CHAMPAGNE THEORY OF POLITICAL ANALYSIS REVEALED

Hmmm. Shades of Mogadishu. American corpses, burnt, dismembered and dragged through the streets of Falluja.

The pundits whinge about why Iraq is going from bad to worse. Well, TT can skip all the fancy geopolitical analysis and sum it up quite succinctly - it's because George Dubbya gave up drinking alcohol.

If Dubbya hadn't given up drinking he would be very familiar with the Champagne Theory of Political Evolution.

Namely, take a tightly corked bottle of champagne, wait a few years (or decades), shake the hell out of the bottle and then yank the cork out and you have.....Iraq.

At least if Dubbya had been drinking he might not only have remembered how the champagne has to be uncorked but also have listened to General WhateverHisNameWas. He was the General who mysteriously announced his unexpected retirement just days after he told a congressional hearing that it would take 200,000 troops on the ground to secure Iraq if the US invaded. Hello? Looks about right to us.

But, Dubba was off the sauce and the rest, including General WhateverHisNameWas, is history......

PASSION THREATENS CONFESSION FRENZY

TT has remained largely impervious to the flurry created in America by Mel Gibson's incredibly lucrative, The Passion of Christ.

We have been more interested in reading about it than actually going to see what sounds to us like a religious splatter film. Just the descriptions make us want to reach for Finding Nemo or Black Beauty.

The reactions it has provoked in people who have flocked to see it have included death (one Kansas women died of a heart attack while watching the infamous crucifixtion scene), marital reconciliation (one couple apprently was so overcome by the film, they put their divorce plans on hold and went for a reconciliation - go figure) and now, we have the case of a Texas man who was so affected by the film that he confessed to murdering his girlfriend.

TT has a squillion reasons why we aren't interested in seeing this film but the case of the Texas man seals it for us. If there is even the slightest hint that seeing this film might lead us into a spontaneous frenzy of confession of our sins - we are going nowhere near this film.

TT readers who also want to keep their legions of transgressions private can also ignore the film and just go to the website byCLICKING HERE ON - KEEP THOSE TRANSGRESSIONS PRIVATE.

CALIFORNIA THREATENED BY EVIL CHEMICAL

Californians do some strange things. Think Governor.

But, when it comes to health issues, Californians are often in the vanguard.

TT therefore paid attention when we read that the city council of some obscure Californian town (they seem to have a lot of them out there and they certainly have enough aging movie stars available to serve as mayor for most of them) was scheduled to vote on legislation imposing a complete ban on Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO) in the town.

TT likes to think that we are very much on top of noxious substances but DHMO didn't ring any bells for us so we checked it out on the web.

We were horrified. This chemical is evil incarnate. It's an enabling component in acid rain, is one of the infamous greenhouse gases and worse - this stuff is everywhere. We really took note when we saw how pervasive it is in the dairy industry - its used everywhere and an FDA whistle blower has disclosed that cows are pushed to consume as much of the chemical as they can -- don't even get us going on milk ---our milk is full of the stuff.

If you doubt how scary this is then CLICK HERE ON DHMO - THE HIDDEN HORROR. After informing ourselves about this lurking menance we couldn't help but wonder why it was that only this little pimple of a town in California seemed to be reacting to the grave menace. Where was the EPA? the FDA? Homeland Security? Forget those elusive WMDs - here we have a clear and presnt danger!!!!

The ace-research team at Turnip Top cranked into high gear and found that this obscure (but probably not for long) town was on the cusp of banning ----water. Seems that DHMO is the chemical name for water and that DHMO.org is ---well, a complete put on.

Seems that a town employee stumbled on the DHMO.org website and sounded the alarm. The local politicos in an uncharacteristic flurry of responsiveness, immediately drafted legislation to ban thiis ubiquitous menace from its town.

It is our understanding that the Council have now withdrawn the legislation.

We wish we could remember the name of the town because TT would like to thank them for providing some much needed diversion from missile attacks on quadriplegic blind guys, kiddie suicide bombers, the 9/11 blame game etc etc etc etc.

DIRTY UNMENTIONABLES POSE LEGAL ISSUE

TT has never been one to shy away from the tough questions.

But, in all the hoo ha about the Kobe Bryant case, we have yet to see anyone ask The Big Question.

In a Colorado courtroom, the alleged victim has been compelled to answer questions relating to her sexual history. Although Colorado has so-called rape shield laws, the defence team successfully won the right to question the young woman about her sexual history -- in a closed court. The judge will then decide whether, as the defence claim, her sexual history, particularly in the days prior to and immediately following 'the encounter', is relevant to Bryant's defence. They will argue that the 'encounter' was consensual and that the 'damage' suffered by the young woman was not as a result of rape by Bryant but, was either caused or enhanced by another sexual partner, in days/hours prior to or following 'the encounter'.

