riday, and thanks to being in a news blogging mood for the past couple of days, there's content galore.

But first, a quick mention of Kali stuff. We worked on double weapons Thursday night, but rather than just stick and stick, we went with stick and dagger. Real sticks, fake daggers, or at least they didn't have sharp blades. It's interesting to use those two weapons, since it's like double stick, but also very different. You do a lot of the same moves, alternating hands for your hits and defending in similar ways, but the hand you're holding your dagger in has far less reach than your other hand does with the 30" stick, and you don't need to swing the dagger hard to be effective with it.

As a result, we're often positioning ourselves with the target to our left, so we can reach it with both weapons at once, and we stayed very close to the target, since otherwise the dagger wouldn't reach at all. And, since we use our empty hand a lot when fighting with a single stick; for balance and form and to physically touch the stick and redirect it and such, you're actually worse with a stick and dagger than you are with just a stick, if you're at a distance.

The real fun was in going against a person with both weapons when you only had a stick. You could try to stay back and beat them with stick on stick, but it was more fun, in a "get killed a lot" sort of way, to get in closer and try to go against both. Staying right against their dagger arm helped, since you could jam it by pushing your arm against their forearm when they tried to raise the knife, and you could counter their stick and then move back or sideways quickly enough to counter the dagger as well. It was damn hard though and honestly, only the Gura could do it well.

It was also a lot of fun to see how best to use the dagger and stick at the same time. Hiding the dagger works well, by holding it against your body and doing big swings with the stick you could create openings to get a quick stab in. Or you could go low with the dagger and high with the stick when they moved to block it, thus catching them in the face with the stick, or you could just try to go very quickly from one to the other, and if your dagger hand was better at stabbing than their bare hand was at stopping, you'd get hits in. The oldest student in class was leading mostly, and yes, he got a lot of hits in. I was no exception to that, being skewered and smacked and other such things. At one point I managed to get a bit too far away, and as a result when I reached to block his dagger stab I actually grabbed the blade, then let go in belated realization just in time to take a stick swing to the face due to being distracted by my severed hand. The dagger was just carved wood and the stick was stopped short of knocking me out again, but it wasn't my proudest moment.

He wasn't even going that fast; it's just so different to have to worry about a second short weapon when you're used to just moving to counter the first long one. It did really illustrate how lazy and slow we get when we're dealing with just the stick though, since even though we pretend the opponent has a dagger then, and move to counter the off hand, it's far different when they actually do have one and are moving it quickly enough to stab you in the ribs. So while doing all the things we'd normally do; block or parry the attack, then slip in for our own hits, we kept getting stabbed since we were standing still for too long after blocking the stick and before moving into our counter attack.

It was a lot of fun to work on though, and Malaya and me will have to go work with those weapons some on our own. We've got Kali knives too... silver plastic ones we got at the Halloween Store on November 1st for about $2.

To the news...

¤ In completely unsurprising news, yet another virulently anti-gay politician has been proven to be... gay himself! As well as possibly a pedophile.

After a lengthy investigation, a newspaper in Spokane, Wash., revealed that the city's conservative Republican mayor -- a gay rights opponent -- used a gay Web site to meet young men. He initiated sex with at least one young man and offered a City Hall internship to another.

According to the Spokane-Review, Mayor Jim West, who fought pro-gay legislation during his two decades of service in the state Legislature, met a local 18-year-old man in a Gay.com chat room last summer. The two met for dinner and then engaged in consensual sex.

...

West was married for five years in the 1990s, but there were rumors that he dated young men on the side.

"It was the worst-kept secret in Washington politics," Christian Sinderman, a top Democratic consultant, told the Spokane-Review.

What is it with these self-hating, stuck in denial conservative politicians?

As a state legislator in 1986, West helped sponsor a bill that would have barred gay men and lesbians from being hired in schools and day-care centers. That same year, he voted to keep the state from giving out pamphlets that explain how to avoid getting HIV, calling the material "something people go buy at dirty bookstores."

In 1990 he supported a bill from the abstinence group Teen Aid that would outlaw any sexual contact for unmarried teens 18 or younger.

"Unmarried teens 18 or younger" or as Mayor West calls them, "fresh meat." Better yet, they may get him for abuse of office too, since he's been offering his himbos perks and city jobs.

