Another week, another bouquet of acrimony and amicable fun at Propeller--but folks, this time around, it's different. I'm to sorry announce that this will be my last WIR feature. At the end of June I will be moving over to AOL News. It's been a privilege to know you all, and to do my weekly round-up with color commentary. Perhaps some energetic Propeller member will take up the mantle and post a weekly, informal summary of the best conversations--in fact, maybe several will, and we can witness a regular Battle of the WIRs. ("My comments can beat up your comments!") In any case, I will miss cranking it out every Thursday afternoon. It's been a pleasurable routine.

Under the circumstances, I though we could skip the last week's activity and take a longer view. We've trawled through the database and come up with the most popular stories over a two-year period, ranked by props, comments, and page views. I'm going to concentrate on those today. There are some predictable items, but also some surprises. And needless to say, some of the commentators have since moved on greener (or possibly grimmer) pastures.

LOOSE CHANGE

Which legitimate story had the greatest number of comments? That would be "Change You Can Believe In! Obama's Approval Index Down 22%," posted on March 2, 2009, with 43 props, 33 drops, and an astounding 7,431 comments. (It's possible that the last 6,000 are ads for Viagra and Acai Berry nostrums--still, that leaves plenty of genuine opinions.) NoWayMan questioned the very premise of the article, which blamed the new Democratic president for the crumbling stock market: "Anyone who knows anything about the markets knows that there are just too many variables in play, and you can't pin performance on one person's possible future actions." But injest accused Obama of having "spooked the markets. Ramming through his 'wish list recovery act' didn't impress anyone, and the markets dived again."

Said wtagg: "I am more than willing to give Obama 38.7% of the blame. Bush owns the rest." To which dmoney2318 replied: "Bush's policies had us on a sharp incline. It wasn't until the Dems took over and blocked his policies that our economy went down the toilet. Now we're paying for not listening to the Bushes [presumably both father and son], and instead letting people like Bill Clinton and now Obama lead us down a path of total destruction." Responded djn3nunez3: "Only if you own Haliburton or Raytheon stock. Bush was a disaster in foreign affairs, domestic affairs, and economic affairs." Added DaneL: "What a trifecta: Obama, Reid and Pelosi. You libs bet on them, now you can reap the rewards." AbuAmirah shot back: "Dude has to clean up a mess that started with the Contract with America and the deregulation that it wrought. Yeah, and we thought that businesses could police themselves."

SCOOTER PIE

Another all-time hit was "Bush Spares Libby From Prison," posted on July 2, 2007. The story rang up 320 props and 1,220 comments, including this one from UnusualSuspect: "The funny thing is, Bush said all along he would not tolerate anyone in his administration leaking (ended up not being Libby, but Armitage), or hindering the investigation. I guess Bush forgot he said that." But libsRfunny dismissed the whole investigation as a tempest in a Beltway teapot: "They were trying to hang it on Rove, not Armitage. How can you possibly impede an investigation into something that never happened? The guy just didn't recall conversations made three years earlier. You have any idea how many conversations people have in DC?"

Lurch, meanwhile, tried to add some historical context: "This administration and these contemporary cons sure make Clinton look like a mix between Churchill and Alexander the Great. Dubya is Caligula to Clinton's Augustus Caesar." Then ceolmor took the classical theme and ran with it: "Hmm, [this] brings to mind Plato's comment, 'The rulers of the state are the only ones who should have the privilege of lying'." But chiefss stuck up for Bush's decision, insisting that his predecessor had given a free pass to many, many more miscreants: "Jesus, I sure didn't hear all you clowns screaming and hollering when Slick Willie pardoned hundreds of convicted felons. Bush just commuted the sentence, didn't pardon. The conviction still stands."

Other stories with impressive comment totals included "Propeller's Incorrigibles," posted on November 27, 2007, with 259 props and 968 comments. (Said Spadecaller, who posted the story: "The level of debate at Propeller matters to many of us. I'm sick of personally abusive commentary that targets member's race, age, sex, nationality, ethnic background, or disability. What about you?" Replied Endoscopy: "One of the major problems that starts this is the abusive political ranting. It starts out bashing the opposition and descends into doing the same to posters on the opposite side.") There was also "Simpsons hit for not-so-gay crack," posted on November 5, 2008, with 875 comments. And let us not forget "Texas School Board Rejects Intelligent Design," posted on August 27, 2007, with 228 props and 783 comments. Said joeblowe: "How about that, there's enough common sense and intelligence in even a ONE STAR state to realize that it's a bad idea to teach idiocy in a science class."

COPY CATS

And what about stories that inspired the most members to hit the prop button? The undisputed champ was "World should ban human cloning, except medical: U.N.," posted on November 11, 2007, with 424 props and a relatively reticent 77 comments. "Hooray!" said 1-2-Oscar. Replied Commodore1: "Yes, I agree. As long as the liberals don't use it to increase the number of votes they get." On a more serious note, reviewer saw the cloning and genetic manipulation of livestock as a definite Pandora's Box: "I wrote an article on cloning for food, and the main thing that scares me about cloning cattle just to have a larger T-Bone is the loss of genetic diversity in the species. Anyone who raises or breeds animals knows the short- and long-term health consequences." Another member, tkyrchncs, argued that this particular train had already left the station: "As to food species, it should be possible to maintain much smaller and greatly more diverse herds by cloning the desirable PARTS of an animal. To all intents and purposes modern herds and flocks ARE cloned. How much genetic diversity do you think there is in a modern egg or fryer producing population, as in comparison to an equal number of wild chickens?" But angelitobcn got in the last, theological word: "Do souls have clones?"

There was also "Attorney General Alberto Gonzales Resigns," posted on August 27, 2007, with 336 props and 754 comments. Bkumm greeted the news with a kind of victory jig: "Adios, muchacho! NOW, who's gonna protect King George? Rove? Gone. Gonzales? Gone. Rumsfeld? Gone." Said Neophile: "Now he can spend some quality time forgetting the circumstances of important decisions he makes about his family." Added searchbeam: "My first computer--a Commodore--had better memory than this bozo! To think that this guy was a Texas Supreme Court Judge makes you wonder about the quality of justice those poor souls in Texas were getting." Did the cashiered Attorney General have any defenders? Well, there was MajJohn, who accused the Democrats of conducting a bigoted witch hunt: "The Democrats can't stand a minority that's not one of their own."

Another prop-happy post concerned the site itself, right after we shed our identity as Netscape. "Propeller Lives!" was posted on September 19, 2007, and rang up 302 props and 197 comments. Searchbeam immediately urged the community to pitch in and give the new site some love: "The more the traffic to your site, the more advertising dollars, and therefore an assured existence! It is a tough world, and for us to exist as a vibrant, productive community, we must be able to pull more traffic to Propeller." Very true. Silverghost, meanwhile, thought the new site might be a spammy wolf in sheep's clothing: "Maybe I'm too infrequently involved, but I didn't have a clue & thought I was being scammed. Took me awhile to trust this change as valid." But ind06, after venting over some of the new site's defects (crappy share feature, sink option), at least knew exactly where to assign the blame: "Oh, and these problems are all George Bush's fault."

Other biggies included the cheery "You are Destroying America. Yes, You," posted on July 18, 2007, with 292 props and 516 comments. And on a slightly more salacious front, there was "Report: Governor Linked To Prostitution Ring," posted on March 10, 2008, with 261 props and 513 comments. "Politics as usual," said BronxBomber, alluding to Elliott Spitzer's serial dalliance with precisely the sort of hookers he was supposed to be driving out of business. "Couldn't happen to a nicer guy," added bobo-in-texas. What followed was a little parry-and-thrust action (sorry), beginning with a comment from Lincoln85: "Bronx, are you still worried about Bush listening to you and your mother's phone calls?" Replied BronxBomber: "I'm not worried about Bush, but please tell your wife to stop calling me." To which cowboygrandpa added: "Yeah, especially trying to call collect like that."

VIEW MASTERS

And what about the stories with the greatest number of page views? The champion here was "Mystery Surrounds Leavenworth, Kansas Underground City," posted on August 19, 2008, with 38 props, 71 comments, and 359,845 page views. One member, dirtylitlesamuel, assumed that the Kansans had unearthed a kind of subterranean Reeperbahn: "When the push came to 'clean up the town,' all the vice moved underground: the drinking, gambling, and prostitution. Leavenworth was a wild cowtown, and people hated the drovers for all the vice they brought. However, they liked the money." Another member, telernc, speculated that the tunnels were connected to the nearby (and notorious) prison: "I have a friend who grew up in a house near the prison. She has told me stories about these underground paths. In fact her father was a high-ranking military man in charge of running the prison, and she says she had a tunnel under her house to the prison." But Propeller being a hotbed of unexpected expertise, this theory was promptly demolished by KUBasketballnut: "Your friend is wrong. I worked at the federal penitentiary for twenty-five years, and at the state penitentiary before and after I worked at the federal. Both facilities have tunnels inside for utilities such as electricity and steam, but they are not accessible from the outside, and are definitely not accessible from the inside to the outside."

