And I hate to say, I've nothing for you, tonight. I picked up a head cold, back in Tennessee, and I've been working hard at getting over it.
In an hour, I'm off to a new year's eve party- I guess the first lawsuits from the SciFi channel will be coming in, by the time I get back.
We'll meet again, come the new year.
DECEMBER 29, 2005
HOME FROM THE RED STATES...
And danged glad... As much as I would like to believe those who pontificate that the whole red state/blue state divide is illusory, I just can't. I was down in Tennessee and Alabama for just about three days, and, well, it's odd...
The more urban areas could very well be shopping strips in New Jersey- long strips of chain giants (Best Buy, Barnes & Noble, etc.) When you visited these stores, you noticed something in the speech of the younger generation- the southern accent is dying away (I can only guess it's over-exposure to television, that's causing this.) But when you leave the more urbanized areas, the southern landscape is occasionally one of blight that is every bit as shocking as that which one sees in the outer districts of Washington, DC.
Just about every town above a few thousand inhabitants boasts a Super Wal-Mart (usually two or more miles away from current housing- apparently anticipating the growth of this new incarnation of the "company town."). If you look to your right, you see what was once the city center- boarded up and literally overgrown with weeds.
And these are the fortunate places.
Entering the more rural areas, you encounter towns that were so fragile to begin with, they were wiped out by the arrival of the Dollar General Store, which, apparently, is the only business, or for that matter, functioning institution, in many of these towns. Ramshackle, overgrown houses with rusted hulks in their yards, walkways terminating at the edge of a two-lane road. Things didn't look good, in these places- mid-south rural towns reminded me of what I saw in northern Mississippi, prior to the gambling boom, and the arrival of Mal-Mart...
In the northernmost counties in Mississippi, you would find towns where you didn't see anyone under the age of 50- everyone young had moved away, and the town was literally dying of old age. In these locales, everything seemed to be covered in dust, and perceptably sagged under the weight of its continued existence.
I saw this familiar, lethal malaise time and time again, during a five-hour family trip to the heart of Alabama, and again, these places, while dreadful, weren't the worst off.
Take a right on Coon Holler Road, and follow it to the stream, turn onto Route 5647643, and head into the hills- that's where the real spectacle awaits...
1970-era trailers, their once-vivid blue paint worn to a robin's egg blue by the predations of time. Window frames covered by bulging garbage bags, which barely serve to keep in the meagre heat. Doorstoops made of cinder blocks, front yards of gravel and faded, broken plastic toys. Rusted hulks of vehicles dotting the area, occasionally punctuated by the incongruous appearance of a 20-foot steel chemical tank, half-buried in the hillside. These simple, poverty-stricken people live a good 40 miles from the nearest grocery store, and their only transportation, in most cases, is a vehicle dilapidated to the point that the Beverly Hillbillies would turn their nose up at it.
And, zooming past, at 45 miles per hour, what did I see plastered, time and again, on the back windows of these barely-mobile wrecks?
"W04" stickers- naked as the light of day- their white, oval shape and red/white/black color scheme all too familiar
Now- let's look at this, analytically. I'll be fair- Tennessee, is, indeed, a red state, and went for Bush by a majority. However, the more urbanized areas of the state (as with all states, nationwide), were either blue, or trending blue. It's these rural, underdeveloped, poverty-stricken areas that are deep-red "Bush Country."
Now- believe it or not, I'm not gonna label these folks as "dumb, clueless rubes", or any such thing. The reason why these deeply disenfranchised areas flock to the republican banner, is because they had no choice. The democratic party abandoned them, decades ago.
Many years ago, during the days of the late Lee Atwater, the republican party was successful in divorcing economics from politics. They did this by meeting the prevailing trend towards economic social justice by labelling such as "tax and spend wastefulness", under their breath, they called policies aimed at providing medical care and food assistance to the poor as "creeping socialism."
Whenever a democrat, or progressive, or a liberal, raised their voices, saying that the policies of the Reagan era disproportionally favored the rich at the expense of the poor, they were accused of waging "class warfare". Much to their discredit, the democratic party never developed the backbone to counter this paper-thin attempt at red-baiting, and they succumbed.