I did love his excuses, though.

In an interview with the newspaper on Wednesday, West admitted the two online relationships: "They were both adults, and I was in public office when I dated women in this community." He also said, "I don't want to go into the whole issue, but I wouldn't characterize me as 'gay.'"

About using Gay.com, he said, "I can't tell you why I go there, to tell you the truth ... curiosity, confused, whatever, I don't know."

It should go without saying, but I could care if the guy is gay or not. My objection is that he's hidden it, that he's living such an unhealthy emotional lifestyle (Fifty year old men picking up random troubled teens online and bribing them to have sex is wrong whether they're male or female.), and that he's been advancing his career with a homophobic agenda. Say what you want about Tom Cruise (and I do in some celebrity news further down this page), but at least he doesn't make movies glorifying gay bashing.

¤ Well, it turns out that basing the profitability of an entire industry on vehicles that get 8 miles to the gallon wasn't such a good idea after all! Who knew?

April U.S. auto sales were yet another repeat of this year's earlier results: General Motors (GM) and Ford Motor (F) took a beating, Asian automakers set records and DaimlerChrysler (DCX) made gains.

GM's sales were down 4.2% compared with a year ago, according to Autodata. Ford's were off 1.6%. Overall industry sales were up 5.7% in April, equivalent to an annual sales rate of 17.5 million new vehicles, vs. 16.6 million a year ago.

Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Hyundai, Kia, Subaru and Suzuki posted double-digit gains. DaimlerChrysler sales were up 8.7%, mostly because of Chrysler Group.

Soaring gas prices apparently are continuing to hurt domestic automakers more than the competition. Overall, sales of SUVs - among the most profitable vehicles - were up 1.7%, but aging products from GM and Ford were stagnant.

There's certainly no way the US auto industry could have been preparing for this, I mean it's not as if there was any precedent or anything. Oh wait... I mean aside from the exact same thing happening when oil prices skyrocketed in the 1970s, after a decade of churning out expensive, heavy, low-mileage vehicles

Seriously though, with gas prices going ever-higher (They say the national average is like $2.25, to which I say you guys are lucky you don't live here -- we haven't seen gas cheaper than $2.60 anywhere in the Bay Area in months.) isn't it about time we did something about it? This calls for drastic action! Perhaps we could cook up some ridiculous excuse to invade and occupy an oil rich nation?  Oh wait...

In better news, there's every reason to believe that gas prices will just continue to rise. World petroleum pumping capacity for existing oil fields is about about 98%, there aren't any more huge, easily-reached ones to tap, and world gas consumption continues to rise, driven largely by China's increasing economy and the ability of US car and oil companies to lobby congress to keep higher fuel standards from being mandated. After all, it's far cheaper and easier to buy off politicians than to rework your business model or behave with an eye on the future when petroleum runs out. And if everything falls apart and your company is big enough, you can just make up some excuses and hold out your hand for billions in taxpayer-funded bailouts, while giving your senior executives huge bonuses and golden parachutes to reward their brilliant leadership.

¤ And you thought I was snarky about Paris Hilton's talents in Monday's blog? Here's one of the short news items on this week's issue of The Onion. You'll want to cover your children's eyes right about now:

Replacement Socialite Cunt Sought for Simple Life Cast
NEW YORK—Due to the falling out between Nicole Richie and Paris Hilton, producers of Fox's The Simple Life are continuing their search for the perfect spoiled, no-talent socialite cunt to step in for Richie. "It shouldn't be too hard to find another vapid, muddied cum-dumpster perpetually drunk on the jizz of trust-fund himbos," producer Jonathan Murray said. "Any million-dollar Bambi with a vast inheritance and no ambition will do, though gutter-sluts with coke-fueled pasts will be given special consideration." Murray added that "it doesn't matter if her pussy rattles when the wind blows—we can fix that in post."

I mean... Jesus Christ. How do you really feel, guys?

¤ In other "makes your head hurt" Paris Hilton news... she's ready for kids!

