Terminator 4: Ski Pole Versus Femur (The Real Story)

Left-Over’s last post got me thinking more and more about this whole “Arnold broke his femur” story. Here is the most descriptive explanation I can find of the injury, from the man who witnessed the accident.

Adi Erber, a ski instructor who often skis with the governor when he visits Sun Valley, told the biweekly Idaho Mountain Express that Schwarzenegger's pole got caught underneath his ski and the governor tripped over it while standing near the half-pipe on the Lower Warm Springs trail.

"He fell on his ski pole, and the impact broke his femur," Erber told the Express.

Having done a fair amount of skiing myself, I decided to break it down:

This is a ski pole:



And this is a femur:



If the two come together with opposing force, it doesn’t take a structural engineer to guess which one is more likely to break. I’ve broken a ski pole, and it snapped like a twig! I still have the handle in my garage as a souvenir of the experience. It wasn’t pleasant, but only the pole was broken.

For reference, I weigh 155 lbs and have 17.5 inch thighs surrounding each femur!

These are Arnold’s approximate measurements (from a page of one of his archived websites).

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER
Nickname: The Austrian Oak
Born: July 30, 1947
Birthplace: Tahl, Graz, AUSTRIA
Residence: California, USA
Height: 6' 2"
Arms: 22"
Chest: 57"
Waist: 34"
Thighs: 28.5"
Calves: 20"
Off Season Weight: 260 lbs
Competition Weight: 235 lbs

The numbers are probably somewhat different today than from his competition days, but you get the picture – someone nicknamed “The Austrian Oak” having thighs more than 2 feet in circumference, should not, even at age 59, have a femur that is more brittle than a ski pole!

Published reports of his surgery also include an additional hint as to what really happened:

The procedure was performed by orthopedic surgeon Dr. Kevin Ehrhart, who also. . . repaired President Ronald Reagan's broken hip in 2001.

So Arnold’s operation was performed by the same guy tapped to repair the 90-year-old Reagan’s broken hip? A specialty, perhaps?

My guess as to what really happened? Arnold tripped over his ski pole and fell – probably onto an icy slope where his hip hit the ice and shattered like a wine glass - much like my grandmother’s hip shattered when she tripped over her walker (like Reagan, she was also approaching 90 at the time!)

But Arnold, the man once known for proclaiming his desire “to be the best-built man in the world," could not admit to an injury more common in 90-year olds, so he says he “broke his femur!”

At least he could have gotten his instructor to say he was injured "while ripping a sick 540 Reverse Tail Grab on the half pipe while moshin' to Green Day on his I-Pod!"

No! Although numerous articles pointed out that the Sun Valley trail named after Arnold is a black diamond “expert” run, Arnold’s injury happened while he was standing on the Lower Warm Springs Trail, which is listed on Sun Valley’s interactive trail map as a green circle “bunny” slope!

Can you say "fragile?"

Arnold's Broken Hip???

Has anyone else wondered if Arnold actually broke his hip instead of his femur? After scanning several articles about the incident and subsequent surgery - I have my suspicions about what actually happened.

The ski instructor who was with Govenator at the time is on record stating that:

"He was trying to take off again and he tripped," Adi Erber, a ski instructor who was with the governor, told the Los Angeles Times. Erber described the fall as a "freak accident."

The femur is the largest and strongest bone in the human body. It would be pretty difficult to break just by falling over. However, many elderly people break their hips when they loose their balance and land awkwardly. Despite Arnold's strange tan, and even stranger orangey hair color - he is 59 years old. He's no spring chicken.

The Governors press office seems to be keeping a tight reign the details of the incident. I can only guess that they decided a "broken leg" sounded much better to the incredibly vain Schwartzenegger than a "Broken hip".

George Explain Your New "Surge" Strategy to this Little Girl!

Heather Martin - When Are You Coming

Whammo Speaks For Me!

This has been flying around the internets lately, and for good reason! I’ve had the opportunity to see Austin's Asylum Street Spankers perform this song live on a couple of occasions, so I’m glad that they are getting wider attention for this gem.

Enjoy!



By the way, Whammo is the guy with the cowboy hat and the ponytail!

Photo of the Day

Vice President Dick Cheney - Out enjoying a day of fishing . . .



. . . with his friend, Dick Whittington!

