Remember Courtney Stodden? She's a local girl (Westport, WA) making it BIG in Hollywood. Her talents are obvious and they could make for her a good couple of years in that fair city. Her career could sag if she can't lift herself up and out of dumb blonde roles on internet comedy shows.
Jason Alexander, of course, is very talented, and we like that he's finally got a decent hairdresser.
The evolution of George Costanza...
Posted by: KS | January 16, 2012 at 01:29 PM
She's from Ocean Shores...
Posted by: Jim | January 16, 2012 at 02:28 PM
Ouch on so many levels.
Which has more snob appeal; Ocean Shores or Westport? I am a Seattle snob, we don't acknowledge either place.
Posted by: AprilMayJune | January 16, 2012 at 04:30 PM
Republican headlines today:
Virginia lawmaker: Children with disabilities are God’s punishment to women who previously had abortions.
Santorum Staffer Says Women Shouldn’t Be President Because It’s Against God’s Will
Republican Sponsor Of Bill To Require Drug Testing For Georgia Welfare Recipients Arrested For DUI
Kansas GOP House Speaker ‘Prays’ That Obama’s ‘Children Be Fatherless And His Wife A Widow’
Romney’s Tax Cut For Millionaires Would Be Nearly Twice The Size Of George Bush’s
Romney Admits His Tax Rate Is About 15 Percent, Lower Than Many Middle Class Families
Gingrich: I ‘Don’t See’ Why Calling ‘Food Stamps’ An African-American Issue Is Insulting
Even Fox News Is Skeptical Of The Case Against Obama’s Recess Appointments
Posted by: Walt | January 17, 2012 at 03:53 PM
Geez......... Walt, get a life.
Posted by: Mr. Whatever | January 17, 2012 at 04:29 PM
I have a life, a great life. So freaking grateful it aint a Republican life.
Posted by: Walt | January 17, 2012 at 06:12 PM
"Influential evangelical leader James Dobson set off the fireworks at this weekend's Christian Right summit, giving a speech that lavished praise on Karen Santorum and asked whether Americans really wanted Callista Gingrich — "a woman who was a man's mistress for eight years" — as their First Lady, according to sources who attended the meeting."....
"Needless to say, the Texas summit did little to unite the Christian Right. On Sunday, the day following the conference, reports began circulating about Karen Santorum's six-year love affair with a Pittsburgh obsetrician and abortion provider 40 years her senior. (The Santorum campaign has yet to comment on the story.) "
Posted by: sparky | January 18, 2012 at 10:04 PM
ABC News is milking it for all it's worth.
They are sending the story via the viral network of political gawkers and blogs to get the idea warmed up. They'll have a dramatic ethical fight with themselves to make sure everyone understands what serious journalists they are. Then, when interest has peaked (takes about 8-12 hours), they'll announce when they are sending Newtie to his doom. Huge viewership.
A fantastic way to sink one ship (drama! Flames! Explosions!), while the other is floundering from whiplash. The Republican Party is imploding, and it just feels wonderful! I pity them not. Let them burn.
And Ex's? They do that kind of shit. Always remember! - Never get anyone's name tattooed on you! Never, ever, ever let embarrassingly naked photos of yourself - get taken, especially while drunk, and while getting tattoo of the name of your soon-to-be ex on you somewhere visible (that you will painfully have to remove or cover later on). I won't tell you why I know this great life lesson.
Posted by: Walt | January 18, 2012 at 11:16 PM
I think Sparky and Walt are talking about two different scandals--both of which are old news.
The fact that Karen Santorum was single, in her 20's, and had a relationship with a man who was also unmarried makes the headline term "affair" disingenuous. This is muck-raking in the bottom of the political barrel. Doesn't the HuffnPuff have better things to do?
On the other hand, Newt may have a hard time convincing the Christian right that he is the champion of true conservative values. Perry's endorsement isn't likely to move a significant percentage of his voters in Newt's direction--many of them will likely opt for Santorum.
Posted by: RQ | January 19, 2012 at 08:43 AM
The Obamamedia is high-fiving each other, while they and the administration continue to swindle the nation and appeal to the low information voters and useful idiots. Only in America !