Perhaps, then, the theory about the underground rumpus room is correct. In any case, many of our stories with the highest number of page views seemed to have a definite theme of mild raunch. (Strange how these things work.) There was "Sex session at work gets municipal employees suspended," posted on August 13, 2008, with 13 props, 37 comments, and 298,384 page views. One member, bratto14, argued that the absent-minded exhibitionists had done nothing wrong: "As long as they are single, leave them alone. Try not to be so judgmental of other people--we have ALL made mistakes." LDN felt otherwise: "Mistakes are forgetting to pay a bill or losing your car keys. This was just plain rude and inconsiderate. As others have said, some things should be done in private."

There was also "Chicago dive bar scores hit with nude Sarah Palin portrait," posted on October 13, 2008, with 89 props, 156 comments, and 293,638 page views. "As they say," noted jovial, "a picture is worth a thousand words." Replied massto: "Just look at where it's coming from. Chicago is not a great place, and the idiots that go into this bar have to have their heads examined." To which Teech responded: "I'm heading to the airport right now. Chicago, here I come!" And on a (somewhat) related note, let's not forget "German Sunbathers Complain About Polish Voyeurs At Nudist Beach," posted on July 29, 2008, with 20 props, 17 comments, and a disproportionate 272,193 page views. One member, zygoter, had little patience for the Mitteleuropean whiners: "If the Poles don't like it they shouldn't look, and if the Germans don't like it they should put some clothes on! They should be glad I'm not there, I would use a 600mm lens and post the pictures on the Internet!" In one of my rare comment-thread interventions, I mused: "A nudist without a voyeur is like--what? A day without sunshine? Macaroni without cheese? There's a word for this: symbiosis." Replied pderoo1: "Beanies without weenies?" And the conversation, like all conversations, came to an end.

HERE COMES THE JUDGE

Barack Obama's nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court inspired several lively conversations this week at Propeller. "Obama Picks Sotomayor for Supreme Court!" racked up 79 props, 3 drops, and 147 comments, including a thumbs up from deathray: "Well, as the Republicans like to say, the president should get the judges he wants. I think Sotomayor is a good choice." There was a similar reaction from sinophil49: "That Sotomayor is a competent Latina judge should be a point of pride for all Americans. If approved, it would truly be a historical event in our Republic's gloried history."

Meanwhile, tanglang expressed some discomfort with what he saw as the nominee's judicial activisim: "She said that appeals courts are where policy is made." Replied Beau7890: "She was describing the difference between appellate and district court. She wasn't advocating making policy. Regardless, appeals courts are where policy is made, whether you like it or not." Endoscopy raised the prospect of Republicans blocking Sotomayor's confirmation, and suggested that such tactics came straight out of the Democratic bag of tricks: "The Democrats... are proud of 'Borking' people." This elicited a quick shot across the bow from Desdamona, who expressed relief that the Robert Bork had been barred from the highest court in the land: "The guy was a nut and I am exceedingly proud of the Senate for preventing his elevation to such an honored position."

A related story, "Rush Limbaugh Slams Judge Sotomayor: 'Racist' and a 'Hack'," racked up 72 props, 6 drops, and 131 comments. Charlson suggested that Limbaugh had no standing (to put it mildly) to criticize the nominee: "The racist, homophobic drug addict has no credibility when it comes to racism and hackism." Bkumm still had some doubts about Sotomayor's "wise Latina" comments: "I would not go so far as to call her a racist, but it is troubling that she would say something like that. There is no evidence that a person who has 'been there' and 'done that' is going to uphold the rule of law better than someone who has not." Yet he still felt that Obama had made a good pick. So did kobzikov, who actually applauded Sotomayor's admission that a judge's background and experience would inevitably factor into his or her decisions: "There are many theories of justice and not all of them would insist on justice being blind. And if we think that justice should serve the society as a whole and not only those who are well-connected and with the means to hire the best attorneys, then I'm not sure a blind servant is preferable to the one who can see."

STRAIGHT OUTTA GITMO

With the president dithering over his promised closure of the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, the Propeller community chimed in on both sides of the issue. "Guantanamo Bay Detainee Site Should Be Open or Closed: What Do You Want?" generated 125 props, 7 drops, and 257 comments. Pecossam thought we were worrying far too much about the rights of the prisoners: "There is no place for 'touchy-feely' when one is engaged in war; not if one wishes to defeat the enemy. As General William Tecumseh Sherman (the Union officer who marched on and burned Atlanta, GA) said, 'War Is Hell.'" And where would the detainees be housed, should the Gitmo facility be shuttered? One member, donald51, proposed a solution: "Keith Obermann interviewed a city councilmen with a totally vacant 300+ bed, high-security prison in Wyoming or Utah, which is empty and volunteering to take the detainees!" But even in that case, Klarissa saw some potential problems: "We would have to set up special kitchens and special religious accommodations wherever these prisoners are sent. Let's be smart for a change and keep them where they are."

There was agreement from prophyporcrites: "If we give them trials here, we open up a Pandora's Box that was better left closed. Heck, how many murderers, child molesters, and others get off on a simple technicality? Is it really that farfetched to think the same may happen to these people?" Replied gamahuche: "So fear of Pandora should guide US 'justice'? Tell that to the judge! The earthly one and the one upstairs if you believe in that one." Commodore1 suggested that there was some NIMBY-style hypocrisy at work: "For those of you who want Gitmo closed, I'm sure you're willing to have them detained in your state. Right?" To which jordan11 replied: "I don't have a problem with it. We already have 'terrorists' imprisoned in this country, and I've heard no one complain in the states they're incarcerated in. Stop being such a whiny baby. You don't trust our prison system? Then stay under your bed."

AND DON'T OVERLOOK....

On a less partisan note, there was "Couple On the Run after 'Stealing' $6 Million Credited to Their Bank Account in Error," with 75 props and 12 comments, most of them fairly cynical. Said rj3sp: "I doubt that the bank would be held at fault if they inadvertently depleted someone's bank account. Of course, that never happens." And EastwoodCarter seemed confident that the bank would recoup its losses, one way or another: "Just charge every savings account a small inactivity fee. Problem solved." Added ppt4706: "Actually, that money is the amount that I have been charged in overdraft fees through the years, so give it back!"

Elsewhere, Propeller members sounded off on waterboarding and pistol play in our national parks. And this YouTube video of Bob Dylan singing "Forever Young" rang up 131 props and 21 comments. There was a small debate over who did the best version of the Dylan chestnut, with chevydog opting for the composer's ex-main squeeze : "The Joan Baez version is among my favorites." Added Ciera-Marie: "I prefer Bob Dylan's or Joan B's versions over Rod Stewart's any day. God, I do not like Rod Stewart at all. Not here, there or anywhere." To which JoseMadre replied: "I think Rod's voice is an acquired taste." It's a terrible temptation at this point to post the "Hot Legs" video, but we'll stick with Bob Dylan after all.

HELL ON WHEELS?

This week, Barack Obama decisively regained the center ring from last week's star, Rush Limbaugh. "Obama Appoints Himself CEO of Chrysler" generated more comments than any other story: 234. It also racked up 97 props, 15 drops, and a brisk summary from Hhussk: "Socialism." Added capecoralM: "Fascism is more like it." There followed a noisy exchange about whether the corporate dog wagged the governmental tail under fascism, or the other way around. Meanwhile, acceptance wondered whether these labels weren't fogging up the real issues: "Terms like fascism, communist, [and] socialism bring emotion but no real thought to the argument--they assume a conclusion." Replied crespi, his tongue firmly in cheek: "You seem to be talking sense. There are penalties here on Propeller for that."

Meanwhile, engineer took to the president's defense: "Obama did not bring on the problems! He inherited them from the previous administration, you morons!" Said beavith1: "Now he's made the problem his. He owns the direction that GM and Chrysler have taken. He could've stood for bankruptcy early, before we poured $30B into these empty vessels." Added BB64: "To add insult to injury, he's also given [the companies] to the UAW. Not a bad trade for $13,000,000 in campaign funds. Had I known, I would have had my company do the same." To which willottica replied: "Giving Chrysler to the UAW isn't a bad idea. It means that the UAW will suffer if Chrysler makes stupid, unaffordable bargains with the union."

