Sexy Referee?

Latest Newspaper Column:

Back when I was growing up, Halloween was pretty much a holiday just for kids. At least that’s the way it seemed to me, but then again, I was generally oblivious to the ways of adults.

In the past few years, though, Halloween has become an “all ages” holiday. Adults aren’t going house-to-house demanding sweets, but they are dressing up in various garb to go out on the town and celebrate. Which is perfectly cool with me. I’ve always been a big believer in the old saying “You’re never too old to have a happy childhood.”

The other day, though, I read something that gave me pause. It seems that a fellow in Oklahoma had a few beers too many and got himself busted shoplifting a Halloween costume at a local shop.

According to the website The Smoking Gun, the costume that 27-year-old Michael Dixon was trying to lift was — are you ready for this? A “Sexy Referee” outfit, consisting of a black-and-white striped halter dress, knee socks and a whistle. The story did not say if Dixon planned to wear the outfit himself or whether he was stealing it for a female acquaintance. Perhaps it’s better just not to ask. Or even to think too much about it.

One of the odd things about what this whole odd little holiday has become is the proliferation of costumes that the makers feel the need to hype as “Sexy.” I looked through some of the costume offerings online (purely for research purposes, of course). I can see the point of “Sexy Harem Girl,” “Sexy French Maid” and the like. Having met a few very nice looking ladies of the Wiccan persuasion, I can even sort of see “Sexy Witch,” although I suspect some actual Wiccans may look at an outfit like that in much the same way an African-American would regard someone in blackface.

But “Sexy Referee”? Most people I know, when they think about the refs at all, are screaming at them for blown calls, not fantasizing about them in a carnal fashion. Unless this is some fetish that even I haven’t heard about, and if so, let’s please keep it that way.

Look, I like to think of myself as a fairly open-minded guy. But I can’t help but wonder about one of the stranger costumes I’ve seen: “Sexy Spongebob.” Ladies, please educate me: What am I missing here? If a guy is hitting on you while you’re wearing the visage of a whimsical, childlike cartoon character who happens to be (1) male, and (2) a sponge, what does that say to you about him?

Likewise, there are the “Candy Striper” costumes. I confess, I’ve never totally gotten the whole “Sexy Nurse” thing. To be sure, a lot of real-life nurses are darned attractive, and some are smoking-hot, but when you actually get into the situation where you see them in an actual uniform in real life, lovin’ is probably the last thing on your mind.

Mostly what you’re thinking of is not dying, or at least not leaving important organs or body parts on the floor of the ER. Still, I understand, it’s a fantasy some guys have for some reason, so I guess the plethora of “Sexy Nurse” costumes is understandable.

But Candy Striper costumes? Really? Aren’t Candy Stripers supposed to be, like, teenage girls? I realize I’m no expert on women (just ask any woman who knows me), but I’ve got to say, if you’re at a Halloween party dressed like a teenager and some fellow starts chatting you up with a “wow, that costume is really hot,” you may want to reconsider him as a potential soul mate. I’m just sayin’.

Ah, well, it’s Halloween. What are you gonna do? We already have a holiday devoted to giving thanks for what we’ve got, and another dedicated to peace and good will. I suppose I should just relax and let one night go by when people can dress in any outlandish thing they want without me over-analyzing it.

I’d go on, but I hit the page in the catalog with the “Sexy Gorilla” costume, and my brain shut down.

Happy Halloween, everyone!

Shocked, SHOCKED, I Tell You!

Disney May Cut Keith Richards from 'Pirates 4' Because of Past Drug Use

Although Disney was able to look past Keith Richards' drug face long enough to invite him back to the 'Pirates' franchise for 'Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides,' a new book penned by The Rolling Stones guitarist could prove to be too much for the family-friendly empire.

Richards' new autobiography, 'Life,' presents the musician's "trademark disarming honesty ... [bringing] ... us the story of a life we have all longed to know more of, unfettered, fearless, and true." In other words, he explains how the hell he survived taking all those drugs. If you're like most people, you probably just assumed his body was being preserved by the mass amounts of chemicals he ingested. Richards, however, explains that the secret was quality over quantity: "It's not only the high quality of drugs I had that I attribute my survival to. I was very meticulous about how much I took. I'd never put more in to get a little higher."

