http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php Blog of Michael Gull en gullmichael@gmail.com Copyright 2008 2008-01-08T03:32:00-06:00 http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/decision-2008your-vote-matters/ http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/decision-2008your-vote-matters/#When:03:32:00Z Of course, I’m kidding. Your vote doesn’t really matter. Ask Al Gore. But we Americans do love to feel like we’re a part of things, so every four years many Americans pretend they don’t know about the Electoral College. It’s cute, really. You are pretending, right? (If you just opened another tab and Googled “electoral college”, please never read my blog or anything else again. And please, for the love of Christ, don’t reproduce. And if you have already reproduced, please drown your spawn immediately). Where were we? Ah yes, the presidential race. I love the process. Love to watch the people get all worked up over supporting their candidates…bumper stickers, yard signs, buttons, endless absurd conversations and heated debates between people about whom the candidates don’t give the first shit. And, most importantly, between people who have absolutely no decision making power in the election of the President. Let’s say you are a huge supporter of Ron Paul (why? I don’t know….maybe you’re borderline retarded). And let’s say you vomit your prepared Ron Paul sales pitch all over my shirt. Then, let’s say I have hit my head several times and decide to also be a Ron Paul supporter. Then I start running around vomiting on people’s shirts. What has been accomplished? Not a goddamned thing. It’s all nothing but balderdash. We have both wasted our energy (Al Gore hates it when you waste energy). But still, this time around is a lot of fun to watch. It’s always a gas to listen to wealthy liberal candidates pandering to the “common people”, pushing all the right buttons with their populist rhetoric. Even more fun to watch people eat it up and believe that the rich attorney “really does care about me”. It’s the same every time, with the same result. Lather, rinse, repeat. Watching the Republicans who are vying for the White House is never as fun for me because very rarely does one of them have a pulse. The right also employs the same tactics every time, and the Limbaugh listeners throw their support behind whichever detached Jesus Freak seems most likely to keep Mexicans and black folks out of their yards. But the Republicans lack passion. Always have. Not nearly as entertaining as the Democrats. Hearing one conservative Godsucker criticize another conservative Godsucker for being a member of a religion in which Jesus and Satan are brothers makes me want to scratch out my own eyes with a pencil, eat them, pass them through my colon, and smear the waste in the hair of said conservatives. That was a bit much. But this time around, even the Democrats bore me. Not coming close to the hype. “We’re making history!” “We could get our first woman President!” Who? Is there a woman running? Maybe Edwards has a vagina… “We could get our first black president!” Obama? Seriously? He’s about as black as Wayne Brady. Or Greg Brady. He’s that “safe” kind of black, the kind that liberal white apologists love because it makes them feel open minded. Like Wayne Brady. White women love Wayne Brady. Why? Because he’s a safe black guy. He seems nice. He seem, well….white. The same is true of Obama. He could have been the light-skinned Huxtable kid, for Christ’s sake. When Jesse Jackson, an actual black guy, ran for the presidency, he had virtually no support, even from guilty white liberals. Why? Too black. He talked about…um…black things. He sounded black. Too black, even for white people trying to be open minded. Gore is too busy to run again. He’s still in Florida, counting them just this one last time… Really, no one else is viable, so I shan’t even type their names. Hey Libertarians, give it up. It’s NEVER going to happen. Move to fucking Canada. And take Alec Baldwin with you. I thought he swore to leave the United States if Bush was re-elected. So what’s the point of all of this? I’m not sure, but soon the new season of American Idol will begin. Finally, someplace my vote really does count. Gull 2008-01-08T03:32:00-06:00 http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/goodbye-my-friend/ http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/goodbye-my-friend/#When:16:06:00Z For anyone who came from the Milwaukee Comedy Scene in the last decade, more likely than not Tony Miller was a big part of your formation as a comic. For years, Tony ran the comedy showcase/open mic at The Safe House in downtown Milwaukee, and then moved his show to the Broadway Theatre Center in Milwaukee. At both of these venues, Tony consistently produced an incredibly high quality show while still giving new comics much needed stage time. His shows featured seasoned professional comics along with fledglings and served as an atmosphere for growth and friendship. It was so much more than just a comedy showcase. It was a comedy dojo, where comics serious about becoming better could work out alongside black belt comics and learn from them. Tony built a sense of community and camaraderie among the comics involved in the Milwaukee Comedy Scene. In 2001 I decided that I wanted to do stand up comedy. I was working as the door guy at the Safe House and would go in the back room every Thursday night to watch Tony's show. When I finally worked up the courage to give it a try, I went on stage, last in the lineup, with a half dozen Jack Daniel's on the rocks in my gut. Of course, I sucked. Week after week, Tony gave me stage time and encouragement. Week after week, I got drunk before going up to do my 3 minutes. Week after week, I sucked. Until one Thursday night in April, when 3 comics Tony was counting on didn't show up. As the second comic of the night was on stage, Tony walked up to me and said "You're next. Think you can handle it?" I told him that under no circumstances was I able to handle going third in the lineup (I was stone cold sober). He told me that I was wrong and that I could absolutely handle it. Tony forced me to go on sober and for the first time, I got laughs. Lots of them. I did more than 10 minutes and killed. The loudest laughs came from Tony. After that night, he started putting me up in one of the prime spots, right before Brian Green, and every week, I could hear his unmistakable, goofy laugh. Some nights, that's all that kept me going. Both Tony and Brian took me under their wings, mentoring me and helping me form myself into a real comic. And both became very good friends of mine in the process. For Christmas, 2003 I bought a new microphone for Tony's show at the Safe House. The old one was beat up and didn't work well at all anymore. I took possession of the old one as a keepsake. I'll always treasure the microphone that Tony used to help launch so many comics, the mic I used on the first night I got laughs. I worked the road with Tony Miller a few times and to watch him headline and take control of a stage was a beautiful sight. His comedic skills easily rivaled his generosity and kindness to new comics and friends. He was an established headliner on the road and well respected among his peers. As some of you know, Tony Miller had been battling stomach cancer for a couple of years and was, as in all other areas of his life, fighting like the bad-ass that he was. This morning, at 6:40 am, Tony Miller passed away, finally letting go of this world and going home. I hope he realized the breadth of his legacy among Milwaukee comics. Thank you for everything, Tony. I'll miss you, my friend. 