Another story, "Obama Confronts Abortion Debate, Urges Notre Dame Grads to Seek Common Ground," racked up 48 props, 6 drops, and 210 comments. Said fiftynine: "I'm Catholic and not angry at all [about Obama's appearance]. In fact, I think it is good that we have a president that will appear before crowds that aren't handpicked and confront an issue like this head on." Added amazed: "Like it or not, Obama is our president. To have the POTUS come to your graduation to speak is a coup and an honor--even if you have no use for this particular president's policies." And Desdamona heeded Obama's advice in seeking some common ground: "[Abortion] is about providing women a choice for how to deal with an unwanted pregnancy (no matter why or how she ended up with an unwanted pregnancy). The common ground is obvious: find more ways to limit the number of unwanted pregnancies. There is always common ground. It is when each side holds to the absolute extreme that we are caught up in a social divide."

DICK CHENEY, ROGUE DIVA

The high media profile of former VP Dick Cheney also got the Propeller community talking. For cowboygrandpa, Cheney was definitely outstaying his welcome: "This guy is a portrait of insanity, being viewed as relevant by the insane who believe him. He thinks that America is the only viable country in the world. What is scary is how many still back the raging lunatic." Why was Cheney airing his concerns on television, rather than sharing them directly with the president? Said jimdoze: "Because Obama and company have succumbed to the au courant disdain for him and have chosen to ignore him." Replied GWHayduke: "Considering that the W administration pretty much bungled every single attempt to provide security domestically and globally, I would say that ignoring Cheney's nonsense is a wise strategic move."

There was also a thumbs down from Radiofreeeuropa: "Eight years hiding in an undisclosed location, now glaring from behind the primordial ooze dripping from every TV screen, spouting the most obtuse nonsense ever concocted.... Go back to your undisclosed location, please. Darken our towels no more." Added myfairlady: "He is giving the whole [GOP] a black eye just as Jeb is out there trying to renew the party." But jimdoze stuck by his man: "Cheney has garnered the moniker 'Doomsday Dick' because he sees clearly how bad things could get when a faulty worldview produces counterproductive foreign-policy actions. As such, he is far more in tune with reality than the chattering left could ever hope to be."

AND DON'T OVERLOOK....

Every now and then it's nice to look further back than the 2000 election cycle, and the Propeller community stepped up to the plate with "Early skeleton sheds light on primate evolution." The story rang up 114 props and 54 comments, including this anti-evolutionary aria from AntiNeoCon: "I find it extremely funny how these fools will jump at anything to prove the Darwin theory, which is and always will be a sham. If you want to claim this bony piece of crap as your family tree, by my guest. I have to admit it looks more like one of your folks, mine are much prettier." Replied toph1973: "Evolution has been proven. It is a fact. All one needs to do is look at the bird flu to see evolution in microbiology." To which Tangent001 intelligently added: "We're not talking about 'proof,' we're talking about evidence. All of biological science could be complete and consistent, and there would still be the possibility that God 'poofed' it all into existence."

Propeller itself is prone to periodic, healthy bouts of self-examination, and that's what we got with "A Revisionist's Terms of Use at Propeller.Com," with 71 props, 14 drops, and 305 comments. One member, aceofspades1, argued against any form of censorship on the site: "The insidious posters are the ones who hide their rampant bigotry in catchphrases, and those naive enough not to see it agree with them. Are we to micromanage all that is said?"

In principle, not2needy agreed, yet she also saw a downside to the mudslinging that can easily creep into online debate: "It just seems that we should be able to discuss, debate, agree or disagree without the personal attacks. That's what runs me off." Added Klarissa: "Freedom of speech puts it all out there so we can make up our OWN minds.... The slogan for Propeller: TEFLON." This elicited a puzzled response from CRYMTYPHON: "Who wants to have skillet-skin? It wouldn't even stop bullets. I guess it would be easy to clean, though." If the community would like to suggest other nonstick synthetic fluoropolymers for a Propeller slogan, that would be just fine. In the meantime, our designers are moving ahead with the new fried-eggs-in-a-skillet logo, which is going to look very jazzy on our business cards. (PS: welcome back, deathray!)

RUSH TO JUDGMENT

Not for the first time, Rush Limbaugh spent the last week at center stage. One story about the radio personality and GOP caudillo, "Limbaugh: Negro-in-Chief Obama Wants Reparations for Darkie Pals," racked up more comments than any other: 324. It also generated 54 props, 13 drops, and some harsh divisions of opinion. Said metavirus (who also posted the story): "It really is quite sad that leaders in the GOP let blatantly racist comments like this just slide by. Until they start getting ahead of patently offensive stuff like this, they are going to lose more and more young people and minorities." PsychoHosebeast agreed: "The man has sold any shred of dignity he's ever had for a buck. He's the consummate Ugly American." And even tanglang, who's often locked horns with Propeller's left-leaning cadre, called him an irrelevant eyesore: "Limbaugh represents no one. I'm so sick of people saying he represents the right and their views. I'm tired of being associated with him. And to be honest, if y'all would just ignore him, he would go away."

There were, however, a few members who thought that Limbaugh was being unfairly pilloried. Said Klarissa: "Today's liberal instructions: bad-mouth Rush, we want to shut him up, this will help to bring back the fairness doctrine." And Hhussk defended the premise of Limbaugh's original comments: "Rush suggested that these socialist policies are like the policies of reparations, where wealth, or assets, are redistributed to people who believe they deserve them but did not earn them. I agree. All we are seeing is redistribution of wealth."

But AbuAmirah wasn't buying: "What Rush does is continue the canard that all 'Blacks' sit on their asses collecting food stamps and welfare checks and think that the government owes them something. I don't know about the rest of you, but when I was growing up, my old man (who was 'Black') told me that no one owed me [anything]. It was up to me to get whatever the hell I wanted and to support my family."

Love him or hate him, Limbaugh landed several other stories in our Top Twenty. "Cheney backs 'Entertainer' Limbaugh over Patriot Powell" earned 99 props, 11 drops, 230 comments, and a blunt assessment from GWHayduke: "El Rushbo garners the support of the previous vice president and chief hawk. Cheney is becoming more of a fringe nutcase each time he opens his totalitarian mouth." And a related story, "Colin Powell/Rush Limbaugh War Rages On," generated 79 props, 4 drops, and 215 comments. There was a final, somewhat confusing defense of Limbaugh from mrdelta: "I am a staunch Rush fan and wish to leave the Republican party myself, for the party that will finally stomp liberals like [Colin] Powell out of existence." To which StevieGee replied: "Powell is a moderate. I'm a liberal. Want to come and try stomping me?

PELOSI IN THE HOT SEAT

Meanwhile, it appears that Nancy Pelosi may have some explaining to do. "Records suggest Pelosi, others were told of harsh interrogations" generated 103 props, 3 drops, and 231 comments. For cowboygrandpa, who posted the story, the House Majority Leader's record on torture was looking pretty suspect: "Me thinks there could be fire where this smoke is coming from. Never have cared for Pelosi or her scurrilous ways." There was a similar response from bruhaha: "I've never been a fan of Pelosi's and I think she's horrid as Speaker. All those who knew what was going on, especially those who are feigning outrage now, need to go. [They should] either resign or be voted out."

BB64 took it one step further: "I love Nancy. She's the perfect Democrat. She lies regularly but is never called on it by the media. She loves to do things that aren't her responsibility, but doesn't do her own job. She loves taking union funds, yet none of her businesses ever employ union staff." But sinophil49 thought this was painting Democrats with too broad a brush: "If you had talked in specifics about Pelosi and her failings, I would be in complete agreement.... All that is fair game and valid opprobrium. I do not approve of any of that. But when you use broad strokes implying all Democrat politicians are liars or greedy, then you have crossed over into excess and you lose credibility."

Spadecaller also took a whack at the Pelosian piñata: "Pelosi is an opportunist and her lack of convictions and integrity are beginning to show. She knew about the torture and she has been covering that up for too long." But rimbaud thought the folly was more widely distributed, and had a novel solution: "Me thinks there is plenty of guilt, and regret, to spread pretty thickly... A truth commission, with liberty and immunity for all, might be just the thing to bring all of these things to light. But let it be conducted by the news media (or a reality TV producer), not the government, far away from Washington--in, say Casper, Wyoming."

AND DON'T OVERLOOK....