Rape shield advocates are shrieking shrillly about the degradation and invasion of the alleged victim's privacy. Isn't the whole point of rape shield laws precisely to protect victims from what is happening here?? What about Colorado's Rape Shield law?? It is being flagrantly ignored they say . An outrage, they say.

Well, TT is no fan of Kobe - on or off the court. Indeed, we are pretty sure he is probably guilty as charged.

BUT, and we are getting to the Big Question, this is a closed hearing - a judge will decide whether any of the salacious details are in fact relevant and should be allowed into evidence.

None of this would be happening though if the young lady hadn't turned up for her post- encounter hospital examination the day after the event wearing undies that contained dna from Bryant AND at least one other individual (let's call a spade a spade here folks, her undies had sperm residue from at least two different individuals).

Now, we ask you, why on earth didn't this woman put on a clean pair of undies at some point?? Did she not put on clean undies before she went to work that day and had the encounter with Bryant? Why would she even think about wearing undies from the Bryant encounter the next day to her exam? Surely they could have been carried to the exam in a brown bag or something?? Did this young woman's mother not instill in her the age-old warning about always wearing clean undies in case you are in an accident (or have an encouonter) and end up in a hospital emergency department?? Even Monica, having decided not to get the infamous Gap dress cleaned, never wore it again after it was 'used'. Does this woman not wash her underwear??? Can dna survive a washing??

For all the swarms of journalists 'covering ' this story, we have yet to see one who has raised these important questions so ever-fearless and ever-probing the Big Issues, it looks like Turnip Top will once again have to be the one to do so.

DANCING ON THE CEILING

TT admits it. We love it when rich celebrities divorce.

It certainly isn't a purient interest on our part however, more an academic interest in the socioligical aspects of what we would term, 'The Normalacy of the Rich'. Each divorce gives us blinding insights into the nuggets of excess which the women (and David Guest) chronical in mind numbing detail, as they build their case for looting and plundering to maintain the lifestyle to which they have become so easily addicted.

Oh, occasionally one gets a corporate scandal with a golden shower curtain or two but they don't provide the quantity and quality of salacious detail that a good juicy divorce provides.

For serious researchers, like TT, we have The Smoking Gun which posts, among other important documents, divorce petitions a milli-second after they have been filed. Serious researchers don't want their news filtered by ET (if you have to ask what that stands for ---shame, shame) or the National Enquirer.

Most recently, we were intrigued by the petition of Diane Richie who is seeking to divorce, with the appropriate amount of financial comfort, Lionel Richie. Now, we have a better understanding of why Lionel must be 'Dancing on the Ceiling' and prone to 'Running with the Night'.

Poor Mrs Richie. We now know she lives with her children ' in an extraordinary home worth in excess of $40 million', a spartan 30 room hovel. 'I had to practically force the Respondent to purchase this house', says poor Diane. 'The Respondent was not interested in such a project.' OK, well guess we see where the seeds of dissension might have been sown.

Now, TT was not surprised to learn that Diane spends at least $15,000 a month on clothing and purses. One Birkin handbag alone is $8000 so how, we wonder, does she manage ??? Of course, her monthly expenses on personal services, clothing and entertainment are $50,000 - jewelry extra. Ah, that's more understandable. Particularly when her petition says (in bold typeface and underlined for emphasis), 'during our marriage I was not on a budget and could spend anything I wanted on whatever I chose.'

We were a bit surpised, however, to see expenses of $150 a month on electrolysis and $1000 A MONTH on laser hair removal. WOW. This is one hirsute lady!!!!!

One can only hope that Lionel is a generous man and pays her enough to keep up the hair removal otherwise one shudders to think of the fear that will be struck in the hearts of small children with this wildebeast on the loose.

TT was also a bit surprised to see costs of $20,000 a year on cosmetic surgery. Hmm. Who would have thought the human body had enough parts to undergo that amount of surgery? Assuming she is 40ish and lives a normal lifespan, we calculate that as approximately $7 million of cosmetic surgery. For this, we can only assume she gets to be a whole new person - maybe J-Low ??? Personally, we would like to know if her plastic surgeon is single.

But, it isn't all self gratification and self indulgence. Mrs Richie points out that she and her hubby have been giving $2000 to $3000 a month to charity 'and our children's school'. Well, let's see that two or three months worth of electolysis and less than one months worth of dermatology (we assume she means botox) which requires $3000 a month to keep that Freddy Kruger skin under control.