2007-10-10T16:06:00-06:00 http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/free-michael-mcgee/ http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/free-michael-mcgee/#When:22:16:00Z I'm completely outraged by the arrest of Milwaukee Alderman Michael McGee, Jr. This is just another example of the racist machine that exists here in Milwaukee and their fear of a powerful man of color. Alderman McGee has done nothing but good for the 6th District, serving only the interests of his constituency. The Milwaukee Police Department and the Feds have been gunning for McGee since he entered public life. Before that, they targeted his father, who also served selflessly as Alderman of the same district. The behavior of the racist Milwaukee media during this past week in dealing with McGee's arrest has been deplorable. The TV news and radio programs and newspapers who have decided to make this a major news story should be ashamed of themselves. It has been pointed out by prominant local media types that when white local political types have gotten into legal trouble, they weren't paraded around in handcuffs and humiliated in public. Alderman McGee is being treated unfairly because he's black AND because he's a strong black man who is the son of a strong black man. McGee is now being mocked by racist white people while he goes through this public humiliation at the hands of the racist justice system. He's also being mocked and criticized for calling in to a local urban morning radio show and singing, as well as being accused of trying to get his supporters to contribute to his legal expenses. I'm sickened by this treatment of a good man who only wants to serve his city. Ouch. My cheek hurts from having my tongue so firmly planted in it. 2007-05-31T22:16:00-06:00 http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/bush-has-lowest-approval-rating-in-history/ http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/bush-has-lowest-approval-rating-in-history/#When:20:40:00Z Hey, the left loves to talk ad nauseam about Bush's low approval rating whenever they get the chance. "Bush has the lowest approval rating of any president in history" is a favorite mantra of theirs. Here's a fact: It's simply not true. Not even close. The president who received the lowest approval rating in history was Harry Truman, who got down to 23%. Maybe GW Bush has the second lowest in history........NOPE. That honor goes to Richard Nixon, with 24%. How about the third lowest? Jimmy Carter, with 28%. If and when this Republican president sinks to 22%, then and only then can the spin happy, fact bending liberals talk about Bush having the lowest AR in history. Until that day comes, everyone with the ability to read would really appreciate an end to the lies. Well, just because Bush doesn't have the all time lowest approval rating in history, doesn't mean that his rating doesn't suck........ That's true, and surely, George W Bush isn't the owner of the record for history's highest approval rating. Oh, wait........YES HE IS. In late 2001, he received the highest approval rating ever for a president: 90%. No doubt I will now be answered by huffing and puffing libs who will say that THAT number is meaningless. Save your breath. You'll need it for your clever chants about the war. If the LOW approval ratings he gets are important, then so are the HIGH ratings. Can't have it both ways, that's just not how it....oh, wait.....forgot who I was addressing. Here's another insight into approval ratings: The aforementioned Harry Truman, who received the lowest approval rating ever (23), was also the recipient of the third highes ever, with a rating of 87% at one point in his presidency. Guess who got the second highest approval rating in history............The elder Bush, during the Gulf War (89%). Man, those pesky numbers........ All that having been said, I now ask you, the insightful reader, to take a look at this story from the USA Today website just today. Nancy Pelosi's Democratic Congress and Whining Factory is in posession of an identical approval rating as Bush right now. And here's the best part: They blame it on Bush. I love the way you guys play. Maybe Bush can somehow be blamed for the Lindberg baby thing. So, tell me......are the numbers important, or not? CONGRESS, BUSH SHARE LOW APPROVAL By Alan Fram, Associated Press WASHINGTON — People think the Democratic-led Congress is doing just as dreary a job as President Bush, following four months of bitter political standoffs that have seen little progress on Iraq and a host of domestic issues. An AP-Ipsos poll also found that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is a more popular figure than the president and her colleagues on Capitol Hill, though she faces a gender gap in which significantly more women than men support her. The survey found only 35% approve of how Congress is handling its job, down 5 percentage points in a month. That gives lawmakers the same bleak approval rating as Bush, who has been mired at about that level since last fall, including his dip to a record low for the AP-Ipsos poll of 32% last January. "It's mostly Iraq" plus a lack of progress in other areas, said Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., who heads the House GOP's campaign committee. "These are not good numbers for an incumbent, and it doesn't matter if you have an 'R' or a 'D' next to your name." Democrats agree that the problem is largely Iraq, which has dominated this year's session of Congress while producing little more than this month's Bush veto of a bill requiring the withdrawal of U.S. troops. It has also overshadowed House-passed bills on stem cell research, student loans and other subjects that the White House opposes, they say. "People are unhappy, there hasn't been a lot of change in direction, for example in Iraq," said Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., chairman of House Democrats' campaign effort. Rising gasoline prices could also be a factor, lawmakers said. In another measure of popular discontent, the survey found that 71% say the country is on the wrong track — about even with the 73% who said so last May, the worst level since the AP-Ipsos poll began in December 2003. The survey was taken Monday through Wednesday, before Bush offered to seek compromise with congressional Democrats over a war spending bill setting benchmarks for progress in Iraq. Bush told reporters Thursday that if pollsters had asked his opinion about Iraq last fall, "I'd have said I disapprove of what was going on in Iraq. They could have put me down as part of the disapproval process." That was before his decision to send nearly 30,000 additional troops to Iraq, which "would more likely cause me to approve of what's going on in Iraq," he added. Overall approval of Bush was steady from last month, but fell to 69% among Republicans, about 7 percentage points below where it had been in April. Earlier this week, a group of GOP moderate House members warned Bush that the status quo in Iraq could mean Republican election losses next year. "If the war doesn't begin to turn around, Republicans will have problems," said Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., who said he supports Bush's Iraq policy. White House spokesman Tony Snow declined to comment on the poll. Congress' approval rating this week was 10 points higher than a year ago, when Republicans were in control. But after bumping up in April, this month's drop left lawmakers' job approval where it was when the year began. April saw Congress defy Bush and send him a bill financing the war and requiring a troop withdrawal, which he vetoed May 1. "People wanted change in Washington" on many issues, not just Iraq, said Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., a member of the House Democratic leadership. "I'm not surprised about where people are. They're hearing only about Iraq." Congress' reduced appeal was evident in several categories of people. Only 48% of Democrats said they approved of Congress, down from 55% last month. That included a 12 percentage point drop among Democratic women, though support from Democratic men remained steady. Approval by minorities also fell a dozen points to 39%, with a similar reduction among people whose family incomes exceed $75,000. By region, the steepest drop was in the Midwest, where approval fell by 10 percentage points to 28%. Congress' highest approval was in the Northeast, where four in ten gave it a positive rating. As for Pelosi, D-Calif., her overall approval of 45% stood 10 points higher than Bush's and Congress'. She was seen favorably by 52% of women, but only 39% of men. While whites are closely split about her, minorities approve of her job by a 15-point margin. Pelosi's numbers are about where she was last month but slightly lower than in January. In the last month, she has lost significant support from younger voters, college-educated women and Westerners. "Voters are frustrated by the fact that the president refuses to change direction on Iraq," said Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly. Bush's approval ratings are lowest for his handling of Iraq and domestic issues including health care, with about one-third seeing him favorably. About four in 10 like the job he is doing on the economy and foreign policy. Men give the president higher grades than women do, whites higher than minorities, and married people higher than singles. The AP-Ipsos survey involved telephone interviews with 1,000 adults. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. I LOVE THAT THEY EVEN TRY TO BLAME BUSH FOR THEIR OWN LOW APPROVAL RATING. BEAUTIFUL. XOXO, GULL 2007-05-11T20:40:00-06:00 http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/gun-control-laws-save-32-on-virginia-tech-campus/ http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/gun-control-laws-save-32-on-virginia-tech-campus/#When:22:46:00Z The state of Virginia is a concealed carry state. Anyone passing a background check over the age of 18 can legally carry a loaded handgun. But Virginia Tech, the scene of what may be the worst mass shooting in our nation's history, is a "gun-free zone". This means that even if a student or faculty member can legally carry in the state of Virginia, they may not carry a concealed handgun on campus. So what happened yesterday was that a bunch of law-abiding students and faculty members went to school, like any other day, and because they were law-abiding citizens, they did not carry handguns on campus. However, one guy DID bring guns to the Virginia Tech campus yesterday. And he ended 32 lives before ending his own. He ended 32 innocent lives because the others on campus were playing by the rules and not carrying guns on a campus in a state where they legally may carry guns. In January of 2006 an attempt was made to change the rule at Virginia Tech and allow students and faculty to carry on campus, but it died in the General Assembly. And in that moment, the fates of 32 innocents were sealed. Of course, no one can say for certain that if concealed carry had been allowed on the campus of Virginia Tech, that no one would have been killed yesterday during the attack. But we can say that perhaps someone would have been in a position to stop the shooter. If a student or faculty member had been carrying their legal firearm yesterday, and had been in the vacinity, the rampage could have been stopped. Would they have taken down the shooter after his first victim, or his 5th? No one knows. All we know is that no one got the chance to defend themselves and 32 people who obeyed the law are dead at the hands of one young man who ignored the law. Yeah, those gun control laws are really protecting people. Let's pass some more. Here's the problem with the unconstitutional gun laws that the more....shall we say....left leaning folks support. CRIMINALS DON'T OBSERVE THE LAW. THAT'S THAT MAKES THEM FUCKING CRIMINALS. Laws against concealed carry do nothing more than ensure that when the shit goes down, as it did on the Virginia Tech campus.....no one will be able to defend themselves. Gull 2007-04-17T22:46:00-06:00 http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/the-faggot-files/ http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/the-faggot-files/#When:22:58:00Z A couple of weeks ago, during a conservative gathering, the notorious Ann Coulter called Democratic No-Chance-In-Hell-Of-Being-President-EVER Candidate John Edwards a "faggot". After she made the comment, the conservative audience, in typical homophobic fashion, laughed and applauded. Being a "Reagan Republican", I also dig Ann Coulter...mostly. I dig it when she points out inconsistencies by the Dems, I dig it when she calls bullshit when it needs to be called. But I don't dig it when she sounds like a 13 year old homophobic boy, calling everyone gay. This is the same woman who made allegations that both Bill and Hillary Clinton are probably gay. Bill Clinton??? The best she could come up with was that he may be