Posted by: KS | January 19, 2012 at 10:20 AM
For those who love Feingold as much as I do and who think he would have been a great Progressive President, check this out: http://www.bluecheddar.net/?p=17713
Do you know that you don't have to html link anymore? If you drag over the address and right click, it automatically opens. I didn't know that.
$7m in the Caymans? That's not much when you consider how many millions he has. I wonder what he put any there?
If anyone heard the open letter regarding education that Ed read today and can link it, I'd be grateful. The doorbell rang as he was talking about it.
Posted by: Mary | January 19, 2012 at 01:10 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-van-roekel/chester-upland-schools_b_1216856.html?ref=education
Crisis In Chester Upland: Putting Private Profits Above Student Success
Arne Duncan is on the same path. Obama is guilty as well. Ed sees a distinction between what Obama is doing and what the Republicans are trying to do. The situation in Seattle is "ed reform" and a lot of parents are fighting it. Obama follows the thinking of Rahm and Rham is a reformer in Chicago. What happened to the Democratic Party?
Posted by: Mary | January 19, 2012 at 01:27 PM
It has become the walks like a neo-marxist quacks like a neo-marxist party with the increased progressive infusion since about 1998 - after the impeachment of Clinton, they swooped in. George Soros began pulling the strings and the rest is history.
Posted by: KS | January 20, 2012 at 11:01 PM
"Influential evangelical leader James Dobson set off the fireworks at this weekend's Christian Right summit, giving a speech that lavished praise on Karen Santorum and asked whether Americans really wanted Callista Gingrich — "a woman who was a man's mistress for eight years" — as their First Lady, according to sources who attended the meeting."....
"Needless to say, the Texas summit did little to unite the Christian Right. On Sunday, the day following the conference, reports began circulating about Karen Santorum's six-year love affair with a Pittsburgh obsetrician and abortion provider 40 years her senior.
(The Santorum campaign has yet to comment on the story.) "
Posted by: sparky | January 18, 2012 at 10:04 PM
"The fact that Karen Santorum was single, in her 20's, and had a relationship with a man who was also unmarried makes the headline term "affair" disingenuous. This is muck-raking in the bottom of the political barrel. Doesn't the HuffnPuff have better things to do?"
RQ pLease now that there are 3things on Blatherwatch
Lies, Damned Lies, and crap from Sparky.
So why does Sparky post such crap? Sure do remind folk's about the lowroad by MSNBC over the death of Santorums child.
Take the high road Sparky not the one that leads to Birch Bay.
Posted by: Edmonds Dan | January 21, 2012 at 11:59 AM
Nothing new here. Is that you Puget Sound? Who else posts repost after repost? Agree with RQ that the situations differ. Old news, ED, old news.
Posted by: Truthseeker | January 21, 2012 at 02:16 PM
Truth-Sneak,
For what it's worth, I've never been shy about posting under my own 'handle.'
I will say that I've posted that line about 'Lies, Damned Lies, and crap from Sparky' in the past. Looks like someone else is a careful reader wanting to stir the pot a bit.
Maybe a bored schoolmarm just back from BB?
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers for Truth-Sneak | January 21, 2012 at 03:36 PM
Well, this may be good news for some on this blog.
After getting the coveted 'Chuck Norris' endorsement it looks like Newt has achieved what is termed 'NEWTmentum' and will likely win the SC primary.
Somewhere there is a fellow who runs a blog about radio-politics who will be pleased with this turn of events. It's akin to 2008 and having Dennis Kucinich be the likely nominee.
For Republicans wanting to win in November, NEWTmentum can be rightly termed bad news.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | January 21, 2012 at 04:19 PM
Speaking of blather: who is the person blathering on KIRO?
Posted by: Dark & Stormy | January 21, 2012 at 04:32 PM
The pissed off GOP crowd is prevailing right now, led by Newt, but that's just one state. The other candidates need to emulate his justified anger at the "Obama" media and repudiate the moderators who are masquerading as cheerleaders for Obama (i.e. Brian Williams, George Stephanopolous, Diane Sawyer, Bob Schieffer and David Gregory) when they attempt to ask gotcha questions. They have succeeded at making a mockery of debates that are supposed to be serious, but throwing in stupid or gotcha questions on purpose. The candidates are gradually getting better at combating this crap, but there have already been too many debates.