When the democratic party abandoned their policies of economic social justice, these people- these poor, huddled masses on the rusted hillsides of deepest Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, West Virginia, and other states, were cast adrift, with no one to speak up for their most pressing needs.
The republicans saw a void, and filled it with an ideology centered around old time religion, guns, xenophobia, and a perverse corruption of libertarian thought that convinced these people that it was their lot in life to suffer- and anyone who told them different was a god-hating socialist homosexual left-handed black east-coast communist.
Now- As absurd as this might seem to some, one must consider- when one is deprived of means for social justice, they will latch on to whatever means left to them, to feel as if they have some control in their lives- even if their meager control is used against their own best interests. Just as the hostage in the grips of stockholm syndrome looks upon their captors as the beacon of virtue, so do these impoverished, forgotten poor feel a warm glow, when they take solace in the knowledge that, while their children will have to go without dinner for yet another night, and they can't get health insurance, because the local wal-mart only pays them for 30 hours a week (while they work at least 40 in unpaid overtime), they can rest assured that Tom DeLay, Bill Frist, and George Bush are "godly men", and all is well, come judgement day.
Howard Dean, during his erstwhile candidacy, promised to raise the political discourse among the southern states above the issues of "God, Guns, and Gays", and now that he's party chief, I'm hoping that I see this political strategy take form, as we head into the '06 elections.
It's going to be a long, hard slog- if it is at all successful. I have seen, during my brief visit to Bush Country, a populace engaged in a collective cult of imagined persecution from an undefined, and amorphous "other"- a vague, cartoonish chimera of a hated "liberalism" that they cannot define by any means other than what they've been fed by Fox "news."
Bush's policies are justified by a narcissistic libertarianism that boggles the mind:
Bush illegally spying on american citizens? Good- the only ones to fear such are terrorists. They can spy on me- I have nothing to hide.
Poverty growing by leaps and bounds? Fine and dandy. Poor people are poor, because they're lazy, or black- good riddance to them.
Tax cuts to huge corporations, and the ultra-rich? Good- Wal-Mart is a good, christian company- they'll pass it on to their employees (insert mental triple-take here). The rich folks are rich because they're godly folks, and will undoubtedly turn their tax cuts over to their churches, in full.
Fags? Ain't they all got aids, yet?
It's such a simplistic mindset, that I'm sometimes convinced that the only hope we progressives have is to engage in a mass-education drive using primitive line drawings to wise up those who are willing to vote for a party that relegates them to eternal poverty, just so long as they can rest assured that "them fags" can't get married, and the Walton family enjoys another 10 billion in profits, this coming year.
The solution? I have none- I just run a website.
DECEMBER 23, 2005
HAPPY HOLIDAYS!
And I'm off, to the deep, red south, to visit my family for the weekend, and lemme tell ya, if I'm not called aside for in-depth questioning, before boarding the flight, I'm gonna be somewhat dissapointed:
"What? I've put in thousands of hours into trashing Bush for the past three years, and this is all I get for my efforts- a friendly greeting, a pack of peanuts, and overpriced headphones?"
I want two stone-faced agents with earpieces questioning me in an anonymous room- and I want them to call me "Mister Anderson"- complete with that aussie drawl that made Hugo Weaving the icon that he is, today.
If there's a cybernetic bug inserted into my gut- well, we'll have to talk about it, later...
AS TO THE MUCH-BALLYHOOED "WAR ON CHRISTMAS"...
I'm sorry, but it just never existed. Just as the "rock and wrestling" phenomenon burnt out in the late 80's, after it turned out to be a strange mixture of hype, cocaine, and a misguided effort to salvage Mr T's acting career, the effort by Fox "news" to politicize a season of inclusiveness and universal joy has shattered.
And good riddance to it.
This politicization of Christmas has been remarkable, simply in the respect that it shows how craven an dastardly, the right is. Deprived of five months of much good to say about the failing Bush Bowl, they turn their sights on a sacrosanct commodity: The spirit of the season.
Regardless of where we all stand- right or left, christian, jew, muslim, buddhist, black, white- whatever labels we impose upon ourselves, the holiday season here in this country has been, until this year, a time at which we can all put aside our partisain differences, and just be.