gay? He's as un-gay as a man ever was. If Bill Clinton could get away with it, he'd strap on a pussy feedbag and wear it everywhere he went (an invention I'm currently rushing to patent, by the way). The man digs chicks. A lot. He digs chicks so much he doesn't even care what they look like. Obviously. The problem here is that Coulter is under the impression that it's an insult to call someone gay. Are there still people who really think this way? Seriously? Clearly there are, since she received an ovation after her Edwards comment. I'm embarrassed to be a republican lately. Ann Coulter is to the right what Michael Moore is to the wrong. Just a loud, obnoxious relative who sometimes makes a salient point but mostly just won't shut the fuck up. But Coulter is kinda hot in a way that Michael Moore just can't pull off, which is why the homophobic, middle aged conservative males still listen to her. I still can't figure out why liberals listen to Michael Moore. Maybe the baseball caps have some sort of hypnotic powers. Who knows? Am I rambling? Sorry. Ok, John Edwards is prissy. Hes's plastic, but he's not gay. And even if he was gay, it would still be a moronic thing to use as an insult. Gay, straight, bi, poly, omni, tranny....whatever.....none of it matters. What matters is that John Edwards will NEVER come close to being President. And why? Because he looks like a Ken doll. That's why he won't even be Vice-President. Remember what happened last time we let a Ken doll be VP? P.O.T.A.T.O.E. Can I get an Amen? That's what I thought. Here are 2 pics. Can you tell which one is the real John Edwards? Spooky? You bet your socialized medicine wanting ass. John Edwards is a slime-ball attorney with an over inflated sense of self. That's why he thinks he can be President. He's dishonest and duplicitous. He served as director of the Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity, which sounds nice. At the same time, he was serving as a consultant for Fortress Investment Group, an asset management firm that exists to help incredibly wealthy people keep their money away from the folks Edwards was pretending to help in the Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity. John Edwards isn't a faggot. He's a lawyer. And a Ken doll. Love You, Gull 2007-03-19T22:58:00-06:00 http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/any-way-the-wind-blows/ http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/any-way-the-wind-blows/#When:17:56:00Z Here are some quotes from some democratic heavies on Saddam, Iraq and the ever popular "Bush Invention"....Weapons of Mass Destruction. I love liberals! Whichever way the wind is blowing...... "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998. "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998. "Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998. "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998. "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998. "Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999. "There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001. "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002. "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002. "Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002. "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002. "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002. "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002. "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002, "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do." Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002. "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ... Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998 "This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others "Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002 "Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998 "(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998 "Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002 "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002 "There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002 "What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002 "The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998 "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002 "I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003 "Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998 "Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002 "The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002 "I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002 "Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002 "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002 "Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002 "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002 "There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002 "I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002 "The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002 "(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America�s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003 "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002 "Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002 "Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002 "As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998 "Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998 "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002 "Saddam�s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq�s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002 "Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration�s policy towards Iraq, I don�t think there can be any question about Saddam�s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002 Keep talking, ladies and gents. You are so so very entertaining. It's like watching a fucking tennis match. Save the whales, Gull 2007-02-22T17:56:00-06:00 http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/i-love-new-orleans-is-the-new-how-are-you/ http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/i-love-new-orleans-is-the-new-how-are-you/#When:20:00:00Z Ok, I'll say it... I DON'T love New Orleans. Gasp! Did he just say what I think he said??? Did he just say he doesn't love New Orleans? You're not allowed to say that! Not after Katrina! Ever since Katrina, we're all supposed to pretend we love New Orleans, regardless of our pre-Katrina feelings for the place! Didn't he get the memo? Bite me. I got the memo, and then I wiped my New Orleans disliking ass with it. Know why? Because I didn't much care for New Orleans before Katrina hit....kinda thought it was nasty and a bit too dirty for my taste. I seriously doubt that being devestated by a hurricane made it BETTER. Therefore, I still don't love New Orleans. Anyone who suddenly developed a love for the place after Katrina