Drudge Report tells us that an entertainment insider has suggested "they very well could end up cutting Keith out of the new movie over this."

So Disney's just now figuring out that Keith Richards has done drugs? I thought these people were supposed to be smart.

The Party of Love Strikes (or should I say stomps) Again

Rand Paul Supporter Stomps Head Of Female MoveOn Member Outside KY Debate (VIDEO) | TPMDC

..always— do not forget this, Winston— always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face— forever.

But don't forget...it's liberals who are angry and full of hate.

The Robots Are Coming - Be Afraid

Latest Newspaper Column

Everybody's afraid of something. Some people fear spiders. Some are afraid of bears. Right-wingers fear gays, blacks, Mexicans, mosques, headscarves, science, multiculturalism, the census, Rachel Maddow, fancy coffees, and certain kinds of lettuce, just to name a few things.

I'm not afraid of any of those. What scares me are robots.

Ha, you may say, Rhoades has seen to many "Terminator" movies. Perhaps I have, but that's not the point. You haven't seen the things I've seen on the news or the Internet. I have, as they say, "connected the dots." And I tell you, we're in trouble.

First there's the news that Google, the company that seems to be well on its way to ruling the Internet, recently revealed that it had been testing a robotic car.

Equipped with sensors, cameras, and, one supposes, a wireless connection to Google Maps, the modified Prius, with a human observer on board as a safety precaution, reportedly logged more than 140,000 miles with the wheel untouched by human hands. It even navigated San Francisco's tortuous and twisty Lombard Street on its own.

Scientists at the German University TU Braunschweig have reportedly accomplished a similar feat with a laser- and sensor-guided Volkswagen that navigated itself through the streets of Brunswick.

You might think this is a great thing, especially if you like to have a few drinks from time to time. Wouldn't it be cool, you might think, to be able to stagger out of the bar, punch "Home" into the car's computer, and nap till you arrived at your doorstep? Or to catch up on a few Z's, read a book, or fix your hair on the way to work while the car does the driving?

You poor deluded fool. Maybe you wouldn't feel so warm and fuzzy if you knew that a scientist in Slovenia is teaching robots to punch humans.

According to an article n the online tech journal Gizmodo, Dr. Borut Povse of the University of Ljubljana "persuaded six male colleagues to let a powerful industrial robot repeatedly strike them on the arm, to assess human-robot pain thresholds."

Supposedly, the idea is to "define the limits of the speed and acceleration of robots, and the ideal size and shape of the tools they use, so they can safely interact with humans." Or so this mad scientist would have us believe.

It gets worse. The deceptively cute little robot its designers called the "iCub" has a terrifying talent: It can teach itself to use a weapon, specifically a bow and arrow. Using a learning program, it figures out how to pick up the bow, string the arrow, and shoot, adjusting each time until it consistently hits the bullseye.

Oh, sure, it's only using a toy bow with rubber tipped arrows. Now.

Then there's the most terrifying machine of all: the Maker LegoBot.

We all know Legos, the little plastic snap-together building bricks that have provided countless hours of fun to tots and countless minutes of agony to parents who've stepped on them barefoot.

A few years ago, the Lego people introduced Mindstorms, Lego sets with tiny programmable computers that allow geeks of all ages to build and program their own robots. I had a bad feeling the first time I heard about those, and now I know why.

Software engineer Will Gorman has made a robot that can take a 3-D blueprint and some Legos, and build whatever you want, so long as whatever you want is made of Lego bricks. According to an article in Wired magazine, the machine is itself made entirely of Legos, which "raises the possibility - theoretically at least - that the machine could, with some modifications, build a copy of itself." And it could do it again and again, over and over, never getting tired, never getting bored, until it and its progeny overwhelm us all.

The Maker LegoBot is part of what Wired calls "an emerging trend" of so-called "3-D printers": computer-driven devices that can fabricate items you request out of plastic, right there in your very own home.

Right now, the Maker LegoBot has to have instructions, and you have to feed it the Lego bricks, but this is just the beginning. How long do you think it will be before machines can build other machines to drive themselves to your house and punch you in the face before shooting you full of arrows?

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Nope, No Crazies Here...