Hilton Wants Kids to Complete Her
Heiress Paris Hilton is determined to have children with Greek boyfriend Paris Latsis "in the next two years" - because she feels she has accomplished everything in life at the age of 24. The Simple Life star has only been dating the 22-year-old shipping heir since last December, but she insists she is in love and almost ready to start a family. Hilton says, "I want to have kids in the next two years because I know that completes your life. I've had so much fun, and had a great life. I've accomplished everything that I wanted to accomplish and I think that when I have kids that'll make me happier than I already am."

First of all... her boyfriend has the same first name as her? WTF? Is there any way her twisted narcissism didn't drive her to pick him out specifically based on that fact?

Secondly... yers. I don't even know what to say about someone this stupid wanting kids. I'm not seriously suggesting this, but would it be out of the question to institute some sort of test one has to pass before one is allowed to reproduce? Should a woman this vapid, stoned, and stupid be allowed to reproduce? Remember when Paris lost her dog and put up signs all over her neighborhood, only to have her mom call her a few days later and remind her that she'd left the dog at mom's house? And then people took the signs and sold them on eBay, and Paris complained about that?

You've also got to admire Paris' ambitions, and the fact that she's already accomplished everything she wanted to accomplish. I guess she's giving up on that Noble Peace Prize?

As for her goals... being born a multi-multi-millionaire certainly helped with those, eh?  I've never read an interview with the woman, and honestly, I'd be surprised if she could put together enough words in a coherent string to actually carry on a conversation, but I suspect she think she's really done something with her life, and that she's a special person who has made herself, and overcome hardships to do so. In her world she's probably had to work hard for what she has, and she thinks she fully deserves her fortune, and that people who don't have equal riches are just lazy and lack the special talents she's used to make herself so famous.

¤ In other vapid celebrity news, there's yet more tabloid fodder from Tom Cruise and his new beard "girlfriend" Katie Holmes. Malaya's probably skipping this entry since she's been grossed out by the whole thing since the media blitz began with Katie talking about how she grew up dreaming of one day marrying Tom, but for the rest of us, could the whole thing smell any fishier?

Cruise and Holmes Stun Las Vegas
Hollywood star Tom Cruise shocked a crowd of Las Vegas revelers on Saturday - by inviting his new girlfriend Katie Holmes to an erotic show. Cruise and Holmes - who are separated by 16 years - posed with the Cirque De Soleil cast ahead of the acrobatic troupe's show KA, which kicked off at the MGM Grand Hotel in February. Cirque De Soleil members also wowed backstage visitors by helping Cruise perform a spectacular backflip. News of the couple's relationship was unveiled by Minority Report star Cruise's sister and publicist Lee Anne Devette last week, following numerous sightings of the actor wining and dining the Dawson's Creek beauty. The following day, the loved-up duo were photographed holding hands on the streets of Rome, Italy.

It had been like six months since Penelope Cruz tired of faking it before the media circus and moved on, so I guess Tom's PR people decided he needed a new and very public relationship to put the gay rumors on hold for a little while. Do they have a waiting list readied for this sort of thing, with B and C-list female celebs who are single and willing to put up with the private humiliation of separate bedrooms and weird Scientology rituals in exchange for the massive publicity and career boost?

What are those things around her mouth?

Is Tom a biter while he pretends she's actually Brad Pitt, or did he give her oral herpes?

Are those lesions marks from some sort of Scientology indoctrination ceremony?

Is she so confused by her new "relationship" that she's taken to going out in public without makeup?

And so on.

What did my update say about this? It was sort of a throw-away mention, but I'll just quote myself to refresh your memory.

You see tons of homeless people in downtown SF, and the air always feels sort of dirty and greasy when there's nothing but concrete and tall buildings in every direction. And this is in SF, one of the most beautiful cities in the US, and one with ocean and bay all around it for ventilation. Plus there are hills and lots of old, quirky buildings. I can't imagine the hell it would be to live in some flat, ugly, landlocked downtown area. Deep in the heart of Detroit or Saint Louis or wherever.

My point is that I think the air feels dirty in the city here, and this city (SF) is considered one of the most beautiful and visit-worthy in the entire US, and on top of that, it's pretty much surrounded by water and is known for being foggy and windy. If any big city can be considered clean, shouldn't it be SF?