The candidates should be allowed to go vs. each other at their own peril though. Newt has some character issues which will probably come back and bite him - hopefully. Santorum or Romney are potentially better candidates with way less baggage and somewhat less of a fighting spirit than Gingrich. For the good of the party and country's future, they need to be able to select a candidate who will not scare the crap out of the independents/moderates. Newt would succeed - at being scary !
Posted by: KS | January 21, 2012 at 07:38 PM
KS
NEWTmentum has led to his win in SC which is good news for Newt but bad news for Republicans.
If you thought the media was doing 'gotcha' now, just wait til the general election.
Who would be a good VP for Newt?
This has the smell of 1964 all over again.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | January 21, 2012 at 07:51 PM
56.5 hours with no power, heat or water..so glad to be back online to find I have a new fan. Hello Dan!
Three days of KOMO has just about killed me...I have learned they run a LOT of rebroadcasting..
It will take months before all the snow is gone from the farm. I think I would like to move to Death Valley now.
Posted by: sparky | January 21, 2012 at 08:17 PM
Truth-Sneak,
I thought name calling was not allowed on this blog? I'm no school marm. You repost posts. ED reposts posts. You got a problem with that?
Posted by: Truthseeker | January 21, 2012 at 10:39 PM
PSB - Going out on a limb here - Newt won't be the nominee. 1964 would be a very bad omen for the country. Romney has a stronger organization and Santorum is gaining steam, so this race won't be over for a while. Both of them must hone their message to get back into the game. The best VP would be Rubio, followed by Christie.
As I mentioned earlier, the general campaign by the Dems will be mean, dirty without regard for the truth and plenty of darkness. However, Obama has shitload of material that can be used against him and the defuse the propaganda machine with light, the best disinfectant. In order for the GOP to win, the light they need to expose is to demonstrate that Fast and Furious, the Keystone XL pipeline blocking and the scam with Solyndra begin and end with Obama getting thrown out of office. Not to mention the avalanche of debt since he took office and a plethora of broken promises.
Posted by: KS | January 21, 2012 at 10:50 PM
KS is right. Romney will be the nominee. Obama will be the elected one.
Posted by: Truthseeker | January 21, 2012 at 10:57 PM
If Obama is reelected, our country will LOSE. It's as simple as that, but don't see that happening at this time.
Posted by: KS | January 21, 2012 at 11:19 PM
ks
next primary that is up: Florida.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | January 22, 2012 at 06:39 AM
Best line on Gringrich's surge
NEWTpocalypse Now!
This will be a big test for folks to watch and see if the Republican Party is able to stop Gingrich and instead nominate an electable candidate.
Usual Suspects, heat up some popcorn, grab a seat and watch. This could get pretty interesting.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | January 22, 2012 at 07:09 AM
I'd be willing to bet that the usual suspects are rooting for the NEWTpocalypse to happen. I am not even sure if the RNC grasps the significance of stopping him as witnessed in South Carolina and before the TEA party coalesces, they ought to stop and figure out the ramifications of Newt vs. Obama race - MAINLY that the independents/moderates will be faced with two mean/bad-ass candidates and will not be as enthusiastic in Nov. as if a Romney or even a Santorum were opposing BO.
Sarah Palin, not the brightest bulb (but brighter than Patty Murray) supports Gin-grinch, perhaps the only other candidate who approaches her in being a lightning rod.
Posted by: KS | January 22, 2012 at 08:23 AM
KS
That's an apt comparison in terms of Lightening Rod. I would only offer this: while the usual suspects 'hate' Palin they 'fear' Newt.
In the event Sarah Palin was elected President they figure it will be fairly easy to prevent her from causing real damage to the policies Left.
In the event Gingrich was elected President they understand that he could cause real damage to the policies of the Left. They also understand that in a debate with Teleprompter President that Newt could make some hay so any 'debates' would have to be relatively scripted affairs in which pre selected questions would be posed to each candidate with little direct give and take.
So if he was nominated you would see a takedown of Newt as the Left could never take the 'chance' he would actually win. They want him nominated but once nominated can't take the chance he would win so it will be an all out assault.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | January 22, 2012 at 10:08 AM
PSB - good analysis. I woudl also add that Newt would get not seven, but more likely one debate out of Obama.
