1) The march of the penguins apparently includes rest area breaks.
2) Twitter is for twits, Episode 4,359
3) Finally, he snatched the pebble from sensei's hand.
4) SLB has a small readership, but it's a very well-informed one. So someone remind me, when was the last time a white man was mistaken for a criminal and killed?
5) No disrespect intended to police officers anywhere, I should start with, but this has to stop. Oh, but I forgot! There's no racism anymore!
6) Really! No one hates anyone anymore! The right wing is perfectly comfortable with a black centrist president!
7) One can only hope that these series of incidents revolving around race...the Sweeten case, this assassination threat, and the Edwards killing...will cause some of our more rational brethren on the right to finally....FINALLLY...denounce the hate the way they insisted moderate Muslims stand up to extremism.
8) It seems there's a condition that strikes white male-- FUCK ME, MOTHERFUCKING COCKSUCKER!!!! --ales more than any other demographic.
9) It never rains in California, but girl, don't they warn you, it pours, man it pours!
10) BEHOLD THE POWER OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY!
Friday, June 05, 2009
Thursday, June 04, 2009
Obama's Defining Moment
While you should read the entire text for yourselves, I believe history will judge this paragraph as the time when America truly rejoined the world community as a leader and a beacon:
Leading up to this paragraph, President Obama spoke of how the continual Muslim violence towards not only westerners but fellow Muslims, has bred a suspicion and, indeed, terror among the partisan right wing of the western world.
After this paragraph, he acknowledges civilization's debt to the Muslim world and to Islam in particular: math, sciences, philosophy, commerce, art, even history...all these were advanced by Muslims when the rest of the world suffered the Dark Ages.
And then he challenged the Muslim world to change with the times. He invited them to view America differently, and if anyone could do that, if anyone could truthfully say those words and mean them in Egypt, it is Barack Obama: America's first African-American President. Indeed, the quintessence of change resides within him.
The intriguing bit came when he began to talk about Palestine. I expect he will get a large helping of grief over this part, where he seems to hint at a division of territory between Israel and the Palestinians (the "two state" solution he has talked about before).
But there's a surprise hinted at in the speech as well when he speaks about Al Qaeda:
I interpret this to mean he's offering the Muslim world a chance for a show of good faith: turn over Al Qaeda and other violent Islamist groups, turn over Osama bin Laden. Show us that you mean business.
Wow. I mean, wow. He invokes among the most holy of passages written in the Koran and challenges the Muslim world to live up to it.
Think about that for a moment: the President of the Great Satan has asked Muslims to turn their back on what amounts to the Religious Right of the Muslim world, the Jerry Falwells of Fatwas, and asked the entire Muslim world to join us in the 21st Century, to shun those who would take the world back to the Dark Ages.
And you know what? He's got a good chance of succeeding.
So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. This cycle of suspicion and discord must end.
Leading up to this paragraph, President Obama spoke of how the continual Muslim violence towards not only westerners but fellow Muslims, has bred a suspicion and, indeed, terror among the partisan right wing of the western world.
After this paragraph, he acknowledges civilization's debt to the Muslim world and to Islam in particular: math, sciences, philosophy, commerce, art, even history...all these were advanced by Muslims when the rest of the world suffered the Dark Ages.
And then he challenged the Muslim world to change with the times. He invited them to view America differently, and if anyone could do that, if anyone could truthfully say those words and mean them in Egypt, it is Barack Obama: America's first African-American President. Indeed, the quintessence of change resides within him.
The intriguing bit came when he began to talk about Palestine. I expect he will get a large helping of grief over this part, where he seems to hint at a division of territory between Israel and the Palestinians (the "two state" solution he has talked about before).
But there's a surprise hinted at in the speech as well when he speaks about Al Qaeda:
And that's why we're partnering with a coalition of 46 countries. And despite the costs involved, America's commitment will not weaken. Indeed, none of us should tolerate these extremists. They have killed in many countries. They have killed people of different faiths but, more than any other, they have killed Muslims. Their actions are irreconcilable with the rights of human beings, the progress of nations, and with Islam.
The Holy Quran teaches that whoever kills an innocent is as -- it is as it if has killed all mankind.
And the Holy Quran also says whoever saves a person, it is as if he has saved all mankind.
The enduring faith of over a billion people is so much bigger than the narrow hatred of a few. Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism; it is an important part of promoting peace.
I interpret this to mean he's offering the Muslim world a chance for a show of good faith: turn over Al Qaeda and other violent Islamist groups, turn over Osama bin Laden. Show us that you mean business.
Wow. I mean, wow. He invokes among the most holy of passages written in the Koran and challenges the Muslim world to live up to it.
Think about that for a moment: the President of the Great Satan has asked Muslims to turn their back on what amounts to the Religious Right of the Muslim world, the Jerry Falwells of Fatwas, and asked the entire Muslim world to join us in the 21st Century, to shun those who would take the world back to the Dark Ages.
And you know what? He's got a good chance of succeeding.
Wednesday, June 03, 2009
Sloppy Seconds
A huge outcry (link not safe for sane people) was raised among the more extreme rightists in this country (i.e. any Republican) about Sonia Sotomayor's perceived dismissal of the "private ownership of guns
Ahem
The sticking point came on a case involving nunchuks in New York City. You may remember nunchuks as the weapon of choice for Bruce Lee: two sticks chained end to end that are very versatile for self-defense...or clocking the ever-living crap out of someone.
In that case, the defendant claimed that the SCOTUS decision in Heller v. District of Columbia, which was a minor landmark decision in that it affirmed, or more to the point, created (so much for lack of judicial activism) the absolute right of an individual to own firearms, implied that states and localities were forbidden from overriding the Second Amendment.
The Appeals Court (Second Circuit) on which Sotomayor sat decided, um, no. States and localities can override it at their pleasure, as many other precedents of the court had dictated. The distinction in Heller is that the District of Columbia is quasi-federal to begin with.
As you can imagine, the NRAites went ballistic...sorry...over this revelation! It was decided in committee that this was absolute proof that Obama was trying to take away their guns.
After the tin foil hats were cleaned and blocked...
Much ado about nothing, as it turns out. The case they cite that Sotomayor sat on, Maloney v. Cuomo, was specifically cited by the conservative Seventh Circuit Appeals Court yesterday in its decision.
As usual, conservatives cried their eyes out and went through boxes of tissues decrying the oppression of the white man.
Ahem
Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor has been called an "anti-gun radical" by some gun rights activists for joining an opinion this year that said the Second Amendment does not prevent state and local governments from restricting arms ownership.
But yesterday a panel of conservative luminaries on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit reached the same conclusion. The unanimous ruling rejecting a challenge to Chicago's tough handgun law could complicate efforts to portray Sotomayor as a judicial activist trying to undermine the Supreme Court's landmark decision last year holding that the amendment protects the right to own a gun for self-defense.
The sticking point came on a case involving nunchuks in New York City. You may remember nunchuks as the weapon of choice for Bruce Lee: two sticks chained end to end that are very versatile for self-defense...or clocking the ever-living crap out of someone.
In that case, the defendant claimed that the SCOTUS decision in Heller v. District of Columbia, which was a minor landmark decision in that it affirmed, or more to the point, created (so much for lack of judicial activism) the absolute right of an individual to own firearms, implied that states and localities were forbidden from overriding the Second Amendment.