Some of us enjoy the christmas spectacle- be we christians or not. The cold weather, the rush of the crowds, the overall spirit of the season. And that's cool- because we realize that this is part of being an american.
Some of us choose to ingore it, because, well, it's not part of our heritage, or our religious upbringing- and that's cool- because we realize that this is part of being an american.
Some celebrate the season- and others don't- but we're all together...
Until this year...
Bill O'Reilly, along with the usual suspects over at Fox "news" have decided that Bush's dissapointing poll numbers demand that they muddy the waters by claiming that there's a "War on Christmas"- not by muslim terrorists, but by "liberal secularists".
If you tuned only into Fox "News", you'd get the impression that folks like me were engaged in an all-out war against anyone who dares speak the word "christmas".
Bullshit.
I'm an agnostic/subgenius, and lemme detail my evening, as a liberal/secular "warrior against christmas":
After getting home from work, I went out to the local mini-mart, to pick up a bottle of coke, and a pack of peanuts. The store was run by Israeli jews, and I noticed that in their windows, there were no less than three banners asking that their patrons have a "Merry Christmas". I then went to the local dry-cleaning shop, which was run by a family of egyptian muslims, to pick up my coat- even though they had a koran displayed, right next to the cash register, they had a "merry christmas" banner on their front door.
Uhh- if Egyptian muslims and Israeli jews can unite upon the spirit of the season, why can't Fox "news"?
Leave it to the right wing to politicize one of the few bastions of harmony we still enjoy in this country.
THE BUSH BOWL IS SPYING ON AMERICANS, WITHOUT WARRANT.
Uhh- does this surprise you?
If you're expecting a ton of invective and links on this matter- forget it-I trust you know how to use google- you can find all the hyperbole you want.
Myself- what is this? The twelfth- no- fifteenth high crime that this administration has committed that is worthy of impeachment.
The Bush Bowl makes Papa Doc Duvalier look downright democratic...
I miss the blue dress...
If the fact that the Bush bowl has circumvented congressional and legal authority to violate our constituion shocks you, you haven't been paying attention.
I gotta go pack...
DECEMBER 19, 2005
BUSH RUINS YET ANOTHER SUNDAY
Okay, I'm not one of the parents who have had to greet the news of their children's deaths in the sands of Iraq, on the cusp of the holiday, but Bush just squatted and squeezed out a log on the one evening a week I look forward to.
He chose to pre-empt national television for yet another tired repitition of the same crap we've heard for the past three years. Now- I didn't mind this, when he did so four times over the past few months, in front of military audiences, only disrupting reruns of the Maury Povitch show with his vapid palaver.
But tonight, this tired re-run pre-empted one of the best shows on television, Family Guy. Just as I sat down for a half-hour of one of the few things that succeeds in making me laugh, I was confronted with this simian pile of feces, masquerading his failed crusade in Iraq, yet again, as a "noble cause".
Screw you, Mr Bush, and your lies. I wonder if your acting coach actually thinks adding those hand gestures to your performance makes it look more "real"- if he does, he's the only one.
As Stewie Griffin would say:
"Damn you to the bloody bowels of hell! 19 minutes of looking at you is like a lifetime of marriage to a pre-op Ann Coulter!"
SO THE RIGHT-WINGNUTS WANNA TALK ABOUT JESUS, THIS HOLIDAY SEASON? OKAY...
So, let's assume that the rapture is next week, and the end of days is but a mere week later. (for the purposes of this story, we'll assume the revelations of John were just a series of bizarre veiled threats against various branches of the greek church, and leave that stuff out.)
Needless to say, the rapture missed Bush, and he's "left behind". However, let's further assume, for comedic purposes, that in the ensuing post-rapture insanity, he gets hit on the head with a bowling ball, and spends the last five days of his "presidency", thinking he's Ralph Kramden. Before ya know it, the Glorious Appearing occurs, and the words of Matthew are played out:
"When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate them one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, and he will place the sheep at his right hand, but the goats at the left. Then the King will say to those at his right hand, `Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.'
At this point, Bush is wondering if there are Goo-Goo Clusters in Heaven, and, lost in thought, misses half the following:
Then the righteous will answer him, `Lord, when did we see thee hungry and feed thee, or thirsty and give thee drink? And when did we see thee a stranger and welcome thee, or naked and clothe thee? And when did we see thee sick or in prison and visit thee?' And the King will answer them, `Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.'