Is the Argument Over Global Warming Misdirected?

Noted intellectual giant, James Inhofe was at it again, with Wednesday’s hearing entitled "Climate Change and the Media."

(Inhofe) convened a hearing with witnesses who share his view that the media has hyped coverage of climate change. "Hysteria sells," the chairman grumbled at one point. "Scare tactics should not drive public policy," he said at another, pressing his view that rising Earth temperatures are mainly a natural, cyclical phenomenon.

One of the benefits of living with a scientist is that I am often called to challenge my initial (sometimes emotional) reactions in favor of a careful weighing of the available evidence.

In our discussions of “global warming,” my partner has frequently made an argument that, in light of Senator Inhofe’s repeated denials of the presence of global warming, makes a lot of sense.

The argument is that the focus should not be on "the presence of global warming,” but on “the increase of greenhouse gases.” The rationale is that the scientific evidence for global warming is inconclusive enough to continue allowing people like Inhofe to make arguments against it. Because we are talking about millions of years of history and cyclical weather patterns, it is not possible for either side to definitively “win” the debate.

On the other hand, there is clear scientific evidence that greenhouse gases are being produced at skyrocketing rates (click here for source). There is clear evidence that such gases trap infrared rays that could heat up the earth like the sun heats up the inside of a car. This makes it a debate about chemistry and physics, rather than a debate about history!

One way of looking at the issue is in relation to the decision on whether to eat trans fats – a topical comparison considering the City of New York’s recent ban on their use in restaurant food preparation. If you want to convince someone to restrict the intake of trans fats in their diet, you would not try to argue that scientific evidence proves they will have a heart attack in the future. That would be silly, and easily ignored by anyone who is determined to use history (I haven’t had one yet! Other people have eaten trans fats and not had them!) to maintain their current diet.

On the other hand, a scientific factual presentation of the existence of trans fats, and how the body processes them, leaves little room to argue that they should not be eliminated from the diet whenever possible.

People like Senator Inhofe are always going to be able to find historians to present a feasible-sounding (to him anyway) argument to maintain our current diet of greenhouse gas production.

But let’s see him produce some scientists who would argue that increased production of greenhouse gases doesn’t increase the risk factors for a global climate heart attack!

The Real Iraq Policy

Looks like Josh Marshall agrees with my earlier assessment on Bush’s real goal regarding Iraq:

One other point we shouldn't go too long without restating. With his policy of no troop increases and no troop decreases, let's all understand that President Bush's real policy is stasis -- no 'winning' or 'losing' or escalating or withdrawing. It's about fighting any fight, carrying any burden to keep kicking this can down the alley until January 2009 so he can say the disaster he created is someone else's fault. That's not hyperbole or trash talk. That's really the policy.

Or, as I put it:

Bush has already gone on record as saying he believes we will be in Iraq beyond the end of his presidency. His recent call for “one last big push to win in Iraq” is yet another indication of his “run out the clock” strategy. He is going to make sure that when it comes to leaving the chaos created by his war, he’s not going to be the decider!

How We Should "Go" in Iraq!

On the Eve of the official release of the Iraq Study Group report, I’d like to return briefly to the recent Pentagon review that came up with a set of possibilities that have been dubbed “Go Big,” “Go Long,” or “Go Home.”

“Go Big” refers to the option of dramatically increasing troop levels – an unfeasible proposition considering current troop availability and the additional cost that would have to be absorbed by a rapidly increasing national debt.

“Go Long” refers to the option of basically continuing to string things along with the current, or slightly reduced, troop levels - in the hope that some sort of miracle will result in something we can eventually claim as “victory." It is an option perhaps more appropriately named “Go Fish,” except that the card we would be hoping to draw has probably already been removed from the deck!

“Go Home” refers to complete troop withdrawal, and would undoubtedly leave years of continued violence and chaos before there would be any hope of improvement - solidifying a legacy of failure in Iraq for Bush/Cheney and, unfortunately, the American people who put them in power.

A fourth option, which I call alternately “Go Wide” and “Go Real,” is the one I hope the American people will eventually choose, although it seems a remote possibility. Both elements would need to be present for it to work, and it goes like this:

“Go Wide” refers to expanding involvement in Iraq peacekeeping efforts to include a true international coalition that would work in partnership, using military, financial and diplomatic means to clean up the mess. It is basically the option that should have been used in the first place, if it had been considered necessary by a real coalition to remove Saddam from power and enforce peace long enough for a democracy to take hold.