The Appeals Court (Second Circuit) on which Sotomayor sat decided, um, no. States and localities can override it at their pleasure, as many other precedents of the court had dictated. The distinction in Heller is that the District of Columbia is quasi-federal to begin with.
As you can imagine, the NRAites went ballistic...sorry...over this revelation! It was decided in committee that this was absolute proof that Obama was trying to take away their guns.
After the tin foil hats were cleaned and blocked...
Much ado about nothing, as it turns out. The case they cite that Sotomayor sat on, Maloney v. Cuomo, was specifically cited by the conservative Seventh Circuit Appeals Court yesterday in its decision.
As usual, conservatives cried their eyes out and went through boxes of tissues decrying the oppression of the white man.
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
The Hypocrisy Clown Car
I do have to love right wing media. They are so consistently inconsistent:
Do you think The Post ever bothered to ask George Bush what his vacations were costing the taxpayers? Let's see...
Now several in the media, both mainstream and Blogtopia (© Skippy the Bush Kangaroo) have pointed out that Obama is as entitled to a night out as any President, that Bush took the full-scale Air Force One to his ranch (the flight alone cost the taxpayers more than $24,000), and that Bush spent something on the order of forty percent of his administration on vacation (that's 3.2 years out of eight).
All valid points.
I focused on something else. The Presidency has long been a...I don't know how to put this...role model factory? When JFK and Jackie O were in the White House, sales of Chanel suits skyrocketed. When they hosted artists and poets at dinners, sales of books about poetry jumped, and attendance at museums spiked.
And now that Obama has eaten at a restaurant in Greenwcih Village and seen the new August Wilson play, both of those are reporting record reservations and mobs outside.
So it's interesting that a man takes his wife on a date, modeling absolutely spot-on behavior for a married man (nevermind that he promised her this date) to be romantic, and the right wing, pro-family-- OK, Drudge is gay, but you get my point-- point people get their knickers in a twist over it!
You'd think maybe these guys might take a hint? I'm betting at least one wingnutcase has been forced to hear from his wife, "Honey, how come you never take me anywhere?" this week.
And maybe that's the point.
Taxpayers footed the bill for the big night on the town, which included a total of at least $24,000 for the three aircraft used to ferry the Obamas, aides and reporters to New York and back. Dinner costs and orchestra seat tickets -- at $96.50 apiece -- were paid by the Obamas.
Obama's jet, a Gulfstream 500, served as a more modest Air Force One for the day in place of the customary presidential Boeing 747.
The White House declined to say how much the trip was costing taxpayers.
Do you think The Post ever bothered to ask George Bush what his vacations were costing the taxpayers? Let's see...
*crickets chirping*
Now several in the media, both mainstream and Blogtopia (© Skippy the Bush Kangaroo) have pointed out that Obama is as entitled to a night out as any President, that Bush took the full-scale Air Force One to his ranch (the flight alone cost the taxpayers more than $24,000), and that Bush spent something on the order of forty percent of his administration on vacation (that's 3.2 years out of eight).
All valid points.
I focused on something else. The Presidency has long been a...I don't know how to put this...role model factory? When JFK and Jackie O were in the White House, sales of Chanel suits skyrocketed. When they hosted artists and poets at dinners, sales of books about poetry jumped, and attendance at museums spiked.
And now that Obama has eaten at a restaurant in Greenwcih Village and seen the new August Wilson play, both of those are reporting record reservations and mobs outside.
So it's interesting that a man takes his wife on a date, modeling absolutely spot-on behavior for a married man (nevermind that he promised her this date) to be romantic, and the right wing, pro-family-- OK, Drudge is gay, but you get my point-- point people get their knickers in a twist over it!
You'd think maybe these guys might take a hint? I'm betting at least one wingnutcase has been forced to hear from his wife, "Honey, how come you never take me anywhere?" this week.
And maybe that's the point.
Monday, June 01, 2009
To Your Health
The broad outlines of the Obama healthcare package are coming to light. I'm not sure I like them much:
My beef with it?
It's too complex and in politics, complex means it's too easy to hide the loopholes in.
Think about the laws we pass in this nation for a moment. Take speeding laws: if you exceed the speed limit, in the judgement of the officer who is issuing the ticket, you've broken the law. A traffic court may overturn this, but it's unlikely that anyone is going to get away scott free with every ticket issued.
The rule is simple: There's a defined limit. You exceed it. You pay a price.
Now, take a look at the tax code, one of the most complex systems known to mankind.
Does everyone pay their fair share? No, not even nominally, much less in practice.
Here, we're talking about people's lives. Here, we're talking about creating a bureacratic nightmare the likes of which we can't even begin to fathom.
Government does some things better than the private sector. Take mail delivery. If FedEx or UPS had the same mandate as the USPS (deliver mail to whomever in the United States mail is addressed to) we'd all be paying enormous sums of money to fund the rural delivery system. Government can make it cost effective enough that it costs 44 cents...and that's AFTER FedEx and UPS have skimmed off the most profitable portions of the delivery system: overnight mail and commercial parcel deliveries!
Government is the only organization sufficiently scaled to handle insuring 300 million people. Period.
This entire bill should be scrapped. We should have a single-payer health insurance where everyone knows what they will pay when they visit a doctor (nothing), doctors can still afford million dollar homes (they do in England) and you don't have to argue with an insurance bureaucrat with regards to being treated. If the doctor finds a test medically necessary, there won't be some beancounter sitting over his shoulder, timing the procedure.
Maybe this is a first step in that direction. And maybe it's unnecessary.
It's hard to believe that only three months ago, health care advocates worried that President Barack Obama would drop the health reform issue from his first-year agenda. Now, with an August deadline to pass a bill, a compromise that once seemed unimaginable is considered quite possible, both sides say.
Congress this week begins a two-month sprint to pass legislation overhauling the health care system — an aspiration that has eluded generations of American politicians. The task is exceedingly complex and faces the legislative equivalent of an Ironman triathlon, tested at every stage by monied interests, political alliances and an estimated 13-figure price tag.
My beef with it?
It's too complex and in politics, complex means it's too easy to hide the loopholes in.
Think about the laws we pass in this nation for a moment. Take speeding laws: if you exceed the speed limit, in the judgement of the officer who is issuing the ticket, you've broken the law. A traffic court may overturn this, but it's unlikely that anyone is going to get away scott free with every ticket issued.
The rule is simple: There's a defined limit. You exceed it. You pay a price.
Now, take a look at the tax code, one of the most complex systems known to mankind.
Does everyone pay their fair share? No, not even nominally, much less in practice.
Here, we're talking about people's lives. Here, we're talking about creating a bureacratic nightmare the likes of which we can't even begin to fathom.
Government does some things better than the private sector. Take mail delivery. If FedEx or UPS had the same mandate as the USPS (deliver mail to whomever in the United States mail is addressed to) we'd all be paying enormous sums of money to fund the rural delivery system. Government can make it cost effective enough that it costs 44 cents...and that's AFTER FedEx and UPS have skimmed off the most profitable portions of the delivery system: overnight mail and commercial parcel deliveries!
Government is the only organization sufficiently scaled to handle insuring 300 million people. Period.
This entire bill should be scrapped. We should have a single-payer health insurance where everyone knows what they will pay when they visit a doctor (nothing), doctors can still afford million dollar homes (they do in England) and you don't have to argue with an insurance bureaucrat with regards to being treated. If the doctor finds a test medically necessary, there won't be some beancounter sitting over his shoulder, timing the procedure.