Right around this time, Bush finally wakes up to the fact that something important is going on...
Then he will say to those at his left hand, `Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels;
(Blasphemous extemporizing begins here)
For I was hungry and you took away my food stamps and AFDC, I was thirsty on the streets of new orleans, while I drowned in sewage, and you remained on vacation, I was a stranger and you profiled me, and put me on a "no fly" list, I was naked and you took away my heating oil assistance, and turned me out of public housing, I was sick, and you cut my medicaid, prescription drugs, and medicare, I was in prison and you tortured me, held me without charge, and sent me to my death, time after time. Further, I was scared, and you invaded my nation, raining bombs upon my brothers and sisters, I was poor, and you foreswore me, so that the wealthiest money-changers might grow richer still from the suffering of my brethren, I was all of these things, and many more.'
Bush will answer "well- yeah- I did that to a buncha poor folks, and muslims, but who cares about them? I thought we had an agreement, right, Big J? How ya like that? I like to give alla my friends nicknames- and you're my friend, now, Big J, right? Ya know- when I look into your eyes, I can see you have a good soul- howya like that, Big J?"
' Then he will answer him, `Truly, I say to you, as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.'
Whether or not you're familiar with the story, I have a feeling you know what happens next- it isn't very pretty.
Happy Holidays!
DECEMBER 16, 2005
NEW IDIOT, NEW MEDIA, AND NOT MUCH ELSE, TONIGHT- SORRY.
I really don't have much- I figure those who come to this site to read my petty rants visit other blogs, as well, so I might as well cover something esoteric, tonight, and leave other folks to cover the big news of the day...
In my day job, I work as a 3d animator, and one of the perks of such a position, is that you have to do a lot of test renders, to make sure lighting and movement is correct., in a given scene. Basically, you click a lot of boxes, adjust a few numbers, and tell the computer to render out the frames. Then, you sit back, and wait for an hour or so, while the computer does the work, and you surf the web. In the biz, it's called "nursing a render."
During these moments, I've spent my time at WIkipedia, doing research into esoterica of all sorts, and on a whim, checked out the entry on the good reverend Fred Phelps, of the Westboro Baptist Church- the folks behind the legendary internet phenomenon godhatesfags.com
For those who are unaware, Fred Phelps is a figure reviled by both the right and the left, a man (seemingly) posessed with a burning hatred for homosexuality, and those who partake in such behavior. He has made news by picketing public events, such as the funeral of Matthew Sheppard, and more recently, the funerals of soldiers returning from Iraq, condemning them for dying "for a nation that refuses to condemn fag sex".
He's become a pop-culture figure of sorts. Howard Stern has invited Fred and his cadre onto his show several times (for pure shock value), and he's even been the subject of an independent film, and was called one of the most "fascinating voices in american politics" by the erstwhile George Magazine.
An activist friend of mine once said to me: "When you look into the eyes of Fred Phelps, you're looking into the eyes of Satan."
And it's true- an animal, freakish magnetism that it hard to describe. When he gazes out into the audience, no matter where you are, you feel he's looking you straight in the eye, and speaking directly to you. It's at the same time both a moment of intimate connection, and deepest violation.
From that time, up until a few days ago, I figured Fred Phelps to be just that- an idiosyncratic oddball- a figure of jest and laughable hatespeech that no one listened to...
Until, during a spate of renders, I read through Fred's (unauthorized) biography, "Addicted to Hate"
If you want to look into the heart of abject hatred, brutality, and cruelty, read the above link. it's downright unbeleiveable- uncanny, otherworldly. Fred's hatred of homosexuality, is the result of a fundamental self-hatred so profound, and deep, that it boggles the mind. After reading it, I was depressed, for days...
And at its heart- is the banality of cruelty. Just as Fred Phelps was able to spend his life beating his wife and 13 children into submission, cheating hundreds of people out of their money, and spreading a doctrine of hate, one finds frightening echoes of Bush- a man with no scruples, outside of his own ends, and damn the consequences. Just as Phelps felt no qualms beating his 8-year-old child into unconsciousness with 200 strikes from a mattock handle "in the name of god", Bush feels no qualms with having over 2,000 americans and 115,000 Iraqis dying for his aspirations of a "greater good"
The major difference between the two is that Fred runs a crap church that no one bothers attending- the other is the "president" of the united states.