And, of course, there are the kids. We get to find out where she shops for those little darlings (Fred Segal, The Gap ---no spoiling them with Fendi or Gucci)and that their daughter Sofia is a moron - well, she must be as she appears to require $800 a month of computer lessons. Mummy is obviously smarter since her computer lessons are only $600 a month. Diane has to spend $1000 a month on birthday presents for poor dumb Sofia's friends. TT is currently investigating how we can get ourselves on the birthday present list.

And so it goes. TT readers who wish to check out the full story on poor Diane's struggle to retain a shred of her spartan lifestyle can CLICK HERE ON HAIRY WOMAN MAY NOT BE ONCE, TWICE THREE TIMES A LADY...at least not after all that plastic surgery.

THE GREAT GORDINI

TT loves the way the British media can make even the most turgid of events entertaining.

Of course, they can also make the most entertaining stories turgid, but...that is for another day, as they say.

In the run up to Chancellor Gordon Brown's 7th budget (delivered yesterday), The Great Gordini( Prime Minister in Waiting..and Waiting...and Waiting) and his pre-election budget, got some laudible advance coverage by The GuardianCKICK HERE ON GORD OF THE RINGS and try and imagine the New York Times giving Dubbya's budget - or any budget - the same kind of treatment.......we think they probably leave such things to Jon Stewart and the Daily Show .

CHUBBY CHERUBS TARGET OF NEW WAR INITIATIVE

TT was very pleased to note that the US House of Representatives,apparently bored with the War on Terror, the War on Drugs and the War on Poverty, has struck a lethal blow in the War on Fat.

The House passed the so-called Cheeseburger Bill by a vote of 276 to 139 passing the' Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act'. It is being hailed by its sponsor as victory for 'common sense and responsibility'. We had no idea that common sense or personal responsibility could be legislated. How about the 'Personal Responsibility in Declarations of War Act'?

Remember those Chubby Cherubs in New York? The ones who after eating as often as three times a day at McDonald's became, well...HUGE? They filed suit against McDonald's, blaming them for their rather considerable girth. The suit was quite appropriately tossed by the judge so one can be forgiven for wondering why then one needs legislation to prevent lawsuits against the food and non-alchoholic drink industry, which is what the so-called Cheeseburger Act does.

The judge who tossed out the Chubby Cherub's search for justice did, however, provide their lawyers with a roadmap for re-filing the suit and it had a lot to do with how the fast food industry lacks transparency and/or misrepresents what is in their food and how consumer's, chubby or not, might be mislead into thinking foods are healthier than they are.

The Cheeseburger Bill still has to clear the Senate but TT is on notice. No way do the legislators want us to be able to blame our extra poundage on the people who produce the stuff we gobble down with such relish. OK, we take the point.

TT notes that the industry itself has taken some initiatives to help us be more personally responsible. It's going to do away with so-called 'super-sizing'. Fine with us. We never did understand who consumed these 42 ounce Cokes. Is ANYONE able to drink that much Coke without going into immediate sugar shock???

In practical terms this means that a super-size French/Freedom fries at McDonald's in America will go from 610 calories to a mere 540 calories and 26 grams of fat. Great, let's have two orders!

What we find interesting though is the discovery that a de-supersized burger or fries are not created equal. A regular Big Mac in America has 600 calories and 33 grams of artery clogging fat but if you hop across the pond to Britain, the same size Big Mac has only 493 calories and 22 grams of fat.

And, as for those WMD's, French/Freedom Fries, a de-supersized order has 540 calories and 26 grams of fat but again, hop across the pond and the same size order contains a scant 412 calories and an almost fat free 18 grams of fat. Or, head to Argentina and grab a 397 calorie, 19 grams of fat order of fries. Different oils and cheeses are apparently at the root of these little anomolies.

So, the first prong in our personal response to this challenge to take responsibility for our food consumption we plan to fly to Britain for our Big Macs and Britain for our fries. It may hurt our bank account but will reap health benefits that will pay off.

Our second prong in our strategy for personal responsibility relates to the initiaves of the food industry to provide healthier eating choices. We are dazzled, if baffled, by the array of salads now being offered by McDonald's et al. Now, we aren't quite sure who in their right mind walks into a McDonald's and orders salads but we thought we might be one of those ( anything in this world is possible).

Imagine our surpise when we learnt that McDonald's caesar salad is more fattening than the burgers. Huh?

Oh sure, you can have the salad without dressing or croutons but order the caesar salad as it was originally intended - with dressing and croutons -you get 425 calories and 21.4 grams of fat. The regular burger and an order of fries carries a calorie count of 459 calories - only slightly more than the salad - and only 16.7 grams of fat. Hmmmmm.

And, as for ordering the salad without the dressing and croutons --yeah, right. And just what would the point of that be???