Unfortunately, “Go Wide,” on its own, is no longer feasible, since no other country would be willing to help clean up the mess made by Bush/Cheney as long as these arrogant pricks are at the helm! That’s why we would need to include another element.

“Go Real” (a variation of “Get Real”) refers to the act of accepting 1) that we (the American people) have a problem, 2) that we created the problem, and 3) we will do what is necessary to rectify the problem in order to be worthy of accepting help from the international community.

It is very simple. We need help from the rest of the world in order to clean up a mess we made for ourselves, but that also affects them. In order to redeem ourselves, we must admit that we made a mistake by allowing Bush/Cheney to pursue an unnecessary war, using unnecessary and probably illegal means. We must remove them from power and turn them over to the International Criminal Court, where their deeds can be judged according to international standards. We must apologize, and then hope we can form a real coalition to enforce peace in Iraq, more along the model of what was accomplished in the Balkans.

I’ve written before about the possibility of Bush and Cheney taking over the cells once inhabited by Milosovic, Etc. Rumsfeld and others have already been charged with war crimes (PDF) in a German court. Ultimately, although discussion of war crimes and the tactics underway in Germany may seem pointless to some in this country, it may be the case that embracing them will be the only way for the American people to recover from the disaster of Iraq!

No Traveler Left Behind: A Guide to Passing the ATS Exam

As an American who has traveled abroad 5 times in the last 26 months, this recently revealed program got my attention.

Without their knowledge, millions of Americans and foreigners crossing U.S. borders in the past four years have been assigned scores generated by U.S. government computers rating the risk that the travelers are terrorists or criminals.

(snip)

Virtually every person entering and leaving the United States by air, sea or land is scored by the Homeland Security Department's Automated Targeting System, or ATS. The scores are based on ATS' analysis of their travel records and other data, including items such as where they are from, how they paid for tickets, their motor vehicle records, past one-way travel, seating preference and what kind of meal they ordered.

I’m not sure how I scored during my recent trips, but using careful investigative techniques and some common sense, I’ve been able to put together the following list of tips that might help improve your ATS score:

Where You are From: Good: Provo, Colorado Springs, anywhere in Texas; Bad: San Francisco, New York, Boston.

How You Paid for Tickets: Good: American Express Corporate Card, Gift of Jack Abramoff, Sale of stock options; Bad: Rolled up wad of dinar, barrels of oil, gay sex (not applicable if you are from Colorado Springs.)

Motor Vehicle Records: Good: Hummer H2, Ford Escalade with gun rack, 69 Chevy Impala with Jeff Gordon decal; Bad: Volvo Bio-Diesel, No registered auto (just a bicycle.)

One Way Travel: Good: Never left U.S. without returning immediately after 7-14 day luxury cruise; Bad: Multiple “one way” flights out of the country while returning, presumably, via open-water swim.

Seating Preference: Good: Two adjoining - to fit extra large derriere; Bad: In cockpit, next to pilot.

Meal Ordered: Good: McDonalds’ Big Mac and "Freedom" Fries (supersized), 40 oz. Steak (extra rare), Gefilte Fish (farmed with dolphins); Bad: Vegetarian, Puppy steak, Chicken with extra bones, preferably sharpened.

Happy Traveling and good luck with your scores!

My Solution for Iraq

This week we learned that the bi-partisan (cough - cough) Iraq study group will report their findings next week. We also learned the Pentagon's new slogans for the next faze of the Iraq debacle as they floated - "Go long", "Go Big" or "Go Home" - which was recited countless times by the dutiful corporate media.

Now everyone who reads our blog knows that Seenos and I are quick to use sports analogies to make a point. However, we are just ordinary citizens trying to make people think. The men on the ISG are statesmen with years of foreign policy experience. Those at the Pentagon are career millitary professionals. Their solution should be bipartisan, thoughtful and complex. Instead it seems they may have boiled our national strategy to fix one of the most colossal foreign policy blunders in U.S. history into a two word slogan.

And how long did it take them to do it? 9 Months!

Then, President Bush announced on Thursday that he would not withdraw troops from Iraq no matter what his hand-picked Iraq Study Group suggests.