Maybe this is a first step in that direction. And maybe it's unnecessary.
Friday, May 29, 2009
Nobody Asked Me, But...
1) If Sonia Sotomayor is held up for questioning based on her ethnic ties, then Antonin Scalia should be impeached unless he renounces his Knights of Columbus membership.
2) It's nice to see that cooler heads may prevail, but the response still needs to be forceful and certain.
3) We forget that people like Kim and Ahmadinejad were, like Republicans, waiting to test the mettle of Barack Obama. And yes, I just included the GOP in the Axis of Evil.
4) Californians may have dealt Prop 8 a death blow, but never fear, friends of Dorothy, the time will come.
5) Two words, Mr Ex-President: shut up and go away. OK, four words, which is three more than should have been wasted on you in the year 2000.
6) "Alas! Poor Yorick...I knew him when he stole the Tardus, Horatio."
7) I'm guessing Wikipedia is not ready for the fight they just picked. Not that Scientology is anything I endorse, just that they have a reputation for, um, some pretty nasty shit.
8) It looks like Sy Hersh was right about those rape rooms at Abu Ghraib.
9) I was firmly in the camp with respect to releasing these new photos. Now, I think we have to rethink that. I still lean towards releasing them, but given the highly inflammatory nature of the pictures, we ought to think about the victims of the rapes, their privacy and how this might affect them.
10) I don't think deep fried apples count as "healthier food."
2) It's nice to see that cooler heads may prevail, but the response still needs to be forceful and certain.
3) We forget that people like Kim and Ahmadinejad were, like Republicans, waiting to test the mettle of Barack Obama. And yes, I just included the GOP in the Axis of Evil.
4) Californians may have dealt Prop 8 a death blow, but never fear, friends of Dorothy, the time will come.
5) Two words, Mr Ex-President: shut up and go away. OK, four words, which is three more than should have been wasted on you in the year 2000.
6) "Alas! Poor Yorick...I knew him when he stole the Tardus, Horatio."
7) I'm guessing Wikipedia is not ready for the fight they just picked. Not that Scientology is anything I endorse, just that they have a reputation for, um, some pretty nasty shit.
8) It looks like Sy Hersh was right about those rape rooms at Abu Ghraib.
9) I was firmly in the camp with respect to releasing these new photos. Now, I think we have to rethink that. I still lean towards releasing them, but given the highly inflammatory nature of the pictures, we ought to think about the victims of the rapes, their privacy and how this might affect them.
10) I don't think deep fried apples count as "healthier food."
Thursday, May 28, 2009
"No! Racism Doesn't Exist Anymore!"
Um. Yea. Right.
First of all, how stupid is that?
More important, how racist is it that a woman claims to be abducted in a small town in Pennsylvania...by two men from Philadelphia who drove a Cadillac and are black???
Sweeten is from Feasterville, PA. Population: 6,500+ Percentage minority (black and Latino): 4.5%
Do the math. That's 300 black and Latino residents in a town where everyone knows everyone else.
Income: $58,000. 70% of Feasterville is family units, and the average age is 36.1 (older than the national average). So we're talking about people who have laid down roots.
You'd think a rear-end accident and an abduction might have attracted someone's attention, particularly if they involved strange minority men in a car too expensive for most residents (who probably would opt for an SUV, like Sweeten did).
Yet, Sweeten, like Susan Smith before her, opted for the "scary black man" tale to cover her own self-indulgences. At least in Sweeten's case, the child is alive!
But, no, there's no more racism in this country, no siree! Indeed, it's the scary black man who is racist! And his Latino "wise woman" appointee! But the rest of us? Oh no! Butter wouldn't melt in ourwhite hoods mouths!
A Pennsylvania mom found in Walt Disney World after claiming she and her 9-year-old daughter were abducted by two black men and stuffed into a car trunk, tricked a co-worker into giving her their identification.
Bonnie Sweeten used a co-worker's driver's license and presented it as her own when she bought an airline ticket and flew to Orlando, Fla. on Tuesday, Henry said, adding Sweeten also used the license to check into the Grand Floridian Hotel at Disney World.
Jillian Jenkinson said Thursday on CBS' "The Early Show" that Bonnie Sweeten's request to use her identification to fix a discrepancy on her 401(k) "seemed innocent."
First of all, how stupid is that?
More important, how racist is it that a woman claims to be abducted in a small town in Pennsylvania...by two men from Philadelphia who drove a Cadillac and are black???
Sweeten is from Feasterville, PA. Population: 6,500+ Percentage minority (black and Latino): 4.5%
Do the math. That's 300 black and Latino residents in a town where everyone knows everyone else.
Income: $58,000. 70% of Feasterville is family units, and the average age is 36.1 (older than the national average). So we're talking about people who have laid down roots.
You'd think a rear-end accident and an abduction might have attracted someone's attention, particularly if they involved strange minority men in a car too expensive for most residents (who probably would opt for an SUV, like Sweeten did).
Yet, Sweeten, like Susan Smith before her, opted for the "scary black man" tale to cover her own self-indulgences. At least in Sweeten's case, the child is alive!
But, no, there's no more racism in this country, no siree! Indeed, it's the scary black man who is racist! And his Latino "wise woman" appointee! But the rest of us? Oh no! Butter wouldn't melt in our
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
2 + 8 = 5
Only in America is being a baby factory profitable:
Yea. The cynic in me says ol' John here (I have never watched the show, but I feel stupid calling him by his last name) banged his little hottie with dollar signs lighting up his eyes.
In fact, it wouldn't surprise me to find out that the Discovery networks actively sought out a woman who could, um, be a co-respondent in the divorce.
In the old days, this used to be called "procurement". Now it's called "marketing".
Ratings for this first episode were more than double the final episode of last season.
So the Gosselins took a page out of the Loud family scrapbook.
Undoubtedly, they bit off more than they could chew. I'm sure the novelty of raising sextuplets (are you listening, Octomom?) and two other children wore off quickly, but the bucks rolled in, even as the audience wore thinner.
But this entire episode speaks to American culture: how bland are our lives that we would rather spend an hour watching a young family changing diapers than deal with our spouses and children?
Changing. Diapers.
Or climbing a tree on some remote island just so you don't have to face the challenges of being "voted off"? Or racing through the streets of Rome looking for a clue to the next destination? Or...
It's amazingly sick and twisted, to my mind at any rate, that the best that TV networks across the spectrum can present to us is someone else's life.
They protest that it's compelling drama, that these are real people, and that they are cheap and easy shows to make.
Until you realize they are as scripted as soap operas or even bad talk shows like Jerry Springer. And then the illusion, the same illusion that drives pro wrestling and game shows, vaporizes. Reality sets in, and you realize that you've been hoodwinked into watching one long commercial.
There was one reality show that I not only liked, but watched obsessively: Mad Mad House. (episodes here)
Here was not only a parody of reality TV done right, it was an actual reality show. Yes, it was scripted, to be sure, but here's the thing: there were no heroics, no safety nets. Real people, a cross-section of "average Americans" were forced not to deal with their shortcomings in terms of being overweight or out of shape or less than perfect.
No, they were exposed to an entire new spectrum of lifestyles: naturism, voodoo, witchcraft, primitivism, and even vampirism.