is certainly welcome to spew their proclamations of affection. Sleep well as you rest your easily led head on a pillow of bullshit, my platitude belching friends. I will have no part of it. I didn't care much for New Orleans then....don't care much for it now. I won't be joining you as you jump aboard the tragedy train. I hadn't really given this issue much thought until earlier this week, when I saw Barack Obama on Good Morning America. It was the morning after the State of The Union Address, and they were getting Obama's thoughts on the speech. After allowing Obama to repeat all of the predictable party-approved phrases he could fit into 3 minutes, they brought the interview to a close by asking Barack for his take on the Superbowl, and the fact that his home team, the Bears would be going instead of the New Orleans Saints. Obama, who, for those of you living in caves, is a Senator from Illinois, expressed his pleasure at the Bears going to the Superbowl. But he couldn't leave it at that. He had to throw in a comment about how much he "loves the city of New Orleans". How absolutely fucking trite. Here's what I need. I need Obama to back up his statement with some hard evidence. I want him to produce proof that he spent time in New Orleans before Katrina. If he can't, he needs to shut the hell up. If someone can provide me with some sort of credible account of Obama having any sort of connection to New Orleans that doesn't involve him jumping on the bandwagon after the hurricane.....I'll......I'll.....vote Democrat in 2008. (God, my fingers feel dirty after typing that last part). But the thing is, I feel pretty safe in this wager because no one will be able to provide any evidence suggesting that Obama legitimately loves New Orleans. As is the case with most of the people running around now claiming to love New Orleans. Here's a pretty basic ruler by which to measure someone's sincerity in this particular area. Ever been there? If so, did you ever go back? If you can't answer these questions in the affermative, then you DON'T LOVE NEW ORLEANS. If you went to Mardi Gras once and got really drunk and don't remember the names of anything but bars.....you don't love New Orleans. You know who you are. I don't need to tell you you're a hypocrite. You already know it. Now go and make sure your "Support Our Troops" magnet is positioned properly on your car and count how many LOCAL homeless people you drive past today, as you feel good about yourself for donating to some Katrina Fund. "I Love New Orleans" is the new "How Are You"....people go around saying it without really meaning it. Makes me a little sick. Have a nice day, Gull 2007-01-26T20:00:00-06:00 http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/what-do-bono-brangelina-and-pamela-anderson-have-in-common/ http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/what-do-bono-brangelina-and-pamela-anderson-have-in-common/#When:21:59:00Z My girlfriend and I argued recently about the validity of activism by celebrities. She is of the opinion that folks like Bono deserve to have their political views heard, and should be taken seriously. I don't agree. Where do you stand? Do you think our youth should be getting their politics from celebrities? Know who I think is really talented? Prince. Know who he feels about the war in Iraq? Me neither. And that's the way I like it. Pamela Anderson wants to protect animals? How about protecting the innocent people of this country against things like that ill-advised tv show she had, "Stacked"??? Am I really supposed to take these people seriously? As for Bono, I really don't even know where to start. Should I begin with the fact that he's almost 50 years old and still goes by a nickname? The man's name is Paul, for Christ's sake. Can't he take off the sunglasses and go by Paul when he's trying to be taken seriously? "Hi, I'm Bono. This is my associate, The Edge. May we see the Prime Minister, please?" Yeah, the Prime Minister will see you in a moment. Right now he's in a meeting with Meat Loaf. But I can take Paul's "middle-aged guy still trying to old onto his youth" thing. That's just surface stuff. My criticism of Mr Hewson goes deeper than that. His hypocrisy is what makes me cringe when I see him blathering on about all the money that's needed to fund his initiatives. Some folks are under the impression that Paul Hewson is a heavy cash contributor to the causes for which he speaks. Let's look at that, shall we? Bono has been quite vocal in his urging of governments to send more money in overseas aide. He has loudly criticized Ireland's Prime Minister Bertie Ahern for not increasing the amount of money sent, particularly to Africa. Here's the part Bono isn't quite so willing to talk about: in 2006, his native Ireland announced that there would be restructuring of the tax laws. One major change is that songwriters, artists and writers would now have to pay taxes on royalties. You see, gentle reader, Paul Hewson and his band, who own a publishing company together, had been enjoying years of tax free royalty income. The new Irish tax law would have had their incorporated publishing company paying a 12.5% tax. I say WOULD HAVE because when faced with the news that the free ride was over and they would have to start contributing to the coffers, Bono and his bandmates did what any good philanthropist does. They moved their publishing company to The Netherlands, where taxes are half what they are in Ireland. Tell the government how to spend tax money, yet avoid paying into the system. Hmmmmmm. Bono is also very vocal in The United States in regard to how our country should be run, and how our tax dollars should be spent. Surely, he contributes to our tax kitty. Well, you be the judge. Paul Hewson is one of the directors of Elevation Partners, a Private Equity Firm based in California. The money held by this firm is $1.9 billion. Here's a project for you. Look into the structure of Private Equity Firms, and find out why it's the best way for massively wealthy people to shield their money. Avoids paying taxes on his huge income in his home country, avoids paying taxes on business he's transacting here.......yet feels as though he has the right to say ANYTHING about how the money collected through taxes should be spent. Hey Bono......Rattle THIS and hum. Gull 2007-01-08T21:59:00-06:00 http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/confessions-of-a-slapaholic/ http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/confessions-of-a-slapaholic/#When:19:36:00Z As I venture through life, trying like the dickens to spread sunshine and love wherever I go, I far too frequently encounter people who need to be slapped in the mouth with the back of my hand. Of course, I generally don't surrender to the temptation. Usually what happens is I walk away from the situation muttering expletives and vowing to never allow myself to