So after much deliberation, here is my solution to end the Iraq war - and it involves sending only one more troop into harms way.

Find the biggest female soldier we can and send her to Baghdad as soon as possible.

Because everyone knows................

It ain't over til the fat lady sings!

Bush's Legacy: An Alternative to the Think Tank!

After pondering George W. Bush’s plans to raise $500 million to build a library and think tank at SMU in order to “shape how history views Bush’s legacy,” I can’t help but wonder how this is going to help.

On the surface, I think Arianna has it right when she says that the donors need to be transparent, but really – how is a think tank going to help “polish” a Bush legacy which will consist of little more than failure in Iraq and a bleak economic future for all but the wealthiest Americans?

Here's a better idea that might actually work:

First of all, Bush should go ahead and raise the $500 million.

Then, he should take $499,995,000 of it and set up a trust fund to help the families of troops injured or killed in Iraq.

Finally, with the the other $5,000, he should use it to set up the George W. Bush Presidential Dunk Tank!



What else is he going to do when he is no longer President? Travel the World building good will toward America like Bill Clinton? Work on projects to house and feed the poor, like Jimmy Carter?

I don't think so!

At least this way, he can give the ordinary Americans who were hurt by his policies the chance to feel good again, if only for the time it takes to throw a couple of balls!

Also posted at Daily Kos.

What I Think the Iraq Study Group Will Find.

If you look at the co-chairs of the Iraq Study Group, what do you see? James Baker, a noted Bush family fixer; and Lee Hamilton, the same Democrat tasked with giving a “bipartisan” look to a 9-11 Commission that was determined to reach a politically acceptable, if not thorough, conclusion on what should be done in response to the terrorist threat.

Is there any reason to expect anything more with this group? I’ve heard lots of talk about how the ISG will serve as a vehicle for a change of course in Iraq, basically an excuse to give up “staying the course” without being seen as “cutting and running.” TPM has posted a good overview of the predominant assumptions about what the ISG will do. They mostly involve coming up with a miraculous new solution that will save Bush’s bacon.

So what can the Iraq Study Group recommend that will be of any benefit to the Bush presidency? Most experts see Iraq continuing to deteriorate, at least over the next few years, no matter what we do. So, for George W. Bush, who has to ride out the next two years of living with his failed policies, a miraculous solution will have to be political and not tactical.

Here is what I expect to happen.

Much like the 9-11 Commission carefully detailed preventative steps to head off future terrorist attacks, but without drawing any attention to the secret desires personal failures of the Bush administration that led to 9-11, the IRG will detail some strategic adjustments that US troops can perform in Iraq to minimize the violence over the remaining two years of the Bush presidency, presumably with the goal of ending US troop involvement “as soon as possible.”

This will serve several political purposes hidden behind the tactical sounding recommendations. It will validate, at least from Bush’s perspective, the decision to stay in Iraq for the remainder of his presidency. It will allow him to continue looking forward and ignoring the lengthy string of blunders and lies that led us into war in the first place. If the Democrats push for a more rapid withdrawal, and are successful in that effort, he will be able to blame any short-term decline (that will most likely occur throughout the rest of his term in office) on the Democrats.

If he is successful in using the IRG report as justification to stay in Iraq rather than admit incompetence defeat, Bush will be able to pass on the responsibility for choosing to withdraw troops to his successor. In other words, if things go badly once troops are removed, he can claim it was because his successor didn’t stay long enough. If things go well, he can say it was because he followed the recommendations of the IRG and set the stage for a successful withdrawal of troops.

Bush has already gone on record as saying he believes we will be in Iraq beyond the end of his presidency. His recent call for “one last big push to win in Iraq” is yet another indication of his “run out the clock” strategy. He is going to make sure that when it comes to leaving the chaos created by his war, he’s not going to be the decider!

And neither is the Iraq Study Group!

Unfortunately for the troops who will continue to die or be injured in the meantime, the only miraculous solution that would be of benefit to them is one that gives no consideration to politics!

Meet the New Conservative Jon Stewart!

Apparently Fox has scoured the country to find the best conservative comedic talent available, and the here’s the guy they think will balance out the biting satire of The Daily Show by mocking the ridiculously hilarious blunders made by Democrats – like trying to raise the minimum wage, provide affordable health care to lower and middle class families, and stopping our troops from being needlessly killed in Iraq!