Enough, you say, of these personality-driven sideshows! Let's talk about some actual policy. Well, "Senate Considers Federal Tax On Soda" rang up 50 props, 1 drop, and 111 comments. CarinEising was all for dropping the dime on Pepsi freaks: "This is a great idea. If cigarettes and booze are 'sin-taxed', then why not junk food?" Responded libsRfunny: "No. It's not a great idea. In fact, it is a wholly terrible idea that will fall on the lower and middle classes, just like the $38 billion federal cigarette tax hike." And JustTrollKing agreed: "This is what you get with leftists in charge. I used to think Bush's 'borrow and spend' was bad, but compared to Obama, the Shrub was Jack Benny. Now we will get soaked with more taxes on top of that. Pretty soon we will be envious of the peasants of Nottingham."

Let's end on a harmonious note. Here's a video of Crosby, Stills and Nash (looking remarkably spry for 2007) performing "Long Time Gone." The Propeller post notched 118 props and 17 comments, many of which focused on the charms of the mid-Sixties Ford Mustang. "I remember listening to this song regularly with my old eight-track cassette deck that I had in a '65 Mustang," said Spadecaller. Added cowboygrandpa: "I had a '66 with a built 302. Roller bearings and cam, solid lifters, holly 4 barrel, hooker headers with glass packs, and an 8-track player. I had to play the music loud to be heard over the car."

But at least one member, mark-stevens, had a more jaundiced memory of the mustachioed, roly-poly Crosby: "I met Crosby years after that group's fame. [He] had done time for drugs, than turned state witness. My friend knew the back-up musicians for Crosby when he performed at a bar in Seattle. Dave was unbelievably paranoid and refused to talk to any strangers... Long live rock and roll!" Couldn't have put it better myself.

On Sunday the New York Times ran a story about Annie Leonard, who is fighting a one-woman crusade against excess consumption and waste. Her primary tool is a 20-minute video called The Story of Stuff, which has become a viral hit in classrooms since Leonard first posted it on the Web in December 2007. Six million people have viewed it on the filmmaker's own website, while the version on YouTube has clocked many more hits (it's hard to tell the precise number, since the film has been chopped up into segments and reposted by other viewers).

Nor is the film's reach limited to the Web. According to the Times, "More than 7,000 schools, churches and others have ordered a DVD version.... It has also won support from independent groups that advise teachers on curriculum choices. Facing the Future, a curriculum developer for schools in all 50 states, is drafting lesson plans based on the video. And Ms. Leonard has a contract with Simon & Schuster to write a book based on the video."



As the Times also notes, the film has its share of detractors, who argue that Leonard applies too broad a brush to industrial society. In the opening sequence, she does admit her own addiction to the iPod and various other consumer items. But her mea culpa goes no further. Capitalism itself is depicted as a bloated, top-hatted monster, like a more dastardly vision of the Monopoly Man. And Leonard's definition of what goes on in a factory is surely a little black-and-white: "We use energy to mix toxic chemicals in with the natural resources to make toxic, contaminated products."

In Missoula, Montana, one irate parent complained when the film was shown in a science class. As reported in the Missoula Independent Online, "The controversy began in October, when Kathleen Kennedy, a science teacher at Big Sky High School, showed her class The Story of Stuff, a 20-minute video about sustainability. One student's father, Mark Zuber, thought the video was biased and ill-suited for Kennedy's Wildlife Biology class, and lobbied the school district to take action against her."

When his complaint was rejected by a curriculum committee, Zuber appealed to the school board. On January 29, after four hours of arguing, the board voted 4-3 that Kennedy's screening of the video had violated the school district's policy on the presentation of controversial issues. On Leonard's own blog, she suggests that procedural oddities plus spotty attendance by the board members--three out of ten were absent, one at his son's basketball game--explained the outcome. And in another local paper, The Missoulian, Kennedy defended her decision to show The Story of Stuff to her class.

"How many of us have ever purchased something that we badly wanted, but didn't really need?" she writes. "I know I have. I would suspect that some of the folks now in foreclosure would have to admit that they bought more house than they needed. These were the kinds of connections I was hoping students would make. The downturn in the economy was becoming news and, being a teacher who tries to make learning more meaningful by tying it to what is going on in the world, I made the decision that this was a topic worth discussing with students. I am concerned that some parents and school board members would question the motives of teachers who connect current events and their curriculum."

The comment thread following the Missoulian story included both praise and potshots. "Kathleen, I've been with you from the beginning," said Glen, "watching the video and reading the newspaper. Teachers are heroes, and I don't understand Zuber's concern. Perhaps, like his daughter, he found himself with a minority opinion for the first time and isn't used to it." Mike disagreed, and he seemed particularly peeved by the video's attack on brominated flame retardants, or BFRs: "[Y]ou had no intent to discuss with your class the merits of the video and the pros and cons in it. Nor did you point out the lies it told about the flammable retardant issue. At this time I feel [you're] a poor teacher and need to be taken to task and/or fired for your blatant disregard of discussing both sides of an issue."

There was also a busy Twitter discussion of the video and its attendant controversy. The reaction was mostly positive. Said @johnmleone: "Loved the parts about materialism & the 'work-watch-spend' treadmill of American life. That kind of life ain't worth living." Added @kkgyimesi: "How ironic. Introduced my boys to a garage sale this weekend. That was before seeing 'the story of stuff' on NYT today." But @JeffStierACSH was pleased to see the Times delivering a more nuanced view of the film: "At least there's some mention of the slant/indoctrinating kids." And @AshleyEngelman offered up a less partisan reason to avoid The Story of Stuff: "Watch this... and proceed to hate yourself."

TRIGGER HAPPY?

Which story generated the lengthiest conversation this week at Propeller? That would be "Obama Wants Gun Registration," with 62 props, 27 drops, and 264 comments. GLee saw this registration campaign as the thin edge of the anti-Second Amendment wedge: "This all is just the beginning of stuff that will have to be 'undone' in a couple of years. Socialism approaching communism." So did rimbaud: "If only 'The Man' is allowed to own really powerful weapons, we will be powerless to fight his tyranny (we will never have a 'well-armed militia'). I propose no bans on weapons of any kind, unless the cops and the National Guard are also prohibited them."

Meanwhile, Beau7890 took the discussion back to basics: "So what exactly is the problem with registering guns?" GWHayduke had a tongue-in-cheek response: "Then they'll know we have 'em. Then they'll send their liberal, fascist military police state door-to-door collectin' the guns we been totin' around pointin' at bad guys.... Or, maybe they want to reduce crime. Either way, it's a socialistic, menshevik communist, fascist, liberal conspiracy to take our guns away in order to suppress us into drones to serve the masters in DC."

DaneL argued that the guns in his own household were kept under lock and key, and that outside of the urban fleshpots they were in fact less dangerous: "Out here we use guns as tools. Unlike the cesspool of a city I'm sure you live in, we don't have drive-bys. The last burglary we had in town, someone stole a bike. You might be surprised how different people act when they don't live like rats, packed in on top of each other." This earned a shout of assent from stalemate: "Bravo, Dane. Here too we live as you do.... We just don't have the problems they do in cities."

To which fsev41 replied: "Unfortunately the majority of our population lives in cities. Somehow we need to find a way to control gun violence in the cities while still allowing for hunters (of animals, not people) and personal protection." And GWHayduke, who had earlier ridiculed the pro-registration argument, came clean about the bolt-action bonbon in his own closet: "I keep the Steyer Mannlicher SSG69 PII that my grandfather gave to me before he died in [my safe]. He shot some strange beasts with that thing. Just because you live in nowhere WY with your cows doesn't mean that you are exempt from the stupidity of others."

ONWARD, CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS

Another hotly debated story was "U.S. Soldiers Pushing Christianity on Muslims in Afghanistan," with 45 props, 3 drops, and 260 comments. "It's proselytizing," said metavirus, "and it's against Afghan law and the military's rules." Replied capecoralM: "To view your words of ignorance is truly spectacular. Muslims, Jews, and Christians believe in the same God." To which crespi replied: "Go down to Alabama and tell a church full of Baptists they actually worship Allah. Better yet, go to Pakistan and tell them they really worship Yaweh. If you have any cool old vinyl records or old comic books or anything, please leave them to me in your will."

But ChefEOD saw nothing wrong in U.S. soldiers distributing Bibles to the Afghan population: "Christians are mandated by Scripture to share and spread the Gospel. To not do so is to disobey God." Replied dissent: "Guns and Bibles.... how persuasive." There was a similar response from doggammit, who saw the Bible as one more stealth weapon deployed by the West, and compared the soldiers distributing them to military engineers (or worse): "Under such conditions, distributing religious propaganda is a sapper's job--a special commission designed by saps and performed by saps. In military hands, the Bible resembles a 9/11 box-cutter." Meanwhile, MisterX wondered if the soldiers could truly be accused of proselytizing: "If handing out Bibles is converting, then the Gideons have been after me every time I check into a hotel room."

