that the government ought not to intervene in our personal lives. Pro-choice people express concern for the powerless, but I can’t think of anything more powerless than a fetus post-Roe.

The flip-flops of the “conservatives” and “liberals” can be explained by the fact that the terms no longer have identify political viewpoints as much as they identify membership in the superfactions that Madison so feared in Federalist #10. The “conservative” superfaction is all for individual responsibility and economic freedom, but also reached a mutually-rewarding deal with the religious right in which the religious folks support tax cuts and an interventionist foreign policy in return for government meddling in our sex/reproductive/marriage lives.

Liberals, who generally support the use of federal power to protect/create/advance the rights of the least fortunate among us, but have spun 180 degrees to keep the feminists within their superfaction.

I just wish both sides would ealize that it is a dead issue. Roe is so established by Stare Decisis that it is unlikely to ever be overturned. And the pragamtists who actually hold power in the Republican party don’t even want to overturn Roe: Witness Bush’s appointment of Justices who support Stare Decisis. Neither Roberts or Alito will challenge Roe.

And liberals should stop getting so worked up over the issue.

Attention pro-lifers: The Republicans are using the issue as a tool to distract you from real issues (much like flag burning and gay marriage).

Attention pro-choicers: There is no real threat. The Democratic interest groups want to scare you to drum up donations and support.

Attention both sides: There can be no meaningful debate. Either you believe that the soul exists at conception or you don’t. And that belief is not amenable to persuasion because it is faith-based rather than empirical.

So:

Can’t we just find a way to concentrate on real issues facing the country?

It’s Raining Men

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader is a pretty normal heterosexual guy. Indeed, few things please him, in so many ways, as regarding the female form. Indeed, all of the regular writers here at Naked Villainy are fond of mentioning our lusty thoughts concerning the dreamy Jennifer Love Hewitt, the tawdry Jaime Pressly, and the recovering Kate Moss.

But your Maximum Leader knows that many of his loyal readers are women. And what has your Maximum Leader done for you (dear ladies) recently? Well, frankly nothing. So to remedy this sad situation your Maximum Leader directs you to the lovely Mo’s site for hunky-Navy-guy-beefcake. He is sure that you will like it.

Carry on.
(more…)

Monkeyman

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader thinks that John Cleese is one lucky fellow. He is a bright man who did his time at Cambridge and graduated with a serious degree. He is gifted with comedic talent as well. He was able to parley his comedic talent into a full-time job that has made him world renowned and quite wealthy.

Now, in addition to intelligence, wealth, fame, and the ability to make people laugh he has a figgin lemur named after him. God does seem to just heap good fortune on some, or at least it looks that way sometimes.

Congrats John. May your memory live on in the lemur that bears your name… Well, in the lemur and all those Monty Python/Fawlty Towers DVDs you ought to be selling.

Carry on.

I Can See For Miles

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader was perusing the Washington Post when he came upon an interesting article concerning assessed values of homes in New Hampshire. The interesting bit was how the house’s assessed value was increased by the quality of the view from the house. So, if you house has a better view, the value of the house is increased, and your tax burden is likewise increased

The article details, in the early going, the plight of Brad Wilder among others. Wilder now has a view valued at over $200,000. This view costs him nearly $5,000 a year in new taxes. Another individual profiled, Bennett Nicholson has had to sell the house he hoped to spend the rest of his life in and move to Canada.

Here is how it works. A county assessor comes to your home. The assessor looks at your view and determines, using their own judgement, how much people would pay for that view. Then the value that the assessor decides is appropriate is assigned to the view and you get a tax bill.

Is your Maximum Leader the only one who thinks that this is more than a little unjust? Wouldn’t a reading of real estate values in an area be a better indicator of a house’s total value? Afterall, houses with good views are likely to sell for more than houses without a view all other things being equal. Suppose there are two indentical houses next to each other on the same street. Further suppose that one house has a spectacular view from the non-street side. Suppose that the otherwise identical house, due to a large outcropping of rock or something, has no significant view from the non-street side - does it follow that the house with the view would be worth significantly more?

Could one say that this tax policy is an unconstitutional taking of someone’s land?

Your Maximum Leader while mulling over this article wondered something… The purpose of the tax assessment seems to be to increase state revenues. (Which should go without saying.) But the implication of article is that the New Hampshire government hopes that out-of-staters who are buying second homes will be the ones to pay the tax. Could one thereby extrapolate that the government is using it tax power to “take” land from current owners with the intention that it be transferred to someone else who will pay the higher taxes and thereby increase revenues? How is this senario much different than the one that New London just won in the recent Kelo decision?