Sounds like quite a task, so Kurt Long must have a stellar resume to be trusted with such responsibility. I decided to check it out as posted at the website of his talent agency, Omnipop. Now Kurt Long may be a really funny guy, given the chance to work with good material, but nothing on his resume suggests that he’s ever been given that chance! Of the two major roles for which I was able to find a plot summary, the humor potential sounds a little sparse.

Soiree (Film)

On his 30th birthday, David tries to reconcile with his estranged wife Angela, but she brings another man to the party. In front of their friends, Angela informs her husband that she will have open affairs with other men throughout the remainder of their relationship. David murders his wife and goes to prison where he is forced to spend the rest of his days as a "cell bitch". Or does he?

I suppose I should note that Long did not play the lead role in the film, so I can only assume that he must have played David’s wacky prison sidekick!

Games Across America (Television)

Comedy reality series that travels the United States in search of our nation's oddest events and craziest competitions. Hosted by funny man Kurt Long, the series has been in production for almost 2 years and has covered everything from Beer Pong in Manhattan to Roller Derby in Texas.

OK, so Beer Pong sounds like a barrel of laughs, but Roller Derby? I guess it might have been one of our nation’s oddest and craziest competitions – if the show were airing in the early 70’s!

Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to find anything related to his lead roles in the films “Tightie Whities” or “The Lay Off.”

But then, I might just have been looking on the wrong websites!

Who's More Delusional? (The Sequel)

In an earlier post, I posed one version of this question.

Is it John Mark Karr, who thinks he accidentally killed JonBenet Ramsey despite negative DNA tests, and witnesses who insist he was 600 miles away at the time of the murder?

Or is it the President of the United States, who gave the following answer (with my emphasis) to the first question asked by Brian Williams in an “exclusive” interview from the streets of New Orleans?

I will tell you this, that when it's all said and done, the people down here know that I stood in Jackson Square, and I said we're gonna help you, and we delivered.

Today, I pose a similar question.



Is it OJ Simpson, who thinks it appropriate to publish a book entitled “If I Did It, Here's How It Happened” about two murders he still claims he did not commit?

Or is it the President of the United States, who made the following assertion from Vietnam, the site of a 15-year war that we never really won, about his war in Iraq.

We'll succeed unless we quit . . . The Maliki government is going to make it unless the coalition leaves before they have a chance to make it.

I’ve got more to say later about why the President is so determined to stay in Iraq, but I couldn’t resist asking this question again in the meantime.

Hey, That's Not Cool Dude!

On the eve of the big game between #1 Ohio State and #2 Michigan, I couldn’t help but notice this article about probably the most politically incorrect rock concert in history.



Sure, Bo Schembechler had maintained a sense of humor about the hardcore band, The Dead Schembechlers. But now that he has died, what was perhaps one of the great band names of all time is not so funny anymore. At least for a while! Of course, it is a moment that was destined to come sooner or later, and according to this description of Schembechler's medical history, the safe bet was sooner.

"It was probably not a heart attack; it just stopped working," Dr. Shukri David said. Schembechler had a heart attack on the eve of his first Rose Bowl in 1970 and another one in 1987. He had two quadruple heart-bypass operations, and doctors implanted a pacemaker to regulate his heartbeat after he became ill during a (radio)taping on Oct. 20.

So, unfortunately for The Dead Schembechlers, the band will have to carry the baggage of having a particularly un-cool name for a while. That is, unless they follow my suggestion, which is to temporarily rename the band, at least until Schembechler’s memory is suitably honored, and his body is laid to rest.

Perhaps they could go by something like:

The Dead Cheneys!

Al Franken Having Fun......d

Here is a great clip of Al Franken taking apart John Fund on HardBall. Enjoy!

Joe Lieberman's Current Extortion Scheme

Let me get this straight. First, Joe Lieberman assures Connecticut voters that his intention to caucus with the Democrats is a "closed issue." Then, he goes on Meet the Press to emphasize that he considers himself an Independent Democrat – with a capital “I,” and a capital “D” - and points out that when Jim Jeffords switched from Republican to Independent, he was allowed to keep his seniority and committee chair positions. Then, he reveals that he “would not rule out the possibility” of switching to the Republican Party!