The left would be in a state of fear and want to keep the campaign in a state of darkness and shadows as much as possible and the less exposure/opportunities to bring the real issues to light, the better it is perceived to be for the liberal-progressives. The ads will be meaner and nastier than if it would be Romney vs. Obama, for they are both narcissists.
Posted by: KS | January 22, 2012 at 11:00 AM
If Newt is nominated, Newt will be President. Obama is a failure in the eyes of most Americans. There are as many unemployed and underemployed indy's as there are Republicans and Democrats in the same position. Working stiffs that still have jobs are resenting the nearly doubled under Obama fuel costs while the guy kills a pipeline that would supply our nation with jobs and reduced fuel costs.
Many government employees have not received pay raises since Obama was elected. Many have had pay cuts.
How small of a percentage of these groups do the Republicans need to pick up vs the last election to push this election in to our camp?
Obama has to go. If it is Newt, Santorum or Romney does not really matter all that much. But with the election of Newt, it will be fun watching my liberal friends and families heads explode. At least there won't be a great deal of brain matter to clean up.
Posted by: Chucks | January 22, 2012 at 11:38 AM
Agreed, Chucks. You will find that the main opposition to your notion are the low information voters and moonbats, who an informal alliance with the usual suspects.
Posted by: KS | January 22, 2012 at 11:50 AM
chucks, if it turns out to be Obama vs Newt we'll put some beer/dinner on it. you game for that?
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | January 22, 2012 at 12:06 PM
and if its Romney vs. Obama - is the deal off ?
Better yet, there's a potential wager for Romney or Newt ?
Posted by: KS | January 22, 2012 at 12:44 PM
Obama has a lot of stuff to recover from if he wants to get re-elected and it will be interesting in how he spins his disasters.
1. Record unemployment.
2. Illegal appointments.
3. Illegal invasion of Pakistan.
4. No proof that Osama was killed.
5. 1200 deaths of US Soldiers in Afghanistan during his Presidency.
6. Gulf oil spill.
7. Solyndra andother failed Fed investments.
8. Government Motors failure since the bailout.
9. Fast and furious.
Whoever runs against Obama will have alot of ammo going in with and lets hope whomeverit is is not shy afraid of using it like McCain was. Oh, and of course his citizenship question. Down in georgia a judge is finally hearing the case.
Posted by: Progblogjunky | January 22, 2012 at 02:51 PM
You make me hot when you talk like that Junkie.
Posted by: Brad | January 22, 2012 at 03:02 PM
LMAO ! That qualifies for comment of the year so far.
Posted by: KS | January 22, 2012 at 03:08 PM
and if its Romney vs. Obama - is the deal off ?
Better yet, there's a potential wager for Romney or Newt ?
Posted by: KS | January 22, 2012 at 12:44 PM
Romney vs Obama, I bet that Obama pulls it out.
The Newt vs Romney nomination is too much of a toss up.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | January 22, 2012 at 03:21 PM
Hey look folks, Ron Reagan Jr. has come to Blatherwatch under the moniker of Brad. Now Ron, errrr, Brad, im not that type of guy so keep it in your pants ok.
Posted by: Progblogjunky | January 22, 2012 at 03:28 PM
KS, i could have put the deficit in there but we all know that was the Schrubs fault with his two illegal wars. One could make a case, but Progressives need their boogey man. It will be interesting on how many times Obama will use the Schrubs name inhis campaign. Over-under anyone.
Posted by: Progblogjunky | January 22, 2012 at 03:31 PM
Romney vs Obama, I bet that Obama pulls it out.
The Newt vs Romney nomination is too much of a toss up.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | January 22, 2012 at 03:21 PM
I would say just the opposite - Romney vs. Obomba - too close to call.
Newt vs. Romney - Romney pulls it out.
Posted by: KS | January 22, 2012 at 03:42 PM
PSB - I'll give you an update on the POTUS prediction after mid-September - by then the economic trend will be pretty well set through November.
Posted by: KS | January 22, 2012 at 03:50 PM
check this out from Michael Steele
"TAMPA, Fla. -- Michael Steele, the former Republican national chairman who oversaw the writing of the party's nominating rules in 2010, told The Huffington Post Saturday night that the chances of an open -- that is, undecided -- GOP convention in Florida next August are now "50-50" after Newt Gingrich's victory in South Carolina.