Okay… It is significantly different than Kelo, but the fact remains that the state appears to be targeting some residents of the state with higher taxes while not targeting others. And the common feature of those targeted is that they have property that is more highly valued by those who seek to own second homes. It all seems very unjust to your Maximum Leader.

Carry on.

The End

Greetings, loyal minions. Your Maximum Leader is sorry that he wasn’t able to blog much on Friday. Internet connectivity problems. Then on Friday evening he went down to the Smallholder’s farm and picked up his beef and butcher hog. It was glorious… Your Maximum Leader has been eating sausage and roasted pork all weekend. Damn it is fine. If you are local to Virginia and interested in organic beef and pork - shoot the Smallholder an e-mail as he is planning out next year…

Anyho… Time to move on to insightful political commentary…

Your Maximum Leader is becoming more and more convinced that een with redistricting and safe-seats in their favour that the Republicans are in a position where they can loose control of the House of Representatives in 2006. To wit, they are having trouble getting basic bills to the floor of the House. If you recall (and your Maximum Leader is sure you do) that the Democrats couldn’t pass a rule to debate their own crime bill in 1994. When your party can’t muster enough votes to pass a rule establishing floor debate on a bill your party supports, and your party is the majority party; you are in serious trouble friend.

Excursus: For those of you who don’t know what a “rule” is in this context… When a bill is discharged from Committee in the House of Representatives it must go to the “Rules Committee.” The Rules Committee of the House then determines the order that bills will be introduced to the floor of the House and then establishes debate guidelines. Debate guidelines are how much time will each side have to debate the bill, will amendments be allowed. All that good stuff. Then when the Rules Committee is done with the bill it is sent to the floor of the House to be read. But before debate can begin, the “Rules” of debate must be approved. This is oftentimes a straight party line vote. So when you are the majority and you can’t win a straight party line vote - you’re in serious doo-doo.

So… The problem with the Republicans is that they have no agenda. The President doesn’t have one to lead on. And the House Republicans are divided. Divided between Conservatives and Republicans. As many are fond of pointing out, just because you are a conservative doesn’t mean you are a Republican. (Some are fond of calling “moderate” Republicans RINOs - or Republicans In Name Only. This assumes that the Republican Party is the Conservative Party. While the Republican Party is generally more conservative than the Democrats this doesn’t mean that the whole party is “Conservative.” Indeed, of late one has been able to see just how many non-conservative Republicans there are out there.)

The divided House - as Mr. Lincoln told us - cannot stand. And if you aren’t doing something in Congress you tend to lose the majority status…

Of course, your Maximum Leader - as longtime readers know - if fond of gridlock. That is to say that he really likes it when Congress can’t pass legislation due to differences between the political parties, the two chambers of the Congress, and the Executive Branch. Indeed, your Maximum Leader is all for lots and lots of gridlock. But he’s dismayed when one chamber of the Congress can’t even work itself up to becoming gridlocked. This is to say that your Maximum Leader likes the elected representatives of the people to try to get something done and fail as opposed to do nothing at all.

So it is looking bad right now for House Republicans. Of course, 2006 elections are still a year off. And who knows what can happen between now and then. But portents herald ill-tidings unless the situation changes.

Carry on.

Before You Comment on Smallholder’s Religious Ruminations

Please note carefully that I’m not bashing all Christians.

As a Christian myself, I’m trying to advance the spread of Christianity by denying the validity of errant thought. The Christian God is not a vengeful, intolerant, hate-filled, anti-science God.

He is a loving, forgiving God who gave us out brains for a reason.

Perhaps he intended us to learn about his creation instead of shivering in caves and breeding better cattle through the proper placement of carved sticks.

Query: Why is it that the most hateful Christians wrap themselves in the cloak of literal translation? And why does their literal, inerrant translation ignore the words of the Bible that aren’t congruent with their hatred?

Query: Why aren’t Christians condemning Robertson’s idiocy? Why do so many Christians tune in to CBN every day for their daily does of narrowminded bigotry?

    About Naked Villainy

    • maxldr

    Villainous
    Contacts

    • E-mail your villainous leader:
      "maxldr-blog"-at-yahoo-dot-com or
      "maximumleader"-at-nakedvillainy-dot-com

    • Follow us on Twitter:
      at-maximumleader

    • No really follow on
      Twitter. I tweet a lot.

The Smallholder is not “squishy” but “independently principled.”

    Villainous Commerce

    Villainous Sponsors

      • Get your link here.

      Villainous Search