GOP Candidate: Violent Revolution “On Table” | FrumForum

Republican congressional candidate Stephen Broden stunned his party Thursday, saying he would not rule out violent overthrow of the government if elections did not produce a change in leadership.

In a rambling exchange during a TV interview, Broden, a South Dallas pastor, said a violent uprising “is not the first option,” but it is “on the table.” That drew a quick denunciation from the head of the Dallas County GOP, who called the remarks “inappropriate.”

Nope, no crazies in the Tea Party, none at all....

Losing the Ability to Cringe

Latest Newspaper column:

Last week, in my column about New York City's Naked Cowboy and his run for the presidency under the tea party banner, I mentioned that members of America's newest political movement were probably muttering "Don't let him be one of ours, don't let him be one of ours ..."

Turns out I was wrong. A lot of local TPers enthusiastically endorsed the idea of handing the leadership of the greatest country on Earth (including the codes to its nuclear weapons) to a guy whose chief claim to fame is playing songs on a public street in his underwear.

It was then I realized: These people have lost the ability to cringe.

By "cringe," I mean in the dictionary sense of "to recoil in distaste," especially from something that's over the top or downright embarrassing. The cringe reflex can be especially pronounced when that embarrassing act is perpetrated by someone with whom you might feel an affinity.

You cringe, for example, when a relative regales the guests at your dinner party with the gory details of his bladder problems. Celebrities often do things that make even their fans cringe, like Tom Cruise leaping up and down on Oprah's couch, Kanye West grabbing the microphone from Taylor Swift, or John Travolta making "Battlefield Earth."

People and organizations of all political stripes often do things that are cringe-worthy. Jon Stewart once memorably commemorated a particularly over-the-top ad by MoveOn.org by congratulating the group who'd "spent 10 years making even people who agree with you cringe."

But tea partiers? No cringe reflex whatsoever. Rick Perry suggests that Texas might secede if things don't go the Republicans' way? Not a problem! Christine O'Donnell says American companies are making mice with human brains? Hey, the media should quit picking on her by quoting things she actually said! Sarah Palin blatantly lies about "death panels" during the health care debate? Sa-rah! Sa-rah! Sa-rah!

The most recent demonstration of the cringe-free tea party occurred in Ohio's 9th District, where the TP candidate is a fellow named Rod Iott. A recent story in The Atlantic magazine talked about Iott's, shall we say, unusual hobby.

It seems that Iott belongs to a group of World War II re-enactors who like to dress up as the bad guys. Specifically, they like to don the uniforms of the 5th SS Panzer, or "Wiking" division, an elite Nazi force which, among their other activities, rounded up and murdered Jews in Ukraine, Austria and Hungary. The Atlantic story featured photos of Iott in full SS drag.

Imagine for a moment if a Democratic candidate, or any candidate for that matter, was photographed wearing the uniform of one of our country's enemies. Heck, right-wingers like Michelle Malkin flipped out over what they called "'jihadi chic" when Rachael Ray wore a black-and-white checked scarf in a Dunkin' Donuts commercial.

Imagine what they'd do if a picture surfaced of, say, Pennsylvania Senate candidate Joe Sestak dressed in a '50s-era Soviet commissar's uniform. Or, more to the point, imagine what Pennsylvania Democrats would do. They'd cringe. They might even start thinking, "We're sunk."

But not your TPers. While some conservative Republicans like Minority Whip Eric Cantor have repudiated Iott, and the National Republican Congressional Committee has removed him from its list of "contenders" on its website, Iott's county GOP chief still backs him, calling the story "political mudslinging."

Iott, for his part, insists that there's nothing odd or untoward in dressing up like an SS trooper and running around the woods pretending to slaughter enemies of the Reich. After all, as the Wiking re-enactor group says, "no matter how unsavory the Nazi government was, the front-line soldiers of the Waffen-SS (in particular the foreign volunteers) gave their lives for their loved ones and a basic desire to be free."

Right. It was everyone else they wanted to oppress, except the Jews, whom they wanted to exterminate. I guess it's that kind of shamelessness, that ability to rattle off specious claptrap that makes venerating a band of murdering fascists seem like a reasonable thing to do, that gave Iott his training for politics in general and the tea party in particular.

And it's the TP's inability or unwillingness to realize just how cringe-worthy that is that makes them so ridiculous.