engage that person again. Sometimes though, I come in contact with people that I like to call "ITIs". The ITI (Impossible To Ignore) is the type of individual who says or does something so ignorant, so mindless, so diabolical....that they simply cannot be ignored. Something MUST be done when an ITI is encountered. There are varying degrees of ITIs, with the appropriate responses also working on a sliding scale. For instance, if a morbidly obese woman is hitting her kid in a WalMart, the response would be different than if a booze-soaked guy was in line in front of you at the gas station buying and scratching off scores of lottery tickets. The lottery ticket guy needs to be hit in the back of the head with a shovel. The WalMart woman just requires a dirty look. So you see, how one responds to an ITI is tricky business. If I was to hit the WalMart woman in the head with a shovel, I might end up having to drive her repugnant kid home or something. And lets be honest: some kids need to be hit. In my day, our parents would beat us with chairs, table legs, the dog.....whatever was handy. And my generation is the last to have any sense of right and wrong. Don't get me started. The most heinous of the ITIs.....the ones who require the most extreme reaction, are the ones who insist on opening their mouths when they really truly shouldn't. The ones who ignore the language, yet insist on communicating with me. Hear this now and know that it is true: If you tell me that you "COULD CARE LESS" about something, you are a fucking retard. I say to Joe that our mutual friend Tim just got a new job. Joe says: "I could care less about Tim's new job." Joe at this point needs to be punched in the neck. Can someone please explain to me why so many people say they "could care less" when what they really mean is that they COULDN'T care less??? The point of uttering this phrase is to communicate your lack of interest in something. Therefore, you COULDN'T care less about the thing in question. To say that you COULD care less is to say that you actually do care about the thing in question. Just thinking about this makes me want to take a flamethrower to someone. I want to kill Joe, and he doens't even exist! I'm actually shaking with rage right now. I need a moment. Okay, I'm back. The other major transgressors in the language assault are the ones who say they are "Shopaholics", "Chocaholics", "Workaholics"........you know the ones. We all know someone who uses these words. These are the ones who shall for evermore be on the receiving end of a backhanded slap from yours truly (I also hate people who say"yours truly"). If you really like to shop, you are not a "Shopaholic". You are not addicted to shopahol. You do not eat to much chocahol, therefore you cannot possibly be a "Chocaholic". As for the "Workaholic" thing........well, you get it. Alcoholics are called that because they are addicted to alcohol. The "ic" suffix is attached to a word to indicate that something or someone is connected with a particular thing. The particular thing in question in the case of an alcoholic is alcohol. The "ahol" part is not part of the suffix, it's part of the fucking root word! Now I'm in a rage again. Be warned. If I hear anyone using any of these words, I will slap them across the mouth with the back of my hand. Why? Because I'm a goddamned Slapaholic. And don't forget to come and see me perform my warm, fuzzy brand of comedy at Northern Lights Theatre at Potawatomi Casino in Milwaukee on Saturday, December 16th. 2 shows, 8 & 10PM. Love & Unicorns, Gull 2006-12-06T19:36:00-06:00 http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/kramer-hates-niggers/ http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/kramer-hates-niggers/#When:17:20:00Z I, like most of you, have been witness to the uproar over Michael Richards' onstage explosion at The Laugh Factory. I've seen the footage, along with the news reports. I saw Richards' apology on Letterman last night, with Kramer's former boss, Jerry Seinfeld conveniently present on the Letterman stage. We all know the story by now. The former Seinfeld cast member and longtime improv/sketch actor is now doing standup. He was at the LA club doing his act, and was "heckled" by a black audience member. His response was a lengthy tirade, peppered with more use of the word "nigger" than was in the movie "American History X". And now there is scandal. People are up in arms. They are outraged. It's all over the news and the Internet. How could he do such a thing? The zany Kramer, screaming "nigger".......unbelievable! I went to YouTube and watched the entire video of the incident, which includes much more than what was shown on the tv news. You should do the same. I studied the video like Oliver Stone going over the Zapruder film, and then I studied the Letterman appearance....and I've come to some conclusions. As you may or may not know, I worked as a Private Investigator prior to entering the glamorous world of comedy. My "bullshit detector" is in pretty good working order, as are my comedy skills, if I do say so myself. Working as a comic, learning from so many talented people, one picks up some intuition as far as things comedic. My "comedic eye" is more focused than, say, your average plumber's. But hey, I can't fix a toilet, so we're even. As I looked at the footage of Richards' onstage breakdown, I could only think one thing: Andy Kaufman. This tirade is classic Kaufman. This is Kaufman yelling at the crowd at wrestling matches, saying that women are inferior. This is Kaufman in the deep South, screaming that southern people are ignorant. This is Kaufman refusing to do standup when he was booked to do exactly that, instead, reading "The Great Gatsby", or playing records. This is Kaufman as Tony Clifton, berating the crowd. This is performance art. A bit of history here: In the 70s, the heavily populated LA comedy scene included 3 up and coming comics. Michael Richards, Andy Kaufman and David Letterman. In February of 1981, Andy Kaufman, now famous, served as guest host for a "Saturday Night Live" ripoff called "Fridays". While hosting the live program, Kaufman flipped out and refused to do a sketch. This resulted in a cast member walking off stage, grabbing the cue cards, and throwing them at Kaufman. Kaufman then threw a glass of water in the face of the cast member, and a physical fight ensued, which ended up involving several members of the cast and crew. The program went to commercial, and everybody was outraged and shocked at Kaufman's unhinged behavior. Later, he made a public, very sincere apology. Years after, it was reveled that the entire incident had been staged for shock value. A social experiment, if you will. The kind of thing at which Kaufman excelled and delighted. One of the few people who was "in on" the joke was cast member Michael Richards, the one who grabbed the cue cards and got the water