AND DON'T OVERLOOK....

There were several stories about gay marriage in our Top Twenty this week. "Two National Polls, for First Time, Show Plurality Support for Gay Marriage" racked up 64 props, 7 drops, and 157 comments. Will1313 greeted this as good news: "They should have the right to be as miserable as hetero couples. We will have to think up a new term, [since] GAY marriage is an oxymoron." Locky12 disagreed: "Why should the state have to recognize same sex unions when there is no incentive for the state to recognize fruitless love?" Replied david_nwpa: "Pure BS! First, if marriage were for parents only, then the sterile, the elderly, and those who don't want children should be banned. They are not!"

Endoscopy wasn't buying: "You and the other people that espouse homosexual marriage never want to look at the fact that marriage is the founding block of any government, as was taught in the civics classes I took." To which Tangent001 replied: "Nope. Historically, marriage is first and foremost a contract between families regarding the disposition of property and political power and only secondarily the legitimizing of children." Other related stories included "Maine prepares to take up gay marriage bill," with 51 props, 4 drops, and 103 comments, and "Majority of Americans oppose legalizing same sex marriages," with 38 props, 11 drops, and 77 comments. Said Wolfie2007: "Marriage should be between one man and one woman. In Canada there is a movement to legalize plural marriage. What next?" Replied gamahuche: "What next? They'll be banging on your windows and breaking down your doors to force you to commit savage, vile and obscene acts against your will."

Finally, there was "Which is Worst Addiction: Smoking or Drinking or Gambling?," with 109 props and 32 comments. "They are all bad," conceded sithmaster, "but I gotta go with smoking." For mark-stevens, all three addictions were sadly familiar: "My dad was a gambler, the whole family suffered in poverty for many years. My street-tough brother-in-law lost a lung and will spend the rest of his life in a wheel chair, due to smoking. My sister has a Jerry Springer family--all three generations--due to a serious drinking problem for twenty-some years. Pick one." Spadecaller also spoke from experience: "Truly addictive personalities change ships, from the Titanic to the Lusitania. From alcohol to gambling. Being a recovering alcoholic myself since September of 1978--over thirty years since my last drink--I quit cigarettes and before I was married (thank God) I gave up my addiction to sex. That does not mean that I gave up sex, btw."

There were also some more lighthearted responses. Said ctiedje: "Weed. Best addiction out there." Replied obiwan2112: "I'm absolutely sure that the worst addiction is smoking, and I'll bet you a fifth of Jack Daniel's and lay 10 to 1 odds that I'm right." But quicksilver0602 cut right to the chase: "Yes, they ARE all bad... but I've got to go with Propeller." That's right, folks: once you start, you can't stop. Can you?

Back in February, when her name was first floated as a possible successor to Louisiana Senator David Vitter, few voters outside of the porn-watching community--granted, a very sizable demographic--had ever heard of Stormy Daniels. The website devoted to drafting this reluctant candidate seemed like a joke. Wasn't it simply a poke in the eye at Vitter's own sexual proclivities, which included frequent stops at a Canal Street bordello and a big box of Pampers?

Maybe not. Daniels, the star of more than one hundred films, including The Witches of Breastwick and Trailer Trash Nurses 6, appears to be taking the idea very seriously. She hasn't yet agreed to run against Vitter. But yesterday Daniels began a "listening tour" of the state, which will allow her to gauge her chances and hear the concerns of potential constituents. Her first stop was in Baton Rouge, where she drew a small crowd of fans and media. Daniels was quick to assure her audience that her film career would not distract her from the business of governance.

"She said her contract with the porn studio Wicked Pictures is drawing to a close," reports Michelle Millhollon of the Baton Rogue Advocate. "She said she is only obligated to appear on camera for the rest of the year and that, at age 30, she is becoming old for a porn star." Daniels added that "entering the adult entertainment business carries a lot of responsibility."

CNN took the high road with Daniels in this video, having clearly briefed Kiran Chetry to avoid double-entendres at all cost. Daniels does acknowledge that the movement to draft her is the direct outcome of Vitter's erotic hijinks: "I hear the word karma a lot." That aside, she's not terribly impressive--she sounds like a pleasant, presentable woman who just happens to take her clothes off for a living.



And what about the reaction on the Web? There was a lively conversation over at Twitter, where Daniels has yet to attain much in the way of credibility. Said @Redstickrant: "Is the Stormy Daniels thing serious? Dunno. I think someone should, um, take a pole." Nor was @anicajeanne impressed by the aspiring candidate's appearance on CNN: "Senate hopeful Stormy Daniels sounds as aimless and disjointed as Palin when she talks. Draw your own conclusion." There was also a partisan note from @rickblanton: "Stormy Daniels should have ran during the Clinton admin. Could have traded favors and got something done."

Despite Vitter's status as damaged goods, it still seems unlikely that Daniels will end up claiming his seat (please, no jokes). Yet skeptics should be reminded of an important precedent: the 1987 election of porn star Ilona "Cicciolina" Staller to the Italian Parliament. True, she served only a single term. But Staller went on to form the tongue-in-cheek Partito dell'Amore (Love Party), whose platform included legalization of brothels, improved sex education, and the creation of "love parks" throughout the Italian peninsula.

Earlier today, the British government published a list of people barred from setting foot in the country. According to Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, the list identifies 16 purveyors of hate speech and extremism (there are another six that the government declined to make public). This rogue's gallery includes Muslim extremists, Russian gang members, an Israeli militant, a father-and-daughter team devoted to anti-gay agitation--and American talk-radio host Michael Savage.

Savage, who is based in San Francisco, has enraged multiple constituencies. He has called the Koran a "book of hate," and accused autistic children of faking it: "In 99 percent of the cases, it's a brat who hasn't been told to cut the act out. That's what autism is." His high profile as a shock jock notwithstanding, it's a little surprising to see Savage singled out in this way--he's hardly the only vituperative voice in our polarized political landscape. Nor does he rise to the squalid level of, say, Samir Al Quntar, a serial killer whose victims include a four-year-old girl. The real question here is how Britain has chosen to balance the opposing demands of civility and free speech.

Not surprisingly, the reaction on the Web has been divided. Over at Women on the Web, chamdas hayomim suggested that excluding Savage was an act of cowardice: "London, why are you so afraid of Michael Savage? Because he may expose [to] the world that you are not the London of the past, because you lost your way. Instead of taking on the real challenge to battle your enemies within, the Muslim extremists who are terrorizing Jews & Christans on daily basis." Responded C. Aune: "LOL, the man should be banned from the human race, not just Britain." Added Diana T.: "Too bad he can't be banned to a solitary deserted island where no one can hear him except the one he adores the most."

Over at Twitter, the conversation was similarly divided between fans and opponents of the radio host. Noted @JoeCaruso: "Muslim hate-mongers are allowed in England. Conservative American Michael Savage is banned." But @jpzenger objected for entirely different reasons: "Not a fan of Michael Savage--UK ban is absurd--now he will have reason to whine endlessly about his 'ordeal.'" Meanwhile, @wolfbreath noted some incidental ironies: "LOL, don't know if it's funnier Michael Savage is listed w/ NeoNazis & terrorists, or that his real name is Weiner."

Savage has responded with a defense of his "traditional values"--you know, the ones that are supposed to save what he has called a "homosexualized, feminized America" from limp-wristed doom. Speaking to World Net Daily, he said: "It's interesting to me that here I am a talk show host, who does not advocate violence, who advocates patriotic traditional values--borders, language, culture--who is now on a list banned in England. What does that say about the government of England? It says more about them than it says about me."

Having already shot himself in the foot multiple times--it's a wonder he can still walk--former presidential contender John Edwards now concedes that he is being investigated for misappropriation of campaign funds. That sounds rather humdrum, doesn't it? The specific accusation, however, is not: the feds are trying to determine whether Edwards used the money to cover up his affair with Rielle Hunter.

Given the tangled state of the former North Carolina senator's financial records, it may take a while to sort this out. Still, according to a dispatch in the Raleigh News & Observer, "records show that Hunter was paid by a political action committee aligned with Edwards. She received $114,000 to film Edwards as he hopscotched the nation to rally crowds in the fight against poverty. She followed him to Uganda, where he met with starving children orphaned by attacks by rebel forces. Her 'webisodes' live still on the Internet." There is also some evidence that Hunter was assisted in her move to California by an Edwards-affiliated PAC.