Oh- and before the right-wing lurkers latch onto this and send me a dozen e-mails saying:
"Aw- Ya'll a Fay-Gut- I KNEW IT! Jest like yew Fay-Gut's to go against Gawd's will, and be against BOOSH.!"
Sorry- I like gals- My personal attitude towards homosexuality is identical to that which I have with heterosexuality:
"I don't care whatever you do in your private lives, because it's none of my business- end of sentence."
-Peace out.
DECEMBER 14, 2005
GOOD LORD, I HATE DAILY "BLOGGING" BUT....
Here I sit, before my computer, on tuesday eve, after watching but a mere fifteen minutes of Fox "news", and well...
Brit Hume was on, and after ten minutes of offending my better sensibilities with just about every word that rolled out of his mouth, he brought on a "military consultant."
The main part of his presentation was standard Rovian BS- but then, he said:
(paraphrasing)"The Sunnis are showing that they're interested in participating in the coming elections- if they don't, well, then, the Shia and Kurds will do what they have historically done, and (paraphrasing ends here) WIPE THEM OUT."
When the guy finished this sentence, it was apparent that he realized that he had just stuck his foot in his mouth, as he ground to a screeching, deflated halt. Brit stepped to the fore, and rescued him, but DAMN...
"Wipe them out"? THAT'S the grand strategy for success in Iraq now? Genocide?
Did Crooks and Liars catch this? Did anyone out there? Don't tell me that this is going down the memory hole...
I need TIVO, and video capture software...
DECEMBER 13, 2005
OH-ONE LAST THING, THAT I MEANT TO MENTION, LAST NIGHT...
Yep- it's as simple as that. Apparently, the powers that be decided that it was either too embarassing, or expensive, to shuttle the fallen troops through Dover AFB, and determined that it was more in line with "compassionate conservatism" to bundle the corpses up in cardboard and plastic wrap, before shoving them into the cargo holds of commercial airliners, along with passenger luggage and excess food stores.
Strange- this past week, we on the antiwar side have been yet again come under fire as "disparaging the war effort, and destroying the morale of our troops in Iraq", simply for stating our views. I have to wonder- what's more demoralizing to the troops on the ground:
1: The majority of americans who now oppose this war speaking their minds...
or:
2: Knowing that, if they should fall, the government that sent them off to this war will render unto their mortal remains the same care and respect one would show to a pallet of dog food.
Have I mentioned, recently, how much I HATE Bush, and his cadre of callous murderers? What's next? Shoving these poor souls into mass graves outside of Weehawken, with a few shovelfuls of lime to keep them company?
Or better yet- I guess the Bush crime family will decide, eventually, to show their affinity for the Iraqi people, and let the fallen bodies of our soldiers lie in the streets of Iraq, until they're devoured by dogs, just as the dead of Fallujah were.
These republican chickenhawks, and their bleating media lambs, along with their useful idiots over at Free Republic DO NOT support our troops. They don't give one, tiny, tinker's damn about them. Everytime a soldier dies, they break wind, and laugh.
I DO support our troops- I want them home, yesterday. I want them home with their families, enjoying the full benefits that were promised to them, when they enlisted. The republicans want them home, wrapped in plastic, alongside a case of Playstations.
Oog- I'm back- it's been quite a week. As much as I'd like to cover all the bases of what's transpired, since I took my sabbatical, the one event I feel the need to cover, initially, is this past week's air marshall shooting of Rigoberto Alpizar.
The day it happened, I was watching CNN (I know, I know), and even before the facts of the case were made clear, they had congresspeople spewing forth rhetoric:
"The subject clearly had a gun in his posession"
"There were explosives involved"
"A struggle in mid-air against a potential terrorist"
All colorful and newsworthy bloviations, tailored to the age of fear which the Bush regime bolsters, daily, untill- well- five minutes later, when we found out that the shooting took place, after the plane had landed. There was no "mid-air struggle" (subliminally heralding back to the 9/11 flight that crashed in Pennsylvania). There was no handgun involved (outside of that carried by the air marshall), nor were there any explosives.