It was "Fear Factor" but without the ick factor. And there was no audience selection, or "democratic" booting out. Your hosts were your prosecutors, judges, and jury, as well as often your defense attorneys.
None of this "AT&T helped select the winner." There were few if any product placements. It was about finding the person with the most open mind...who could also be tough enough to survive all the backstabbing antics behind them.
And frankly, it was compelling. I like watching uncomfortable people deal with a situation that, while not threatening or harmful, forces them out of their cozy little superiority complices and into dealing with other people as equals.
America needs to learn that lesson over and over again.
Jon and Kate Gosselin's marital misery sent their TV show soaring off the charts Monday night.
But before they start enjoying themselves too much, they might also want to consider this: If their marriage slides under the bus, it will very likely take their TV show with it and they will have to find another job.
Besides raising eight kids.
Yea. The cynic in me says ol' John here (I have never watched the show, but I feel stupid calling him by his last name) banged his little hottie with dollar signs lighting up his eyes.
In fact, it wouldn't surprise me to find out that the Discovery networks actively sought out a woman who could, um, be a co-respondent in the divorce.
In the old days, this used to be called "procurement". Now it's called "marketing".
Ratings for this first episode were more than double the final episode of last season.
So the Gosselins took a page out of the Loud family scrapbook.
Undoubtedly, they bit off more than they could chew. I'm sure the novelty of raising sextuplets (are you listening, Octomom?) and two other children wore off quickly, but the bucks rolled in, even as the audience wore thinner.
But this entire episode speaks to American culture: how bland are our lives that we would rather spend an hour watching a young family changing diapers than deal with our spouses and children?
Changing. Diapers.
Or climbing a tree on some remote island just so you don't have to face the challenges of being "voted off"? Or racing through the streets of Rome looking for a clue to the next destination? Or...
It's amazingly sick and twisted, to my mind at any rate, that the best that TV networks across the spectrum can present to us is someone else's life.
They protest that it's compelling drama, that these are real people, and that they are cheap and easy shows to make.
Until you realize they are as scripted as soap operas or even bad talk shows like Jerry Springer. And then the illusion, the same illusion that drives pro wrestling and game shows, vaporizes. Reality sets in, and you realize that you've been hoodwinked into watching one long commercial.
There was one reality show that I not only liked, but watched obsessively: Mad Mad House. (episodes here)
Here was not only a parody of reality TV done right, it was an actual reality show. Yes, it was scripted, to be sure, but here's the thing: there were no heroics, no safety nets. Real people, a cross-section of "average Americans" were forced not to deal with their shortcomings in terms of being overweight or out of shape or less than perfect.
No, they were exposed to an entire new spectrum of lifestyles: naturism, voodoo, witchcraft, primitivism, and even vampirism.
It was "Fear Factor" but without the ick factor. And there was no audience selection, or "democratic" booting out. Your hosts were your prosecutors, judges, and jury, as well as often your defense attorneys.
None of this "AT&T helped select the winner." There were few if any product placements. It was about finding the person with the most open mind...who could also be tough enough to survive all the backstabbing antics behind them.
And frankly, it was compelling. I like watching uncomfortable people deal with a situation that, while not threatening or harmful, forces them out of their cozy little superiority complices and into dealing with other people as equals.
America needs to learn that lesson over and over again.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Troubling Blind Spot
The Bush administration's singleminded focus on Iraq blinded it to some pretty ugly things going on in other parts of the world.
Translation: When John Bolton warns George Bush you're doing it wrong, U R Doin It Rong!
Remember this gem of a meme?
Odds are you won't hear a peep from the right about Bush's complicity in the further development of nuclear arms by the North (absent Bolton's now-year-old OpEd), rather than correctly point out that, of the "Axis of Evil", only Korea had any hopes of developing a nuclear armament program AND legitimate targets to lob them at.
Means, motive, opportunity, the classic tripod on which to hang a conviction in a criminal case apparently holds no weight in the realm of the right wing. We striked out at the country with the least means, the lesser motive, and practically zero opportunity and rattled sabres at the country with slightly more means, slightly more motive, but even less opportunity.
And did nothing about the guy in the ski mask holding a gun at the bank teller window with an open sack.
Smart. Very smart.
What could have been handled six years ago is now looming as a pandemic of pandemonia. The same logic used to invade Iraq could just as easily have been applied to Korea, all the way to the feeble excuse of bringing an international criminal to justice and freeing his citizenry.
Indeed, that charge more applied to Kim Jong Il than to Saddam Hussein. Hussein, at least, never starved his own people, despite gassing large numbers of them.
But now we have what we have, as Strindberg so aptly put it.
North Korea has fired two more missiles, hours after the UN Security Council unanimously condemned its nuclear test, South Korean reports say.
The Communist state fired two short-range missiles off an east-coast base, South Korea's Yonhap news agency reported, citing an official.
The move came as UN diplomats began work on a resolution to punish North Korea for its underground nuclear test.
Translation: When John Bolton warns George Bush you're doing it wrong, U R Doin It Rong!
In 2002, our intelligence community definitively judged that the regime was working on an industrial-scale enrichment program. Since then we have little new information, reducing the confidence level, but not changing the substantive conclusion, that the North Koreans "have and continue to operate a uranium enrichment program" – as Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell testified in February.
For the Bush administration, however, the lack of new data is an excuse to ignore the entire issue of uranium.
On plutonium, the administration seems content to seek vague statements from the North that "account" for the amount of this fissile material we think it has extracted from its Yongbyon reactor's spent fuel rods over the years. Administration briefings reveal little or no interest in how many plutonium weapons exist; whether there are other plutonium-related facilities hidden in North Korea's vast complex of underground facilities; and what the North's weapons-manufacturing capabilities are.
Proliferation? Perhaps the Bush administration's most wondrous act of magic is to make that problem disappear. The State Department argues that North Korea may have proliferated in the past, but that's all behind us. How do we know? The North Koreans have told us.
Remember this gem of a meme?
Under the final terms of the Agreed Framework approved in October of 1994, Clinton agreed to provide the "Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea" (DPRK) with two light water nuclear reactors and a massive allotment of oil. The U.S. agreed to ship 500,000 metric tons of oil annually in response to the North's pretense that the energy-starved backwater had developed the nuclear facility to generate power. These shipments have cost taxpayers more than $800 million to date - a bargain compared with the $6 billion spent on constructing the nuclear reactors, which now empower North Korea to produce 100 nuclear bombs each year.
All these measures failed to quell the North's atom-lust.
Odds are you won't hear a peep from the right about Bush's complicity in the further development of nuclear arms by the North (absent Bolton's now-year-old OpEd), rather than correctly point out that, of the "Axis of Evil", only Korea had any hopes of developing a nuclear armament program AND legitimate targets to lob them at.
Means, motive, opportunity, the classic tripod on which to hang a conviction in a criminal case apparently holds no weight in the realm of the right wing. We striked out at the country with the least means, the lesser motive, and practically zero opportunity and rattled sabres at the country with slightly more means, slightly more motive, but even less opportunity.
And did nothing about the guy in the ski mask holding a gun at the bank teller window with an open sack.
Smart. Very smart.
What could have been handled six years ago is now looming as a pandemic of pandemonia. The same logic used to invade Iraq could just as easily have been applied to Korea, all the way to the feeble excuse of bringing an international criminal to justice and freeing his citizenry.