Needless to say, Edwards is not the only presidential candidate to star in a vanity production. But the ironies here are stacked uncomfortably high, especially when you take a look at one of Hunter's initial videos, in which the honey-tongued candidate declares his intention to let his expensively coiffed hair down. "I actually want the country to see who I am," he tells his mistress. "Who I really am. But I don't know what the result of that will be." Ouch. (Given the extent to which Edwards has torched his own extraordinary prospects, it's also ironically appropriate that this film clip is prefaced by a teaser for Land of the Lost.)



The reaction on the Web was not exactly forgiving. Over at the CBS Hot Sheet blog, zeitman77 declared the former candidate a monster of hypocrisy: "John Edwards, who soulfully talked of the travails of poverty and two Americas, epitomizes the criminally treacherous politics of America and the betrayal of its people." But another, Brownermustgo, cautioned us against opening a partisan can of worms: "We need to be looking forward, not backward. What if we look into all this stuff and find out that Edwards waterboarded Hunter, as part of some good old kinky fun?"

Over at Twitter, another noisy conversation ensued. Of course Edwards has his own Twitter feed, set up by the media-savvy senator early in the campaign. But it hasn't been updated since November 14, 2007, when the candidate was en route to a hospital in Dubuque, Iowa for a meet-and-greet. (For a quick remembrance of things past, take a look at his October 3 Tweet: "Latest poll shows I'm the only Dem candidate to beat every republican in a head-to-head match-up.") Meanwhile, @GateCityBlog delivered a crushing verdict: "John Edwards cheated on his cancer stricken wife then paid his mistress with campaign funds. That is about as low as a politician can get." So did @BuzzwireStaff: "Guess John Edwards won't be pulling an 'Elliot Spitzer' revival anytime soon. Ruh-ohs! Here come the Feds!" And @rkref reminded us to keep the blame firmly pinned on the candidate himself: "Don't blame ego and sex for John Edwards. They were doing just fine before he came around."

OBAMA NATION?

Which story prompted the longest conversation at Propeller this week? That would be "Why Does Obama Hate America So Badly?," with 57 props, 46 drops, and 281 comments. The thread included a spirited debate about Obama's virility index, especially as perceived by the British. Said pc25: "Seems they are starting not to like President Pantywaist much there." Replied hefaa1: "President Pantywaist sure slaps the Republican members of Congress around pretty. There are also three Somali pirates at the bottom of the ocean that don't think he's a sissy either."

Taking a more geopolitical point of view, stalemate urged the president to toughen up, and quickly: "Doesn't Obama realize that if he keeps flip-flopping, there may not be an America for him to govern? Obama, wake up. Be a man and quit being such an apologetic, begging wimp. Muslims only respect strength in their counterparts." To which mesodude replied: "Stop giving orders from your keyboard and sign up yourself and all of your family members. Then we'll know you're serious and not just another fearful con chickenhawk who loves to cheer from the sidelines." And AbuAmirah had an even more pungent response (which has been slightly redacted here for our PG-rated audience): "How do you know who and what it is that we respect? Do you know any Muslims? Hell, no. Have you ever been in a mosque? Hell, no. All you know is what they tell you on conservative talk radio and Faux News."

For libsRfunny, the POTUS still had some explaining to do. Indeed, he ridiculed the idea of Obama as a cool, reflective leader: "The Moron-in-Chief signed a $786 billion spending bill that he didn't read and that he didn't allow members of Congress to read or debate. I don't know anyone with a shred of common sense who would call that 'thinking before acting.'" For truthiness, however, this was nothing but sour grapes: "Here is the crux of it, the Republicans appear to be scared because, unlike Carter, President Barack Obama is a formidable opponent. He is kicking your asses left and right. Your party doesn't know what to do, because Rove's strategies don't work on him. He won't be distracted, he won't get sucked into name-calling BS, he just keeps on doing what he was elected to do."

CURIOUS GEORGE

"Billionaire Soros Bankrolling Calls for 'Torture' Probe" racked up 48 props, 19 drops, and 179 comments. Candida was all for George Soros putting his money where his mouth was: "So what? He is a thinking person, so he should join all the other thinking persons. In addition, he has lots of money, and what better way to use it than to promote justice?" Responded slate: "Isn't Soros a non-citizen? I mean it's one thing for citizens to support things and even send money, but a foreigner having his fingers in the American Pie doesn't bother you lefties?" (In a subsequent comment, slate conceded that Soros was indeed an American citizen.)

Meanwhile, Beau7890 saluted just about anybody who was willing to spearhead an inquiry into our interrogation tactics: "Torture is morally wrong. I don't give a rat's ass if Kim Jong-Il, Hitler, or Cheney himself calls for investigation of our use of torture--it should be investigated anyway. Anyone who has a problem with investigating simply because George Soros is calling for it is not rational." But BB64 still excoriated the Hungarian-born billionaire, who he branded as a socialist and political meddler: "Wow, Soros is bankrolling this. Does this surprise anyone? He's typical of all huge socialists. Insists you and I pay taxes while he avoids them. You want to follow corruption, just follow his money trail to the 527s."

Then there was the related issue of how torture may damage America's image on the world stage. For prophyporcrites, that horse left the barn a long, long time ago: "Hurt our image? We are the only country to use a nuclear weapon on innocent civilians. We nuked a few hundred thousand Japanese to death--I think waterboarding is a little less hurtful to our image than that!" But willottica sardonically (I think) argued against throwing in the towel quite yet: "Alright, since your image is already tarnished, you might as well give up the pretense of democracy, too. The two-party system already guarantees that political choice is severely limited and fairly inconsequential. Why not just admit that it's a tyranny by the wealthy and get over it?"

AND DON'T OVERLOOK....

A story about the defection of Senator Arlen Specter to the Democratic Party generated 65 props, 2 drops, and 133 comments. Several members, including RedRiverJ, were delighted to see him go: "Good, he should take Collins and Snowe with him." Replied most_reasonable: "Arlen finally realized that there was no room in the new GOP for honest, integrity, and competence. Something that has now been more and more apparent to the American public." Meanwhile, chevydog saw the whole spectacle as pure electoral calculation: "One has to wonder about the role that age played--or maybe should have played--in this. Arlen's not in the best of health, and he'll be 80 when the election rolls around. I suppose he could have retired gracefully; I'd hazard a guess that that still may happen. Either way, it won't translate into a Republican seat in PA." (A related post, "Limbaugh Urges Specter to take McCain with Him," earned 66 props and 105 comments. Said mntnman444: "[Limbaugh] recruiting for the Democrats... Now I've seen everything.")

And finally, there was "Miss California loses for supporting marriage between a man and woman," with 52 props, 15 drops, and 125 comments. Said Klarissa: "The question should not have been asked in the first place. It was inappropriate for the occasion." Replied Dionys: "Why? It comes down to the fundamental rights of humanity within the US legal system. Can one marry the adult partner they've fallen in love with or not?" Meanwhile, dailyblueberry questioned the whole point of beauty pageants to begin with: "Should we give credence to beauty contests? I say no. It sends the wrong message." But it was sonofreason who most effectively stared into the crystal ball: "Next year, Elsie the Cow will be a judge posing the question: Should Americans eliminate beef from their diet?" Game, set, match.

Courtesy of Google Trends, here is some news that should warm the heart of every Frank Lloyd Wright fan: the great architect's Unity Temple, which has been crumbling into pieces for years, has just been named one of the eleven most endangered historic places in the country by the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

This is, you might argue, a dubious honor. But Wright's creation in Oak Park, Illinois, has been steadily self-destructing since it first opened in 1909. The Chicago Tribune summed up the problems very nicely: "It is one of the earliest-dated public buildings to feature exposed concrete--which became one of Wright's signature architectural elements. But problems emerged within a few years of construction. The temple has 16 flat roofs and a drainage system that funnels water down internal metal drains embedded in concrete columns. There are no gutters. Water has been seeping into the concrete. Cracks have appeared in the shotcrete, or sprayed concrete, that was used in the 1970s in an attempt to cover the exterior walls."

Being added to the endangered list will surely help the building to find funding for a thorough restoration. But who will foot the bill? Over on the Tribune site, at least one reader objected to the idea of another taxpayer-funded bailout. "It's a religious structure & no public money should ever go to it!" argued Garry. "Not a cent, they've never paid anything in real estate taxes on it & I'm sure the landmark loonies will be out begging for government money to fix it up!"