Now, TT would have thought that common sense and personal responsibility would mean we should buy a caesar salad instead of a buger and fries but apparently common sense is not so easily excercised - hence the need for legislation.

To view the full array of personally irresponsible choices, including the Bacon Ranch SaladCLICK HERE TO SEE LEAVES OF IRRESPONSIBILITY. In keeping with the spirit of the Act, we are going to pass on the salad and stick to British and Argentinian burgers and fries.

FOCUS ON SALAD MAY BE LETHAL

TT is trying very hard not to take tooooo much pleasure in watching the Domestic Diva get her just desserts (crafted from self-milled flour and home-grown cacao beans).

As one might expect, TT prefers to look at the bigger picture--ask the big questions. Will Martha take her $8000 Berkin handbag with her when, as a convicted felon, she goes to register with her probation officer today or, once sentanced, whether she will take it with her to 'the big house'??

Martha, Martha, Martha. Did she learn nothing from her 'little tax problem' some years ago?? The same arrogance that led her to insist she was not a resident of new york(and pay new york taxes) when her own magazine showed pictures of her in New York on critical dates, seems to have led her to Friday's grand finale when she became a convicted felon. The judge in her little tax dispute deemed her testimony at the time as 'not credible' (isn't that a nice way of saying she was untruthful?? that her testimony was a lie?). Maybe if she had got jail time then instead of just forking over a few hundred thousand dollars.........

But, to be fair, TT understands that the significance of her conviction is of some consequence. How is America going to master the correct art of chopping cabbage without her? How will anyone ever be able to use up all those apples and bananas if they don't have Martha to show them how to use them for decorating the Christmas tree??

CBS in New York has cancelled her programme ( the same programme on which she asked to be allowed to 'focus on my salad' instead of answering questions about the charges against her). Other affilliates had already begun the burial process by sticking her nauseating self promotional vehicle to 'less optimal' time slots (0300 to 0400 on Monday's where hard core porn is more the taste of the audience than cabbage chopping).

Pundits are now mulling the future of Martha, her company and its share price, her products, her magazines. Of course anyone who bought stock in a company that is based, at least in part, in there being an ever growing thirst for new ways to make home made pot pourris...well, let us just say we have little sympathy. In fairness, however, we did learn something from Martha and her troubles - we now know that Mexican vacations can be charged to our company as a business expense.

TT thinks pundit predictions of doom and gloom are, however, rather premature.

We think that Martha's conviction opens up a whole new market for her products and interesting opportunities for new product development. Even John Wayne Gacey found a market for his paintings.

With the current reality show craze, we see big money making potential for Martha to negotiate a 24/7 show detailing her life in the 'big house'.

We can imagine her showing fellow fellons how to make their own botox (we supect the federal prison medical system doesn't provide botox for prisoners - yet) from breadcrumbs and old cheese rinds.

Martha can still make a big contribution in her daily columns (IF the ny times has any vision and doesn't cancel it) by addressing such subjects as; ' Turning Confined and Cramped into Cozy'.'Growing to Appreciate Polyester', 'Making Orange Work For You Rather than Make You Heave', 'Top Ten Bull-Dyke Decorating Tips', 'Hair Colouring Made Easy; A Primer for Using Leftover Canned Vegetables'.

Of course, America likes its felons to show remorse and redemption before it rewards them. We suspect Martha may be a bit far from remorse at this point. Milliseconds after the verdict, her website spewed out a defiant, 'i've done nothing wrong'--all that was missing was the dog. Clearly, the lawyers jumped in (the same lawyers who wisely didn't put her on the witness stand) and the evidence of her self-delusion was quickly removed ( some signs of remorse certainly don't hurt when it comes to sentancing). It was replaced by a slightly less delusional message which forecast her eventual vindication.CLICK HERE FOR MARTHA WHILE SHE CAN STILL GET BOTOX INJECTIONS.

As for TT, we plan to go on chopping our cabbage the way we always have - or just buy it pre-chopped which makes a lot more sense to us anyway.

POSTSCRIPT: TT is probably the last person to jump to the defence of the lawyers but ENOUGH with the 'Why didn't her lawyers put her on the stand', 'Why didn't they bring in character witnesses? Why didn't her lawyers take one of the plea agreements offered? Hello. Maybe she IS guilty and her lawyer wasn't about to put her on the stand to either lie again or get bogged down in the morass of contradictions her lies had already spawned. Maybe, just maybe, the client refused to accept a plea. Maybe, just maybe the client in this case is arrogant enough to think a jury would never convict her. And maybe, just maybe, for every witness who could attest to Martha's probity, the prosecution could dredge up 100 witnesses who could testify to the contrary-----