Indeed, that charge more applied to Kim Jong Il than to Saddam Hussein. Hussein, at least, never starved his own people, despite gassing large numbers of them.
But now we have what we have, as Strindberg so aptly put it.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Friday, May 22, 2009
Nobody Asked Me, But...
1) I'm not sure if Californians realize this is the 21st century? On the other hand, it's fun watching the Armageddon of the conservative mantra of "tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts."
2) Once again, Americans prove they hate Teh Gay.
3) I don't follow Idol. I feel it is to the American psyche what McDonald's is to the American circulatory system: poison. However, every account I've read of this season's finale point out that Lambert was hands down the better performer, better singer, and bigger star. The second I heard that there were photos of Lambert kissing other men, I knew he was doomed, particularly against a married college student. Based on his reaction to the news, I suspect he knew it beforehand as well.
We Americans like our gays closeted, so we can refer to them as "flamboyant" (Lambert's nickname, indeed, was "Glambert"), like Liberace. Or we like them hidden behind an unquestionable veil of masculinity, like Rock Hudson. There are precious few gay men who don't fit either of these (Anderson Cooper comes to mind as the exception).
4) I don't often pray, but please, Lord, let Dick Cheney keep flapping his gums, reminding Americans that he was solely responsible for the quagmire we are in.
5) I don't know that this is such a good idea...
6) Bush's popularity was so bad that he dragged his entire party down with him.
7) Porn Day on YouTube?
8) Now this is Olympic training I can get behind. And in front of. And under. And sort of sideways lying across the bed.
9) Obstructive tactics be damned!
10) Have a happy and safe Memorial Day weekend, everyone!
2) Once again, Americans prove they hate Teh Gay.
3) I don't follow Idol. I feel it is to the American psyche what McDonald's is to the American circulatory system: poison. However, every account I've read of this season's finale point out that Lambert was hands down the better performer, better singer, and bigger star. The second I heard that there were photos of Lambert kissing other men, I knew he was doomed, particularly against a married college student. Based on his reaction to the news, I suspect he knew it beforehand as well.
We Americans like our gays closeted, so we can refer to them as "flamboyant" (Lambert's nickname, indeed, was "Glambert"), like Liberace. Or we like them hidden behind an unquestionable veil of masculinity, like Rock Hudson. There are precious few gay men who don't fit either of these (Anderson Cooper comes to mind as the exception).
4) I don't often pray, but please, Lord, let Dick Cheney keep flapping his gums, reminding Americans that he was solely responsible for the quagmire we are in.
5) I don't know that this is such a good idea...
6) Bush's popularity was so bad that he dragged his entire party down with him.
7) Porn Day on YouTube?
8) Now this is Olympic training I can get behind. And in front of. And under. And sort of sideways lying across the bed.
9) Obstructive tactics be damned!
10) Have a happy and safe Memorial Day weekend, everyone!
Thursday, May 21, 2009
WIN FOR OBAMA!!!!!
It feels good to write that after hearing about how for eight years, Bush kept us safe from terrorists, and then having it turn out that, welllllll....it was police work that saved the day, even if the threat was hardly credible to begin with:
The "informant" in question was a Sunni Muslim who was working with the FBI in exhcange.
I'm betting he was not tortured.
After the Sears Tower plot of 2006 was exposed, we were told time and time again about how effective the Bush administration had been in foiling terror attacks.
This time?
So it was good old fashioned police work...none of this military-industrial-covert espionage crap that Bush tried to ram down our throats. Identify a plot and work to uncover the breadth and depth of it, then shut it down and roll up the cells.
Reminds me of the good old safe days of the Clinton administration with Janet Reno!
And should serve as a reminder of the cynical gloating of the Bushies, who treated the most insignificant terror plot revelation as a two-year child who just took a dump would expose it to his mom.
"Lookit! Lookit what I did!"
Four men were arrested Wednesday night in what the authorities said was a plot to bomb two synagogues in the Bronx and shoot down military planes at an Air National Guard base in Newburgh, N.Y.
The men, all of whom live in Newburgh, about 60 miles north of New York City, were arrested around 9 p.m. after planting what they believed to be bombs in cars outside the Riverdale Temple and the nearby Riverdale Jewish Center, officials said. But the men did not know the bombs, obtained with the help of an informant for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, were fake.
The "informant" in question was a Sunni Muslim who was working with the FBI in exhcange.
I'm betting he was not tortured.
After the Sears Tower plot of 2006 was exposed, we were told time and time again about how effective the Bush administration had been in foiling terror attacks.
This time?
Around 9 p.m., a law enforcement official said an 18-wheel New York Police Department vehicle blocked the suspects’ black sport utility vehicle at 237th Street and Riverdale Avenue. Another armored vehicle arrived and officers from the department’s Emergency Service Unit took the men out of the truck and handcuffed them.
After the plot was broken up, the team of uniformed officers took the suspects away.
So it was good old fashioned police work...none of this military-industrial-covert espionage crap that Bush tried to ram down our throats. Identify a plot and work to uncover the breadth and depth of it, then shut it down and roll up the cells.
Reminds me of the good old safe days of the Clinton administration with Janet Reno!
And should serve as a reminder of the cynical gloating of the Bushies, who treated the most insignificant terror plot revelation as a two-year child who just took a dump would expose it to his mom.
"Lookit! Lookit what I did!"
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Fuel Me Once, Shame On You
This was the best they could do?
Oh brother!
So many problems in this nation could be solved if we actually broke our addiction to oil (perhaps the one truth Bush spoke in eight years). Right now, we are spending more in military aid and supporting troops in the Middle East than the net value of all the crude we are getting from there.
And the best step we could take at this time is to, you know, tweak things a little?
Here's what should have been done:
1) Raise the CAFE standards to 40 mpg. The 2016 time table is fine, for what it is, but at 35.5 mpg Detroit can meet that with minimal disruption. Since Detroit has been relying on the US government for twenty years as a bailout plan, perhaps a little discomfort for them will go a long way.
2) Remove the exemption for light trucks and SUVs. Factor them in as a fleet on their own right. In fact, I'd go one step further and insist these be reclassified as trucks, subject to the rules of the road and insurance and licensing requirements that truckers have to meet (including bonding).
We can, of course, offer some form of assistance to people whom this might impact adversely, like small farmers or poor people with large families who absolutely must have an SUV, minivan, or pickup truck, but lets face facts: any asshole who drives a Hummer to Starbucks because of that three degree incline on the entrance ramp at the mall parking lot will likely grasp with both hands the right to be called a "trucker". We can even throw in a hat.
This is a legtimate beef, by the way. SUVs and pickups use more gas, cause more wear and tear on the nation's infrastructure and are responsible for more fatalities and injuries than cars.
Yes, I'm aware of the apparent rise in fatalities when automakers increase their car fleet, but look at those accidents more closely.
First, automakers in an attempt to cut corners make vital safety components out of cheaper material, rather than re-engineer a car for safety. Second, many of those fatalities occured in accidents with an SUV or pick up!
Substantially reduce the number of those on the road, and auto fatalities will decline permanently. It's a simple matter of physics. When two masses collide, the smaller mass usually bears the brunt of the damage.
Of course, looking at how people who use four wheel drive vehicles behave, apparently, they believe the laws of physics no longer apply to them.