On Twitter, the reactions were a little more sentimental. Said @jackyrun: "Sad to hear my beloved Unity Temple in Oak Park is on the endangered list. Lots of peak life moments occurred there for me." In another tweet, @slushfundbaby noted that she was "nearly heartbroken that the cost to save the Unity Temple will be more than $20 million, and grateful for having seen it once." Still a third tweet, by @dailybungalow, included a link to the Flickr feed below, which consists of images from a 2007 visit to the building.



Incidentally, Wright's cubical sanctuary is by no means the oddest structure to make the list. As you can read in this Veterans Today dispatch, a dilapidated aircraft hangar has also gotten the nod from the NTHP.

"The Enola Gay hangar," reports Jill Serjeant, "which housed the B-29 bomber that dropped the first nuclear bomb on Hiroshima in 1945, is in a critical state of disrepair at the remote Wendover, Utah, airfield, the Trust said. A federal grant of $450,000 was recently approved for work on the massive hangar, but the Trust said it believed that about $5 million was needed to restore the building, whose history has generated controversy. 'We are not getting into interpretation. The site itself is of great historic importance. It led to an action that some people felt was totally necessary to end the war but everybody agrees was horrendous,' said Peter Brink, senior vice president of programs at the Trust."

A few other non-glamorous structures on the list were mentioned in a New York Times piece, including an 85-year-old bridge connecting Portsmouth, N.H., and Kittery, Maine, Miami Marine Stadium, and the Ames Shovel Shops, a 19th-century industrial village in Easton, Mass.

Swine flu, which has already killed dozens in Mexico and sickened at least another thousand adults and children, is now cropping up around the globe. Confirmed cases have appeared in the United States, Spain, Canada, and Scotland. And according to a CNN dispatch, this may be only the beginning.

"Hundreds more cases are suspected," says CNN, "especially in Mexico, where as many as 103 deaths are thought to have been caused by the virus, the country's health minister said. More than 2,000 cases have been reported but not confirmed in the country. Federal officials confirmed 20 new U.S. cases on Monday. A federal official said they were at the same school in New York in which eight U.S. cases were confirmed earlier. More than 100 students at the school were out with flu-like symptoms last week."

President Obama has acknowledged the potential danger, but argued that so far, the disease is "not a cause for alarm." It's true that the number of confirmed cases is still relatively small (to get an idea of the geographical range, you can track the spread of the disease on this Google map). And after an emergency meeting on Saturday, the Emergency Committee of the World Health Organization (WHO) declined to raise their alert from Phase 3. They agreed that "that the current situation constitutes a public health emergency of international concern," but held off any further action until more epidemiological data could be gathered.

That never stopped the folks on Twitter, whose ongoing response you can view here. Some of the tweets were essentially breaking news updates. Said @Alonis: "Nebraska is testing more than a dozen specimens for #SwineFlu right now & in Eastern Idaho four residents are being tested for swine flu." Meanwhile, ABC News correspondent David Wright (in his alter identity as @abcdavid) let it be known that the mainstream media considered the illness a big story, but not the big story: "Swine flu in Mexico and along the border - how scared should we be? Tonight on @nightline. (A hint: we're NOT the lead story...)."

Other tweets were more facetious. @TheWaltWhitman suggested a kind of homeopathic response: "In my day, having #swineflu meant you were hankering mightily for a rasher of bacon and a tub of hog lard in which to dip it." Added @bcbishop: "Seems like it's a good time to re-read The Stand."

The Twitter stream also pointed to some additional media responses. Over at Computer World, businesses were advised to grapple with the possibility of mass, flu-driven absenteeism. "It is important to have pandemic contingency plans that define what you would do if the workforce absenteeism rates exceeded 40% or you had to close your offices. As you develop and refresh those plans don't forget that mobile and wireless technology has a part to play," said Gartner analyst Nick Jones in the CW article.

There was also a somewhat defensive post from England's ThePigSite.com: "The pork industry finds itself with a serious public relations problem that is not of its own making and, in reality has nothing to do with pigs--SWINE FLU IS A PIG/PORK PROBLEM IN NAME ONLY! That is the emphatic word over the weekend from both the National Pork Board, the producer checkoff-funded group charged with promoting pork in the US and US pork abroad and conducting production and product research." Leave it to the "website for the global pig industry" to make this impassioned defense of our porcine friends. But they do make an important point: it is the human-to-human spread of the disease, which often mutates once it leaves the animal population, that is of the greatest concern. The pigs are innocent, snorting bystanders.

TEA FOR TWO

For the second week in a row, the Tea Party protests have claimed the lion's share of attention here at Propeller. This time, it's mainly the after-party fallout. "FBI Spied on TEA Party Americans!" racked up 62 props, 23 drops, and 224 comments. RedRiverJ had nothing but contempt for the bureau's surveillance efforts: "Our politicians leave our borders wide open, allowing criminals, rapists and terrorists easy entrance to our country while our FBI spies on Americans exercising their freedom of speech." Replied hamy: "Now you are saying that it's wrong to spy on protesters when before, during Bush, you were all for it. So why now? Is it because you're party isn't in power anymore?" (Added tanglang: "Did [libsRfunny] say it was OK for Bush to spy on folks at rallies?" Replied Bacalo: "No, just in their homes.")

Meanwhile, "CNN's Roesgen Grills Tea Party Protestor Who Calls Obama a Fascist," generated 100 props, 14 drops, and 197 comments. "Some will try to dismiss this story," argued jovial, "but there are more and more reports coming to light. You just can't dismiss all of them. The rhetoric is becoming increasingly uglier." There was agreement from not2needy: "It's because these supposed tea parties weren't quiet tax protests, they were more [like] anti-Obama rants. Media such as Fox only add fuel to the fire." Several members pointed out that many of the 250,000 protesters nationwide would probably be getting a tax break rather than an increase. But for icewater, that didn't invalidate the concerns of the protesters: "I appreciate my generous tax refund, but I think what most of these people are worried about is the soaring national debt, which will be repaid only through excessive taxation in the future or by inflation, which will basically rob people of the buying power of their money. Either way, it's bad."

There was also "GOP hopes to build momentum behind tea parties," with 98 props, 1 drop, and 159 comments. The thread featured a brief skirmish about a protester who tried to dump teabags in the Susquehanna River in northeastern Pennsylvania, fell in, and was rescued by EMTs. Spadecaller had an abbreviated response: "LMAO!" Replied capecoralM: "How mature of you to take pleasure in someone falling into a river and being in danger." To which Progressive responded: "She fell in through her own stupidity, but was fortunate to be rescued by non-partisan EMTs."

CRUEL AND UNUSUAL

The ongoing debate about torture also provoked plenty of conversation over the past week. "9/11 Plotter Waterboarded 183 Times" racked up 55 props, 11 drops, and 125 comments. GLee, who also posted the story, suggested that Khalid Sheik Mohammed hadn't been tortured enough: "Can we have him [waterboarded] one more time? 184 is a much nicer number. Having said that, let me qualify the above statement. This character brought about massive deaths of civilians with no regard for innocents." No way, said Tangent001. He argued that waterboarding "had been condemned as torture both in WWII (when we prosecuted the Japanese for doing it) and Vietnam (when we prosecuted our own troops for doing it). If Pelosi and other Dems sanctioned its use, hang them out to dry as well. I refuse to put party before country." UnusualSuspect insisted that in the post-9/11 world, it was more important than ever to keep our hands clean: "My youngest sister was in the Pentagon on 9/11--[luckily], on the east side of the building. But even if she had been killed that day, I would (as would she, I'm sure) still be against waterboarding." Replied Locky12: "But waterboarding is not torture. Only the loony left calls it torture."

A related story, "Rush Limbaugh: It Isn't Torture if You Can Survive It," generated 67 props, 9 drops, and 123 comments. PsychoHosebeast speculated the Limbaugh might be persuaded otherwise: "Someone hook a car generator up to this guy's nuts in the shower while he's handcuffed to the shower head and see if he changes his mind." For prophyporcrites, there was still some question about whether waterboarding was the worst of all possible persuasive techniques: "The marine I work with--who was waterboarded a few times as part of his training--told me he'd rather be waterboarded than break a finger, break his nose, get knocked out, have his jaw broken again, [or] have to breath tear gas again." But mntnman444, who also underwent the military's SERE training, had another story to tell: "I guarantee you nobody is smiling in SERE. [In] most cases, including mine, a bag is put over your head and you are bound naked while water is poured over your face. It's terrifying whether it's real or not, and I have no doubt that fat boy Limbaugh couldn't even qualify for the training."

AND DON'T OVERLOOK....