I wanted to name a city for comparison, but as I typed I realized what Bryan's mail says... that there basically aren't any major US cities that are not positioned on an ocean, lake, or major waterway. The reason for that is obvious; the cities grew up on transportation hubs, and back before highways and railroads were built, people traveled on things that floated. But it doesn't help with my metaphor. True, a river, especially as polluted and dirty and damned dammed as they usually are, isn't going to provide any cleaner feeling to the city it flows through or beneath, but that's not the point.

Detroit is on one of the Great Lakes and it has a big river right through it. Saint Louis is very flat and land locked, but it's rather well known for being bisected by the Mississippi River. So much for my examples, eh? I first thought of mentioning Cleveland, but they've got a lake and a river as well, even if it did get so polluted that parts of it actually caught on fire back in the "pollute all you want" pre-EPA days of the 1970s. I then thought of some cities that are actually inland and not on rivers, but they weren't good examples either. Dallas might have been the best option, or maybe Kansas City. I also considered Denver, but while it's landlocked and with a major river, it's also a mile high and seems scenic and snowy and mountainous.

Honestly, I probably should have said LA, since while there's not really any real downtown (just endless miles of freeways and buildings in every direction), it's incredibly dirty and crowded and awful there. I always dreaded any long drive up to LA from San Diego, since it was also so crowded and hot and unpleasant, even compared to the 2m+ population of San Diego County, just 120 miles away. And yes, LA is on the ocean, but unless you're literally on the beach, that doesn't mean shit. It's a basin with very little airflow, hence the smog, and while it's not quite as steel canyon and concrete jungle feeling as older cities, it's not much fun either.

It's sort of a moot point anyway, since as we've seen, 1) rivers and oceans and lakes don't mean much in terms of how dirty of clean a city feels, and 2) most cities have one or more of those things next to them anyway, but in any event, it wasn't my best analogy.

¤ The subject of King Arthur inspired more reader mail than anything I've written about in months, oddly enough. After Caaroid's emails about the movie itself, two more came in about the historical realities of King Arthur and medieval warfare. First up, here's Jack.

Flux -

Love the site, etc. etc. 

Didn't see King Arthur, hadn't planned to, wouldn't bother except under duress after your review as I usually agree with you about these things. A very silly film by the looks. But there may be less farce battle-wise than you suspect. Or rather, the farce may be more life-like than you'd credit.

Check out a history of the Hundred Years War sometime. Battle of Crecy and I believe Agincourt followed pretty much the Saxon/Woad battle plans substituting French/English respectively. Blistering displays of stupidity. Really crushing. Puts the "Ni!" in knight. Anything written by John Keagan or Gwyn Dyer should put a proper face on the proceedings.

You know what they say about truth and fiction. Enjoy.

- Jack

I haven't read that much history of war stuff, but from what I have read, it seems that conflict is defined far more often by incompetence and misunderstanding than by anything resembling intelligence or skill.  Incompetence on the part of the war planning generals, but also from the troops, as those studies we're always seeing about how like 70% of weapons they recover from dead troops on the battlefield have never been fired. In the case of modern war, the more you know about how it actually transpires the stupider the movie versions of it look.

At least that's usually the case, until you see a movie like King Arthur, where all of the war stuff is dumb, and as a result it might actually be accurate, accidentally or otherwise.

¤ Then there's this one from Marty.

Leaving aside any debate over the historical accuracy of what the numerous and competing "the real story of King Arthur" books say, I'd just like to add a comment on Myrridin. As you may know, the popularized versions of the Arthurian Legend came from French writers; the same ones who introduced romantic fiction and the love triangle with Lancelot and Guinevere and that whole thing. They took the character of Myrrdin and made him a mage and an advisor, while slightly tweaking his name; and if you speak any French you can probably laugh and guess why.

"Merde" means "shit" in French, and it's pronounced very like "Myrrid" would be pronounced, and it would hardly do for Arthur's magician to be named "Shitin" now would it?

That's the story I've always heard anyway, and while it seems like a perfect tale, I dunno if it's true, or just apocryphal. It's almost too good to be true, so my doubt is if it's anachronistic. Yeah, "merde" is "shit" in modern French, but was that how they said the word 500 years ago? Probably; profanity stays constant in most languages pretty much forever, but I'm just wondering.

My Webster's lists "shit" dating to 1585, and "fuck" from the 1500s, so "merde" could easily be as old or older in French.