This is much like the steroids argument: if you want to make it a fair game, then take the supercharged ubersized vehicles off the road.
The Obama administration's sweeping fuel-economy and emissions initiative announced Tuesday reopens a fierce debate over tradeoffs between fuel economy and auto safety.
[...]The plan requires automakers to sell cars that average 35.5 miles-per-gallon by 2016, a little more and a lot sooner than current law. It has been heralded as a brilliant solution to the nettlesome mix of problems related to fuel consumption and greenhouse-gas emissions.
Oh brother!
So many problems in this nation could be solved if we actually broke our addiction to oil (perhaps the one truth Bush spoke in eight years). Right now, we are spending more in military aid and supporting troops in the Middle East than the net value of all the crude we are getting from there.
And the best step we could take at this time is to, you know, tweak things a little?
Here's what should have been done:
1) Raise the CAFE standards to 40 mpg. The 2016 time table is fine, for what it is, but at 35.5 mpg Detroit can meet that with minimal disruption. Since Detroit has been relying on the US government for twenty years as a bailout plan, perhaps a little discomfort for them will go a long way.
2) Remove the exemption for light trucks and SUVs. Factor them in as a fleet on their own right. In fact, I'd go one step further and insist these be reclassified as trucks, subject to the rules of the road and insurance and licensing requirements that truckers have to meet (including bonding).
We can, of course, offer some form of assistance to people whom this might impact adversely, like small farmers or poor people with large families who absolutely must have an SUV, minivan, or pickup truck, but lets face facts: any asshole who drives a Hummer to Starbucks because of that three degree incline on the entrance ramp at the mall parking lot will likely grasp with both hands the right to be called a "trucker". We can even throw in a hat.
This is a legtimate beef, by the way. SUVs and pickups use more gas, cause more wear and tear on the nation's infrastructure and are responsible for more fatalities and injuries than cars.
Yes, I'm aware of the apparent rise in fatalities when automakers increase their car fleet, but look at those accidents more closely.
First, automakers in an attempt to cut corners make vital safety components out of cheaper material, rather than re-engineer a car for safety. Second, many of those fatalities occured in accidents with an SUV or pick up!
Substantially reduce the number of those on the road, and auto fatalities will decline permanently. It's a simple matter of physics. When two masses collide, the smaller mass usually bears the brunt of the damage.
Of course, looking at how people who use four wheel drive vehicles behave, apparently, they believe the laws of physics no longer apply to them.
This is much like the steroids argument: if you want to make it a fair game, then take the supercharged ubersized vehicles off the road.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
On The Upswing
I feel pretty good today.
I look to the future, and while things could easily slip back into darkness, things are looking brighter.
The economy seems to have bottomed out, altho we'll still see disturbing numbers of lay-offs through the summer. Housing starts are trending down, but that's more because people are sitting tight and refinancing their existing homes. Remember, housing starts have been artificially inflated for almost a decade now. We're at levels we should have been historically.
Even the stock markets seem to have incorporated and digested the shitty news and are primed to tick upwards regularly.
On the political front, I see an evolution in America. Obama's election was supposed to herald change, and indeed, it will. Maybe not as fast as many of us would like, but here's the thing: we have to trust that he meant what he said when he said he would be an agent of change.
Sometimes, to make a change, you have to fix what's broken first, stabilize that, and then you can build.
But it's culturally I see the greatest and most positive changes to come. Incrementally, to be sure, but change has a funny way of evolving in fits and starts. If you plant a hundred seeds, maybe eighty of them germinate and maybe fifty of those outlast the birds and worms. You can't predict where you'll have flowers, only that they'll grow out of some of the dirt.
If a future me was to come back in time and report that we needed to endure the Bush administration in order to truly advance the cause of humanity, that the past eight years were the dying gasps of a failed philosophy and mind-set, it would hardly surprise me.
Life is like that: change happens over the entrenched ideologies and agendas of the powered few. They'll try to clamp it down, then when the top blows off the boiling pot, get more aggressive in effecting the status quo.
And then they end up fighting a rear guard action, trying to maintain scraps and scrapes of what their power structure was. I don't expect conservativism to go away, not even quietly, but I do expect the noise level to decrease significantly as the changes we make turn up the signal, wipe out the noise.
We'll hear echoes of them down the corridors of time. Hell, one day a conservative will be elected President yet again, but like Reagan and Bush before him, he or she will have to deal with a changed world. Reagan had to unlearn to hate Social Security. Bush had to unlearn to hate equality.
The next conservative President will have to unlearn his(her) hatred of national healthcare and gay rights.
Time moves forward, not backward, and it is in this vein that we see the triumph of progress.
I look to the future, and while things could easily slip back into darkness, things are looking brighter.
The economy seems to have bottomed out, altho we'll still see disturbing numbers of lay-offs through the summer. Housing starts are trending down, but that's more because people are sitting tight and refinancing their existing homes. Remember, housing starts have been artificially inflated for almost a decade now. We're at levels we should have been historically.
Even the stock markets seem to have incorporated and digested the shitty news and are primed to tick upwards regularly.
On the political front, I see an evolution in America. Obama's election was supposed to herald change, and indeed, it will. Maybe not as fast as many of us would like, but here's the thing: we have to trust that he meant what he said when he said he would be an agent of change.
Sometimes, to make a change, you have to fix what's broken first, stabilize that, and then you can build.
But it's culturally I see the greatest and most positive changes to come. Incrementally, to be sure, but change has a funny way of evolving in fits and starts. If you plant a hundred seeds, maybe eighty of them germinate and maybe fifty of those outlast the birds and worms. You can't predict where you'll have flowers, only that they'll grow out of some of the dirt.
If a future me was to come back in time and report that we needed to endure the Bush administration in order to truly advance the cause of humanity, that the past eight years were the dying gasps of a failed philosophy and mind-set, it would hardly surprise me.
Life is like that: change happens over the entrenched ideologies and agendas of the powered few. They'll try to clamp it down, then when the top blows off the boiling pot, get more aggressive in effecting the status quo.
And then they end up fighting a rear guard action, trying to maintain scraps and scrapes of what their power structure was. I don't expect conservativism to go away, not even quietly, but I do expect the noise level to decrease significantly as the changes we make turn up the signal, wipe out the noise.
We'll hear echoes of them down the corridors of time. Hell, one day a conservative will be elected President yet again, but like Reagan and Bush before him, he or she will have to deal with a changed world. Reagan had to unlearn to hate Social Security. Bush had to unlearn to hate equality.
The next conservative President will have to unlearn his(her) hatred of national healthcare and gay rights.
Time moves forward, not backward, and it is in this vein that we see the triumph of progress.
Monday, May 18, 2009
Hat In Hand
No, not for me. I'm fine and doing well, and have enough.
No, I'm asking for a friend. Free Speech TV.
I'm always going on and on about the mainstream media and how we have to live with their filters.
Well, here's a station that is NOT filtered, that carries Amy Goodman and Laura Flanders AND Greg Palast. Free Speech carries programming about the weaponization of the space over your head to the tragedy of mining accidents in Kentucky.
You say you want a revolution? How about putting down a few bucks, doesn't have to be much, on that very thing? How about turning your back on CNN and MSNBC and especially Fox News, and spending some time with Free Speech TV, and you'll see why it is vitally important to bring this programming to the people.
Please. Give now.
And if you don't get the channel, call your cable provider and ask for it.