Clearly, this is all part of a plan to extort his way into making sure that he loses absolutely nothing by being rejected by his own parties’ voters in the primary, and then flipping them the bird in a selfish attempt to retain his seat by appealing to Republicans.

To this strategy, I have only one piece of advice to the Democratic leadership.

DO NOT NEGOTIATE WITH EXTORTIONISTS!

Really – who cares whether the “Independent Democrat” caucuses with you as long as he is going to vote with the Republicans whenever his “independence” tells him that another Bush rubber stamp is in order? The bottom line is that a “paper majority” in the Senate means nothing if the votes go the other way!

Realistically, legislation won’t be passed without the agreement of a strong Democratic majority in the House anyway, so even if Lieberman were to defect and give the majority back to the GOP, it would not mean that all is lost. In fact, such a move might even solidify the determination of voters to keep on surfing the current wave of GOP revulsion by voting for Democrats in 2008!

Besides, after what just happened to the six GOP incumbents who were just swept out of the Senate, how hard to you think it will be to pick off a few moderate Republican votes from those who are eyeing their own re-election bids in 2008? In other words, who needs Lieberman when his presence in the Democratic caucus may well be the equivalent of a football team allowing an opposing defender into their huddle?

SCREW THAT GUY!

Oh yeah, and as to Holy Joe’s pledge to push for the creation of a Federal Office of Public Integrity, I’m all for it! Why don’t we have them start with an investigation into the conflict of interest created when congressional spouses work as lobbyists?

Did California's Major Newspapers Bet Their Lives on Schwarzenegger's New Image?

After most of the major newspapers in California endorsed Arnold Schwarzenegger’s re-election bid, it was a foregone conclusion that he would return for another term as Governor. Clearly, he is still such a media darling that editors were willing to overlook political flip-flops of the highest order, believing only the latest sweet nothings that Arnold decided to whisper in their ears.

Here’s a quick run-down of opinion from some of the major publications throughout the State:

Los Angeles Times:

In the last year, the Republican has formed relationships with legislative leaders that focused the usually fractious and often obstructive Democrats on a productive agenda. . . If he is re-elected, the governor says, "we're going to continue in a bipartisan way."

Sacramento Bee:

In a time when the nation is wracked by deep partisan divisions, he is the candidate most likely to lead California away from partisan warfare and into a future focused on entrepreneurship, education and opportunity.

San Francisco Chronicle:

The climate of cooperation in Sacramento can be traced directly to the conciliatory tone struck by Schwarzenegger on the night of last year's special-election debacle. . . . Schwarzenegger said the message from voters was "you fix it" -- by working with legislators -- in Sacramento. The most dramatic adjustment was to his attitude.

San Jose Mercury News:

Schwarzenegger's conversion involved process, not principles. He is an ambitious man who likes to win. He discovered that success as governor lies in being a collaborator, not a Terminator. We'd expect more of the same in a second term.

Clearly, all of these newspapers are betting that the real Schwarzenegger is the moderate, bipartisan, leader that emerged during the 2006 campaign season. Personally, I still think it is more likely that Arnold’s preferred agenda is the one promoted shortly after he assumed the Governor’s office in the first place! This was when he thought he could force his desires on political opponents through his personal popularity and the initiative process! The major media, on the other hand, seem to have accepted the idea that Arnold came into office and started with “Plan B,” but then later reverted to “Plan A!” If that assertion turns out to be wrong, there will be very little credibility left for these media outlets to sell.

Here’s what my local newspaper, to which I have subscribed for the last 17 years, had to say as they endorsed Schwarzenegger for another term:

The Schwarzenegger of 2006 has shown the moderate, problem- solving approach that made him popular in the first place.

Since he can’t run for another term, it will not matter to Arnold if all of these newspapers are wrong in anticipating more of the “Schwarzenegger of 2006.” However, if Schwarzenegger reverts back to his previous agenda of attacking working families and public employees - in favor of corporate interests - I hope it will matter to these newspapers!

If that happens, I will begin the process of expressing my disgust by cancelling my long-time subscription to my local newspaper - as their reward for choosing to enable another Schwarzenegger con job!

Photo of the Day

"Heck of a job Guys"

Oh George, Can We Measure the Drapes Now?