"It's a real possibility," Steele told HuffPost. "Right now I'd say it's 50-50. The base wants its chance to have their say. They aren't going to want it to end early, before they get their chance, which means that the process could go all the way to Tampa."
And if it does, Steele says, the result will not be an unpalatable anti-democratic display of insider deal-making, but rather an advertisement for the ideological and grassroots input of the party.
"You would see the people who had the influence to begin with -- the Tea Party, the social conservatives, you name it, hashing it out right in front of us all. I think that is good."
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | January 22, 2012 at 05:26 PM
I'd like to see all options remain on the table. May the best GOP candidate get the nod.
Let the Dems think that is to their advantage, but in reality noone knows. The events beyond our control that unfold this year will have an affect on it. Right now it seems like the GOP are damned if they do and damned if they don't.
Posted by: KS | January 22, 2012 at 05:53 PM
Newt Family Values: using daughters from your first wife to convince everyone your second wife is lying about your third wife.
Posted by: Walt | January 22, 2012 at 07:33 PM
The mainstream doesn’t want to talk about it, but Stephen Colbert got more support in South Carolina than former GOP frontrunners Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann combined. So they blacked it out on the list.
Posted by: Walt | January 22, 2012 at 07:36 PM
I am a conservative but I hate to say Newt Gingrich is a racist based on the statements he made about blacks and a bigot basd on statements he made against a religious minority. His moral ineptitude based on what has been reveled about his multiple marriages make me believe this guy does not have what takes to be a decent American, let alone be a president of the United States.I am not excited about Romney or Santorum either. If these guys are the best the Republican Party can come up with. then come November
I will stay home and let Obama have another four years.
Posted by: Mike | January 22, 2012 at 07:56 PM
Newt, true to his name, is another sort of reptile-- a chameleon. While his colors reflected the SC base voting in this primary, his colors will change with upcoming state primaries to reflect what their voters want to hear. This is the lesson he learned from the ugly cheers rising up to buoy his vitriolic comments. Newt has no conscience, and therefore no moral objective. He is brilliantly manipulative, like most sociopaths. It will be interesting to see whether this mean spirited rhetoric flies in other states. If it does, Obama will have to cut himself a new cloth because he doesn't have it in him to match mean for mean, a characteristic many of us applaud, but a possible detriment in our predatory, reality show political atmosphere. If it doesn't-- and I hope this is the case-- Obama will be able to deliver on a higher plane more akin to his comfort level in any Obama-Gingrich debate.
Of course, all this speculation is dependent on Newt being the nominee. If what I'm hearing on conservative talk radio can be counted as true, he will be. And I'm not listening to the hosts-- they are mightily trying to promote Romney and congeal the base in his direction-- I'm listening to the callers who are convinced that Newt can win against Obama. Their divisiveness is fascinating-- maybe their own projection is reflecting back in a destructive interference pattern. Apt.
Posted by: Obama 2012! | January 22, 2012 at 07:59 PM
When the news media asked a question about Newt Gingrich's request for permission for continuous, open adultery, Newt responded with a full throated attack on his accuser:
"I think the destructive, vicious, negative nature of much of the news media makes it harder to govern this country, harder to attract decent people to run for public office."
Newt lead the charge to impeach President Clinton during the same period Newt was cheating on his wife with a staff member.
Can anyone think of a better example of pathological narcissism?
Posted by: Walt | January 22, 2012 at 08:05 PM
You seem to be in denial that Obama is pathological narcissist and ideological marxist sympathizer.
The quote by Newt was correct and spot on as an indictment of our corrupt, insipid and pathetic news media. I do not support Newt for the nomination, because of his questionable past which would help Newt be the issue and take our eyes off of the real issue - the audacity of failure by Obomba, because its perfectly fine with the news networks (except for Fox News - which at least tries for balance ) - because he's a black liberal.
McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform is really what has led to these messy, vicious and obsessive presidential campaigns.
Can anyone think of a better example of pathological narcissism?
Posted by: Walt | January 22, 2012 at 08:05 PM
Yes, our sitting president - its as plain as the nose on your face. Newt is also a narcissist - not denying that.
Posted by: KS | January 22, 2012 at 08:32 PM