Or switch to DISH Network, one of the last surviving independent television providers on the planet.
No, I'm asking for a friend. Free Speech TV.
I'm always going on and on about the mainstream media and how we have to live with their filters.
Well, here's a station that is NOT filtered, that carries Amy Goodman and Laura Flanders AND Greg Palast. Free Speech carries programming about the weaponization of the space over your head to the tragedy of mining accidents in Kentucky.
You say you want a revolution? How about putting down a few bucks, doesn't have to be much, on that very thing? How about turning your back on CNN and MSNBC and especially Fox News, and spending some time with Free Speech TV, and you'll see why it is vitally important to bring this programming to the people.
Please. Give now.
And if you don't get the channel, call your cable provider and ask for it.
Or switch to DISH Network, one of the last surviving independent television providers on the planet.
Syncopation
The Twitterpated rabble on the right wing of this nation have suddenly decided that liberals are falling out of love with Barack Obama:
Unlike, of course, conservatives who marched lockstep with Bush like lemmings until suddenly last November 5, they uncovered evidence that Bush was not really conservative and was in fact the pre-Obama Barack Obama.
We on the left are a cantankerous bunch, to be sure, which means, to periphrase Barnum, you can't fool all of the peoples all of the time. For the right, apparently you can not only fool all the of the peoples all of the time, but you can make them smile and ask for more.
After making a case that liberals will demand a "liberal Scalia" as payback for his backpedalling on issues like torture and troop withdrawal, Politico goes on to dump this load of shit on the blogosphere:
Right. Because as we all know, liberal groups will shoot themselves to spite themselves.
If the past eight years have taught liberals, at least thinking liberals anything, it's that lockstep ideologues are unlikely to be satisfied with very much for very long and the Bush administration policy of appeasement might have won him a second term, but it did not win him a successful administration.
Obama himself said it best at Notre Dame, albeit it on a different topic:
Politico, please...stop characterizing us on the left. You think you know us, but you know nothing.
Barely four months into his presidency, Obama is confronting growing dissatisfaction among members of his liberal base, who feel spurned by a series of his early decisions on issues ranging from guns to torture to immigration to gay rights.
The list got longer last week as Obama reversed his earlier decision to release photos of detainees abused in U.S. military custody and announced plans to try some terror suspects before military commissions – though on the campaign trail he railed against earlier versions of the tribunals.
A few, like MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, have even hurled the left’s ultimate epithet – suggesting that Obama’s turning into George W. Bush.
Unlike, of course, conservatives who marched lockstep with Bush like lemmings until suddenly last November 5, they uncovered evidence that Bush was not really conservative and was in fact the pre-Obama Barack Obama.
We on the left are a cantankerous bunch, to be sure, which means, to periphrase Barnum, you can't fool all of the peoples all of the time. For the right, apparently you can not only fool all the of the peoples all of the time, but you can make them smile and ask for more.
After making a case that liberals will demand a "liberal Scalia" as payback for his backpedalling on issues like torture and troop withdrawal, Politico goes on to dump this load of shit on the blogosphere:
Brittain said such a [centrist] nominee would be confirmed – but liberal groups would probably be slow to respond to future calls for help from Obama. “When he went to press the button next time to rally up people, I think there would still be a lingering issue,” Brittain said.
Right. Because as we all know, liberal groups will shoot themselves to spite themselves.
If the past eight years have taught liberals, at least thinking liberals anything, it's that lockstep ideologues are unlikely to be satisfied with very much for very long and the Bush administration policy of appeasement might have won him a second term, but it did not win him a successful administration.
Obama himself said it best at Notre Dame, albeit it on a different topic:
“Each side will continue to make its case to the public with passion and conviction,” he said. “But surely we can do so without reducing those with differing views to caricature.”
Politico, please...stop characterizing us on the left. You think you know us, but you know nothing.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Joke For Today
The IRS decides to audit Morris, and summons him to the IRS office, and he's not surprised when Morris shows up with his attorney.
The auditor says, 'Well, sir, you have an extravagant lifestyle and no full-time employment which you explain by saying that you win money gambling. I'm not sure the IRS finds that believable.'
'I'm a great gambler and I can prove it,' says Morris. 'How about a demonstration?'
The auditor thinks for a moment and says, 'Okay. Go ahead.' Morris says, 'I'll bet you a thousand dollars that I can bite my own eye.'
The auditor thinks a moment and says, 'It's a bet.'
Morris removes his glass eye and bites it. The auditor's jaw drops. Morris says, 'Now, I'll bet you two thousand dollars that I can bite my other eye.'
Now, the auditor can tell Morris isn't blind, so he takes the bet - but Morris removes his dentures and bites his good eye with them!
The stunned auditor now realizes he has wagered and lost three grand with Morris's attorney as a witness. He starts to get nervous.
'Want to go double or nothing?' Morris asks. 'I'll bet you six thousand!dollars that I can stand on one side of your desk and pee into that wastebasket on the other side and never get a drop anywhere in between.'
The auditor, twice burned, is cautious now, but he looks carefully and decides there's no way this guy could possibly manage that stunt, so he agrees again.
Morris stands beside the desk and unzips his pants, but although he strains mightily, he can't make the stream reach the wastebasket on the other side, so he pretty much urinates all over the auditor's
desk.
The auditor leaps with joy, realizing that he has just cancelled a major loss. But Morris's attorney moans and puts his head in his hands. 'Are you!okay?' the auditor asks.
'Not really,' says the attorney. 'This morning, when Morris told me he'd been summoned for an audit, he bet me twenty-five thousand dollars that he could come in here and piss all over your desk and not only that but you'd be happy about it!'
The auditor says, 'Well, sir, you have an extravagant lifestyle and no full-time employment which you explain by saying that you win money gambling. I'm not sure the IRS finds that believable.'
'I'm a great gambler and I can prove it,' says Morris. 'How about a demonstration?'
The auditor thinks for a moment and says, 'Okay. Go ahead.' Morris says, 'I'll bet you a thousand dollars that I can bite my own eye.'
The auditor thinks a moment and says, 'It's a bet.'
Morris removes his glass eye and bites it. The auditor's jaw drops. Morris says, 'Now, I'll bet you two thousand dollars that I can bite my other eye.'
Now, the auditor can tell Morris isn't blind, so he takes the bet - but Morris removes his dentures and bites his good eye with them!
The stunned auditor now realizes he has wagered and lost three grand with Morris's attorney as a witness. He starts to get nervous.
'Want to go double or nothing?' Morris asks. 'I'll bet you six thousand!dollars that I can stand on one side of your desk and pee into that wastebasket on the other side and never get a drop anywhere in between.'
The auditor, twice burned, is cautious now, but he looks carefully and decides there's no way this guy could possibly manage that stunt, so he agrees again.
Morris stands beside the desk and unzips his pants, but although he strains mightily, he can't make the stream reach the wastebasket on the other side, so he pretty much urinates all over the auditor's
desk.
The auditor leaps with joy, realizing that he has just cancelled a major loss. But Morris's attorney moans and puts his head in his hands. 'Are you!okay?' the auditor asks.
'Not really,' says the attorney. 'This morning, when Morris told me he'd been summoned for an audit, he bet me twenty-five thousand dollars that he could come in here and piss all over your desk and not only that but you'd be happy about it!'
Nobody Asked Me, But...
1) The rain in Spain falls mainly on cocaine.