"Iran: Death Penalty for Offensive Bloggers" rang up 102 props, 1 drop, and 22 comments. For engineer, this violent response to dissent was one more sign of a sick, sick nation: "The fanatical nutcases of Iran. Time to take the reactors out, [although] I hope someone does it other than Israel." Added b-happy: "They need to be dealt with forcefully, and now is the time to grow some balls and tell them to stop." Islamstudent, meanwhile, reaffirmed that the Iranian government's policy was way over the top: "Death for blogging? And I complained about being banned [from] a blogging website, Mixx, for questioning Muslims about Islam."

A story about secession in the Lone Star State, "Can Texas Go It Alone?," rang up 70 props, 2 drops, and 103 comments. Said ranchhasawhiteass: "We ain't gonna secede from the Union. Hells bells, the other 57 states couldn't survive without us." Another member, djn3nunez3, had little but scorn for the idea and for Texas Governor Rick Perry (seen in photo above): "It was tried 150 years ago or so. Didn't work out too well then either. I hope Perry keeps talking nonsense." To which bigG responded: "I think that is inevitable, dj, unless of course he chooses to never talk again." Meanwhile, bluetexasvalley denied that any of the pro-secession bloviators had a real constituency to address: "Ron Paul represents a handful of East Texas rednecks and Rick Perry represents George Bush. That's not the real Texas."

Finally, there was a link to this YouTube video of George Harrison performing "Here Comes the Sun." Charlson had a positive response: "Terrific music! Miss you Harrison, your music was great." Added GehlLady: "Timely for me, thanks! One of my all-time favorites." Perhaps this optimistic, Abbey Road-era gem will allow us to end the week on a less rancorous note.

As reported in the New York Times, the trustees who control the disputed estate of hotel baroness Leona Helmsley (seen at left) are beginning to slice up the pie. In a mission statement attached to her will four years before her death, the so-called "Queen of Mean" specified that the bulk of her $5 billion fortune should quite literally go to the dogs. Twelve million dollars were specifically earmarked for Trouble, her own Maltese. The rest was to be disbursed to canine causes "and such other charitable activities as the trustees shall determine." But now, to the intense annoyance of animal advocates across the nation, the dogs are getting the short end of the stick.

"The first $136 million from the hotelier Leona Helmsley's disputed multibillion-dollar estate has been distributed, trustees announced on Tuesday," writes Sam Roberts of the Times, "but the bulk went to medical centers instead of dogs. Only $1 million of the estate, valued at about $5 billion, was donated to the care of dogs, which Mrs. Helmsley had designated as her primary beneficiary. 'This is a trifling and embarrassingly small amount,' said Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States."

The news prompted some amusing responses on the Web. Over at Gothamist, blogger Jen Chung led with a speculation: "Wherever Leona Helmsley is now, we imagine she's throwing a fit." Mr Mel gave the trustees a round of applause: "She was incompetent, no animal charity deserves that kind of money. I'm surprised PETA hasn't gotten involved. [J]ust as well, because they would use the money for sloths, raccoons, baboons, and all the other ugly species." The appropriately named felixthecat2 saw another case of greed, with NY Attorney General Andrew Cuomo in on the game: "Cuomo was behind this, all these greedy trustees and their friends wanted their hands on this money and now they took it away from the dogs."

There was a similar division of opinion over at Twitter. As @cushiebutter saw it, the money-grubbing grandchildren were robbing the pups of their rightful inheritance: "Leona Helmsley's grandchildren aren't entitled to anything. They should have never gotten that money. Some people!" Another tweeter, @Gabriel Cheong, seemed to think little of the billionaire's estate planning: "I'm troubled that a Will and Trust meant absolutely nothing to Leona Helmsley." Still a third, @TheBishopTutu, took a more practical approach: "I want some of the money that Leona Helmsley left to her dogs."

Meanwhile, a related Propeller post also inspired some piquant commentary. One member, ranchhasawhiteass, laid down the law for his entire menagerie: "Well, I plan on living longer than my dogs. But if they don't mind real good, they're outta the will. I'd hate to play favorites, but the donkey will probably get to live on the property for the rest of her life. The heifer? That will be according how broke and hungry I get." But not2needy played the kibble card: "I don't think I agree with that decision. If she wanted her estate to go to the animals, her wishes should have been honored! That said, it's sad that she would overlook so many other decent charities, but it was her money!"

One way or another, the enormous fortune will go to charity. But the dispute does raise an interesting question: how would Leona Helmsley have spent the money if she were still alive? Perhaps we can glean an answer from her 1987 trial, when she and her husband Harry were slapped with 235 counts of tax evasion. Among the precious items the husband and wife claimed as business expenses: a $1 million marble dance floor above a swimming pool, a $210,000 mahogany card table, and $500,000 worth of jade trinkets, all for their private residence in Greenwich, CT. Dig deeper, and you'll probably find a solid-gold, diamond-encrusted milkbone for Trouble.

Deep in the heart of Texas, there seems to be a lurking urge to--well, go it alone. Residents of the Lone Star State have always been an individualistic lot, and there is some history to take into account: along with Hawaii, Texas is one of two American states ever to have existed as a sovereign nation. Still, it's hard to know what to make of Governor Rick Perry's recent rumblings about secession. As reported in The Dallas Morning News, his comments have gotten a mixed response.

"The empathy Perry [left] has shown this week to those spitting-mad-at-Washington secessionists had newscaster Geraldo Rivera calling him 'grossly irresponsible' and ripe for impeachment," writes News reporter Christy Hoppe, "while former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay said that Perry was being a righteous governor 'standing up for the sovereignty of his state.' What is certain is that Perry has struck a chord. And it is aimed at Texas' ultimate mythology--that because it began as a country, by gum, it could go it alone again."

What do Perry's constituents think of his breakaway talk? On Twitter, at least one Texan sounded alarmed. "I saw a sea of white people at tea parties," said @yves1960. "Here in Texas things were radical. Our nutty gov. was ranting secession!" There was a similar response from a transplanted Texan, @tomthedog: "Trust me, as a Cali boy moved to Texas, it's the non-celebs who are much more embarrassing (like Rick 'Pro-Secession' Perry)." You can check out the many, many Twitter reactions here.

Of course, commentary in the blogosphere was by no means limited to Twitter. Over at the customarily staid U.S. News & World Report, contributing editor John Aloysius Farrell had a few laughs at the expense of an independent Tejas. "The new nation would have to raise an Army and a Navy and an Air Force from scratch, of course," he writes. "For the first few years, if it didn't want to be gobbled up by Mexico or intimidated by the hugely irritated United States to the north, there would probably have to be confiscatory taxation, and a draft of a million or so healthy men and women over 18, just to guard its thousands of miles of borders.... Austin would be an interesting case. Would its liberal software designers, musicians, University of Texas faculty and filmmakers stay with Texas? Or secede, in turn, from Texas and rejoin the United States? Or become a kind of laid-back Switzerland, playing both countries against each other?"

This fantasia provoked some irate comments. "If Texas were to stand up and leave the union there will be hundreds of thousands of 'northerners' moving south, for freedom and liberty, to escape the soft tyranny of the socialist states of America," insisted CAZ. And John, himself a Texan, added: "Libs in CA or NY wouldn't want to secede because they are pathetic, weak people who believe in crackpot Marxist ideas that are destroying them (which they deserve), are generally pantywaists, are already broke, and don't have weapons anyway, or else would be too cowardly anyway like you."

Here at Propeller, a related post--about Ron Paul's semi-endorsement of Texas secession--touched off a lively thread of its own. Justice4All had no problem with the Texans going off in a sulk: "If they keep George Bush, then it will be OK for them to secede. But in 20 years their economy will be more like Mexico's than like the US." Neither did frctm5: "Frankly, I wish all the red states would secede. Then we can stop subsidizing them." But there were also some stalwart Perry fans in the mix. Argued all2fun: "Texans appear to want to escape the slavery imposed upon them by the Federal Government and enforced by the Schutzstaffelesque IRS. If one must labor for 4 to 5 months out of the year simply to pay homage to our masters in Washington, what other name can be used to describe it?"

A couple of questions remain. First: is there even a shred of a legal argument that would permit Texan secession? The Dallas Morning News article cited above said no: "The fact is, the treaty under which Texas joined the U.S. provides that it could be divided into five separate states. But it is not empowered to leave the union, a question that the Civil War seems to have settled once and for all." Meanwhile, this FAQ posted by TexasSecede.org provides a resounding yes: "Joining the 'Union' was ever and always voluntary, rendering voluntary withdrawal an equally lawful and viable option (regardless of what any self-appointed academic, media, or government 'experts'--including Abraham Lincoln himself--may have ever said)." And finally, an even more pressing question--the potential impact of secession on the video-gaming industry--is addressed here.