thrown at him. In 1982, Andy Kaufman was involved in a very public fued with Wrestling legend Jerry Lawler. The two of them did an exhibition match where Lawler seriously injured Kaufman, and Kaufman made several public statements about his intent to sue. 3 months later, the two of them agreed to appear on Letterman's show to try to patch things up. The appearance became confrontational, with Kaufman engaging in name-calling, and Lawler ultimately smacking Kaufman out of his chair. Kaufman then stormed off the set, screaming obscenities. After Kaufman's death, Lawler revealed that the entire thing had been a carefully planned set up. It was all just a bit, and Letterman was involved. Michael Richards' fiasco at The Laugh Factory was performance art. He was employing a touch of Lenny Bruce's technique of trying to teach us that words are only words, and they only have as much power as we allow. He was throwing that into the pot with a heavy dose of Kaufman-esque standup, where the joke is on the audience. The secret to doing this style of comedy is to never let the audience off the hook. A keen observer will be able to tell what's really going on, but the crowd will be duped everytime. Michael Richards is nowhere near as skilled at this as Kaufman was, nor as hip as Lenny was, so his execution of the concept falls short. If you watch the entire 2:49 seconds of footage from the club appearance, you will see him make 2 mistakes. Early on, in what is supposed to be an uncontrollable rage, he calmly addresses the audience and makes reference to how "shocking" his outburst is. Then he's back to rage. But the biggest error in execution (and the most significant indicator that this was a performance art piece) is at the very end. Just before walking off stage, Richards calmly says: "You see? There's still those words. Those words. Those words". The Letterman appearance is part of the act. Letterman, who participated in the Kaufman scam, is an active participant in this one. As is Jerry Seinfeld, Richards' former boss. Some of you will recall that several months back, Richards, during a club appearance, went off in much the same fashion about "The Jews". Seinfeld publicly condemed his comments, but the incident didn't get much play. That was the set up. This one is the punchline. Watch the entire footage of the Letterman appearance and you'll see a piece that greatly resembles Kaufman's public apologies. Right down to Michael Richards refering to blacks as "Afro-Americans", a term he's using to try to seem sensitive, but really enrage more. He's playing out of the same book. The only problem is that he's not doing it well enough. He's a little clumsy, and he's too interested in making sure we get it. Never explain the joke. Where Kaufman never did, I fear Michael Richards will have to. America doesn't have a sense of humor anymore, and we certainly aren't comfortable examining our our prejudices and preconceived notions about one another. Controversy sells tickets and puts asses in chairs. It made Lenny and Andy legends. Sadly, Michael Richards is not in the same league. Not even the same sport. Joke em' if they can't take a fuck, Gull 2006-11-21T17:20:00-06:00 http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/playing-with-fire/ http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/playing-with-fire/#When:02:16:00Z So, last evening I somehow came to the conclusion that it would be a good idea to start my hand on fire. After a 10 or 12 second episode with my left extremity engulfed in flame, I was left with a rapidly blistering hand, as well as equally rapidly increasing pain. As I stood in my bathroom watching the flesh on my hand turn white and curl, I could only think one thought: I belong in an emergency room. But I didn't go. Seeing clearly the damage that I had done, I resisted what I knew was the correct course of action. I instead looked for another way to deal with the problem. I made a phone call to my ex-wife, an RN. She of course told me to go immediately to an emergency room. I responded by getting in my car and driving directly to Walgreens, on the hunt for some sort of magical burn cream that would allow me to bypass what was needed. As I paced the aisles of the pharmacy, I spotted an older, grandmotherly fellow shopper. She, I decided, would direct me to the magical product I sought. I approached my silver-haired saviour, thrust my damaged digits in her face, and asked her what I should do. "Go to a goddamned emergency room." Not the response I was looking for. I explained to her that I would prefer to treat this myself, and she walked me over to the first aid section, where we selected a product. As I walked away from her, she advised me once again that what I needed was an emergency room. Once home, I applied the miracle cure to my wounds. What had previously been a 7 on the 1 to 10 pain scale immediately shot up to a 46, and I washed the crap off, now almost crying from the pain. I paced my house, holding my wounded paw, considering my options. Called the ex again and told her what had happened. She once again advised me that I was a moron who needed to be in an emergency room. I got off the phone, unsatisfied with her answer. Now I really put some thought into it. Then it came to me. I have to go to the emergency room. As I drove myself to the nearest E.R., hand sticking out the window to cool in the frigid night air, I was sure it was now too late. Even though I had finally come to my senses, I knew I had done permanent damage to myself, and even the best efforts of the doctors would not be enough. I registered and took a seat in the waiting room next to a woman who had a javelin sticking out of her hear or something. Finally, they called my name, and I was seen by a doctor. In remarkably short order, they had managed my pain, treated my burns and dressed the wounds. Today, as I reflect on the events of last night, there are messages that jump out at me. 1) Don't play with fire - - - You really WILL get burned. 