2) Apparently, Bob Graham has Nancy Pelosi's back, while her minion, Steny Hoyer, has his knife out.
3) No wonder the GOP opposes the stimulus package: it provides Americans with low-wage underpaying jobs without benefits.
4) Hey, Conservatives! Going Galt? Need a place to go on vacation free from US Government regulation? I have just the place:
Somalia!
5) Good thing they're not having more sex or the conservatives might be upset!
6) It's not often you'll see this as a headline: "468 Year Old Man Arrested"
7) If capitalism were truly free market, this would happen a LOT more frequently.
8) On the one hand, this story is fascinating. On the other, it sounds like a Roger Corman movie.
9) The Governator is auctioning off parts of his state. I'd say "Film at 11," but I suspect he's already moved to copyright that.
10) I wonder if old white men in the White House catch some sort of dementia?
2) Apparently, Bob Graham has Nancy Pelosi's back, while her minion, Steny Hoyer, has his knife out.
3) No wonder the GOP opposes the stimulus package: it provides Americans with low-wage underpaying jobs without benefits.
4) Hey, Conservatives! Going Galt? Need a place to go on vacation free from US Government regulation? I have just the place:
Somalia!
5) Good thing they're not having more sex or the conservatives might be upset!
6) It's not often you'll see this as a headline: "468 Year Old Man Arrested"
7) If capitalism were truly free market, this would happen a LOT more frequently.
8) On the one hand, this story is fascinating. On the other, it sounds like a Roger Corman movie.
9) The Governator is auctioning off parts of his state. I'd say "Film at 11," but I suspect he's already moved to copyright that.
10) I wonder if old white men in the White House catch some sort of dementia?
Thursday, May 14, 2009
NEWS ALERT: Politician Tells The Truth
Oh President Obama...:
Here's how to fix that, sir.
Release the torture photos.
As if.
Look, Mr President, by diddling with this decision, you're allowing an opportunity for Al Qaaeda and other religious extremists (including the right-wing nutjobs in this country) to awfulize the photos, to give them mythic status and to talk to the un- and underinformed based solely on rumour and innuendo.
As for our troops in harm's way, well, most of them shouldn't even have been there in the first place, and I think it's incumbent on the people whose boots are on the ground to make amends. My understanding is, ever since the Abu Ghraib scandal broke, that's precisely what some troops have done. Those troops will not be in harm's way.
Neither will troops who have legitimate cause to be in country, such as the ones in Afghanistan who are actively hunting down Taliban and Al Qaeda forces who would re-enslave the people of that nation. Those folks will be grateful, and my suspicion is they'll have a more flexible empathy for the position American troops have been put in by your predecessor.
Yes, some troops WILL face more violence, of that you can be sure, but likely those inflamed tensions would have used any spark to light.
Meanwhile, our history shows that the American public is least served by the administration that hides and cowers behind the skirts of public opinion.
Courageous behavior, sir, is lacking in your administration. It's time you man up (maybe put Hillary in charge of this, if you don't have the stones) and take responsibility for what this nation has done to innocent civilians from other countries.
That's the American way.
President Barack Obama on Wednesday told graduates at Arizona State University that he had not done enough in his life to automatically receive an honorary degree.
Here's how to fix that, sir.
Release the torture photos.
WASHINGTON — President Obama said Wednesday that he would fight to prevent the release of photographs documenting abuse of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan by United States military personnel, reversing his position on the issue after commanders warned that the images could set off a deadly backlash against American troops.
The administration said last month that it would not oppose the release of the pictures, but Mr. Obama changed his mind after seeing the photographs and getting warnings from top Pentagon officials that the images, taken from the early years of the wars, would “further inflame anti-American opinion” and endanger troops in two war zones.
As if.
Look, Mr President, by diddling with this decision, you're allowing an opportunity for Al Qaaeda and other religious extremists (including the right-wing nutjobs in this country) to awfulize the photos, to give them mythic status and to talk to the un- and underinformed based solely on rumour and innuendo.
As for our troops in harm's way, well, most of them shouldn't even have been there in the first place, and I think it's incumbent on the people whose boots are on the ground to make amends. My understanding is, ever since the Abu Ghraib scandal broke, that's precisely what some troops have done. Those troops will not be in harm's way.
Neither will troops who have legitimate cause to be in country, such as the ones in Afghanistan who are actively hunting down Taliban and Al Qaeda forces who would re-enslave the people of that nation. Those folks will be grateful, and my suspicion is they'll have a more flexible empathy for the position American troops have been put in by your predecessor.
Yes, some troops WILL face more violence, of that you can be sure, but likely those inflamed tensions would have used any spark to light.
Meanwhile, our history shows that the American public is least served by the administration that hides and cowers behind the skirts of public opinion.
Courageous behavior, sir, is lacking in your administration. It's time you man up (maybe put Hillary in charge of this, if you don't have the stones) and take responsibility for what this nation has done to innocent civilians from other countries.
That's the American way.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Note To Dead Old White Guy
You had your chance, you killed 3,000 Americans on American soil and another 5,000 in unnecessary wars. Please go away:
"Legacy"...funny word that. No doubt you were privvy to the contents of the August 6, 2001 PDB. Maybe you recall the bloody title?
Nothing says "safe" like ignoring a warning!
Did anyone else die in terror attacks on American soil since September 11? Frankly no. But no one can know if that's due to your *koffkoff* tireless efforts, or merely because Al Qaeda et al shot their wad on 9/11 and it took them years to arm up again.
Indeed, I'd absolutely lay money on the latter because of the posturing you guys did. Keeping in touch with your inner adolescence, you and your Bush administration cronies acted like a bunch of pre-teen hoodlums outside the polar bear enclave at the zoo, teasing and harassing the animals, knowing full well that the next person in the cage...you know, the adults?...would have to deal with an angry bear.
Yea. Brave. That pretty much sums up the level of courage you and Bush the Immature showed in the past eight years.
Dick, and I call you that because it's your name and not necessarily because I think it describes you to a T, your heart stopped decades ago. Follow suit, mmmmmmmmmmmmmK?
Former Vice President Dick Cheney may have largely stayed under the radar during his time in the Bush administration, but he is not going softly into that good night, seemingly launching a one-man campaign to fight for his legacy and -- in his view -- the safety of the nation.
"Legacy"...funny word that. No doubt you were privvy to the contents of the August 6, 2001 PDB. Maybe you recall the bloody title?
Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.
Nothing says "safe" like ignoring a warning!Did anyone else die in terror attacks on American soil since September 11? Frankly no. But no one can know if that's due to your *koffkoff* tireless efforts, or merely because Al Qaeda et al shot their wad on 9/11 and it took them years to arm up again.
Indeed, I'd absolutely lay money on the latter because of the posturing you guys did. Keeping in touch with your inner adolescence, you and your Bush administration cronies acted like a bunch of pre-teen hoodlums outside the polar bear enclave at the zoo, teasing and harassing the animals, knowing full well that the next person in the cage...you know, the adults?...would have to deal with an angry bear.
Yea. Brave. That pretty much sums up the level of courage you and Bush the Immature showed in the past eight years.
Dick, and I call you that because it's your name and not necessarily because I think it describes you to a T, your heart stopped decades ago. Follow suit, mmmmmmmmmmmmmK?
Subscribe to:
Comment Feed (RSS)
Posts