2) My refusal to do what needed to be done had resulted in unneccessary pain, but as soon as I committed to the needed course of action, the problem was solved. Sometimes we see what we need to do, and for reasons that only make sense to ourselves, we resist. I have to correct this in all areas of my life, and not wait until it could be too late to repair the damage done. Go with the gut. Do what needs to be done. 3) I can be a complete dumbass. XOXO Gull 2006-11-13T02:16:00-06:00 http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/smell-my-neck/ http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/smell-my-neck/#When:21:15:00Z Last week, at my twice-monthly Former Child Star Support meeting, Danny Bonaduce practically begged me to kick his ass. From the moment I sat down, the chubby redheaded “Partridge Family” bastard would not stop looking at me. As that little gay kid from “Who’s The Boss” told an emotionally-charged story about Tony Danza’s legendary flatulence, Bonaduce continued to taunt me with his icy stare. He was relentless. But I was holding strong, and was not going to be cajoled into a fight. I did my best to ignore his unblinking gaze and tried to get as much as I could out of the meeting. You see, these regular FCSS meetings are the only things that keep me grounded and sane during the crazy times in my roller coaster life. When Scott Baio and I were doing our one-man show together and the negative reviews started pouring in, I was hitting like four meetings a week. The life of a former child star is impossible to understand unless you’ve lived it. That’s why all my friends are fellow former child stars. We get each other. When things get to be too much, I have only to recite my mantra: “What would Eddie Munster do?” So naturally, you can see how important these meetings are to me. Bonaduce trying to bust up my healing groove could only mean one thing: he had seen my recent interview on “Access Hollywood” and was jealous. Let me just say this. I didn’t even want to do the stupid show, but given all the recent developments in my career, the media has been all over me. That’s why they call it a comeback. The media pays attention. It’s not my fault, man. I only work my craft. Plus, who can blame them for interviewing me? I am a pretty interesting guy. The interview was only supposed to be a light fluff piece, with me talking about my massive comeback and sharing cute anecdotes from my days on “The Odd Couple.” But it ended up being a Pulitzer Prize-winning, in-depth slice of journalism. And Danny Bonaduce was pissed. Not my fault if you suck, Danny Partridge! The support meeting turned ugly when Tootie from “The Facts Of Life” refused to spit out her gum. All hell broke loose, and Screech started to cry so hard he was convulsing. It was at that point that I confronted Bona-douche-bag. Because I’m a calm, even-tempered chap, I quietly and politely inquired as to whether Danny would like me to punch him in his stupid face. He responded by throwing scalding hot coffee in my eyes and stabbing me in the breadbasket with his Swiss Army knife. Now, anyone who knows me is aware of the fact that I really hate being stabbed. Right then, the man in the back said “Everyone Attack” and it turned into a ballroom blitz. Chairs, coffee cups, shoes and broken dreams flew through the air as we all showed what we were made of. Gary Coleman and that other little black kid, the one from “Webster,” ran around biting people on the crotch while I held both Punky Brewster in a figure four leg lock AND Bonaduce in a sleeper hold at the same time. The Brady kids had Valerie Bertinelli trapped in a corner and were beating her without mercy. Scott Baio, who has always been my right-hand man, injected Bonaduce with Windex while I had him down. After what seemed like hours, Danny finally stopped moving. By this time, the other fisticuffs had also died down. Todd Bridges wouldn’t stop whining about not being able to feel his legs and in all there were four fatalities, not counting Danny Bonaduce. In a panic, Baio and I carried Danny’s lifeless form to Baio’s car just as Neil Patrick Harris was arriving at the meeting – late as usual. He was muttering something about having a big announcement to make. No need, Doogie Howser… we already knew you were gay. As Chachi and I drove around in his Ford Festiva looking for a place to dump Bonaduce’s corpse, “Blinded By The Light” came on the radio. We cranked the volume and sang every word at the top of our lungs. It was so fun! “Mama always told me not to look into the eyes of the sun…” Man, that Springsteen can write a song. I don’t much care for him singing that one – I much prefer the Manfred Mann version. Classic! And on the subject of classics, Bat Out Of Hell III just came out, and it kicks ass. If you loved the original Bat Out Of Hell, do go out and pick up this new one. Meat Loaf sounds great, and the songs are over the top with dramatic arrangements that definitely stay true to the Bat tradition. Cheesy, operatic rock at its best! I love that new show, "Studio 60" (NBC, Mondays at 9:00 Central). Check it out if you get the chance. Amanda Peet is on it. That’s all for now, Gull 2006-11-07T21:15:00-06:00 http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/stay-away-from-me/ http://www.vitalsourcemag.com/index.php/site/stay-away-from-me/#When:04:44:00Z Here’s a thought. If your IQ is lower than the top speed of your car, stay away from me. Yeah, that’ll work out nicely for everyone. It appears I reached my “dealing with dumbasses” quota sometime in the late 90s, and just can’t seem to muster the tolerance anymore. Sorry for any inconvenience this may cause. Where are my manners? I haven’t introduced myself. My name’s Michael Gull and I’ll be occupying this space until enough of you demand my removal. I’m a 41 year-old divorced dad who performs in comedy clubs and casinos. Prior to embarking on my illustrious standup comedy career five years ago, I was a private investigator who had the pleasure of examining, up close, the worst of what we humans do to one another. I voted for Reagan twice, own a gun, and pretty much survive on coffee and cigarettes with the occasional bourbon dessert thrown in. That’s enough background for now. Here’s another thought. If you are under the impression that you have the right to tell other people how to live, stay far away from me. If you’re heterosexual, your opinion on gay marriage is meaningless. Unless you have a uterus, you don’t have anything legitimate to say about abortion. Your religious morals do not give you the right to make the rules for anyone but you and your unfortunate children. Never forget that. Oh yeah, and stay away from me. Others who are invited to steer clear of me include: white guys who call each other “bro;” anyone who claims to know the “truth” about 9/11; Bernie Mac; anybody who thinks Green Day is a punk band; people with that white spit thing that travels from their top to bottom lip when they speak; each and every person who claims to have a personal relationship with a guy who died 2,000 years ago; the morons who use the teachings of the aforementioned dead guy as a weapon; people who suddenly loved Christopher Reeve after he became paralyzed; and – though this in no way completes the list – anyone who can name the last three winners of American Idol, but can’t name three members of Congress. Again, if any of the above applies to you, please stay far away from me at all times. Never engage me in conversation. Never tell me about your god. Never make eye contact with me. Unless you have a lazy eye. I find lazy eye highly entertaining and will talk to anyone possessing one, regardless of how stupid or misguided that person may be. Gotta go. I miss you already. Gull 2006-10-30T04:44:00-06:00