Rather, we find that the incident was nothing more than the shooting of a mentally ill, distressed passenger who was gunned down, even as his wife was pleading with those in attendance that her husband was "sick, and needs his medication."
Over the next few hours, we found out that this man was a christian missionary, returning from his work, for the holidays. But we didn't find that out by watching the corporate media- they lost interest in the story, as soon as the latest Natalie Holloway reports came in. To understand the true nature of the incident, you had to do research.
The shooting of this innocent man had nothing to do with the "war on terror". Lamenting his death doesn't make me guilty of existing in a "pre-9/11 mindset".
What this unfortunate and lamentable incident DOES lend credence to, is the culture of fear and paranoia that this regime has engendered into the popular consciousness, in recent years.
The right can call me clueless- call me ignorant, say that my head is in the clouds. They can call me a terrorist, or a terrorist sympathizer. They can toss whatever invective they want my way, that makes them feel good about themselves- I don't care.
What I do care about, is yet another family, that will have to go without their loved one this holiday season, because of the culture of fear that we find ourselves in, thanks to the usual suspects.
And, for further reading, check out this report, detailing how reliable our current air marshall program is.
I have little to say about this, because well, I trust you can put one and one together, and come up with the sum of two.
Is anyone out there familiar with a precedent for this? Seriously- since the U.S. Civil War, has any administration actively curtailed the enfranchisement of voters? Yeah- I know- the Jim Crow Laws, Katherine Harris, etc- but those were regional and state initiatives- has there ever been a federal progrom against voting rights, in the past century?
This is the first administration, in modern times, that has made it MORE difficult and troublesome to exercise one's right to vote.
(Compare that to Clinton's initiatives to increase enfranchisement- "Motor Voter", etc.)
But such is life, in Bush's America. I guess I should still be grateful- after all, I'm white, and while I don't pull down the big bucks, I think I'll be able to afford the eventual poll tax that these jokers have in store for us...
DECEMBER 5, 2005
I'M TAKING A BREAK, BUT BEFORE I GO...
First off, this article, in which Steven Hadley, Bush's national security advisor, said that troop withdrawalls will go ahead in '06, "if Iraqis continue making progress at the current rate."
Well, considering the amazing "progress" we've seen over the past two years, I'm certain such "progress" will continue:
Insurgent attacks will continue to escalate, they'll continue to have sham elections, torture will continue, and Iraq will "progress" into a Shia/Sunni civil war.
Once we reach the threshhold of full-blown internicine conflict in Iraq, we'll have made enough "progress" to start pulling our troops out, just in time for the '06 ballot.
Yes, this will hasten the collapse of the anemic state that Iraq has become, but that's beside the matter, for the Bush Bowl- in a few more stolen election cycles, they'll be able to trot out their new campaign slogan:
"We're at war in Iraq- we've ALWAYS been at war in Iraq."
Now- to the right wing, the foregoing statements might sound a bit hyprocritical:
"HEY- yall LIB-ruls keep SAYIN' we should pull out of EYE-rack- now, you crit'cize the lone son of god allmighty fordoon jest that!"
Now, assuming that Jesus Jr isn't just making another empty promise, I have no problem with Bush bringing the troops home- every one of those folks who come home from Iraq, is one less american serviceperson in harm's way, back with their families, and I can only celebrate that.
But what I have a problem with, is Bush's overall continued lack of strategy. He'll bring troops home, for political capital, but he will continue his "go it alone" strategy, even in the face of dwindling troop numbers on the ground, placing the remaining troops in even more danger.
The only new element that Bush brings to the Iraqi troop withdrawal arena is the shift of the war from troops on the ground, to "surgical" airstrikes (which have NEVER been "surgical", unless you count the definition, back when blacksmiths did dentistry.)
His grand plan? Take troops off the ground, and put more pilots into bombers. Give radios to the fledgling Iraqi national guard, and tell them "use this to tell us where you think terrorists are, and we'll bomb them.."
BRILLIANT, eh? Indeed- considering that Shia Muslims are already forming anti-Sunni death squads within the valiant Iraqi National Guard, we can only assume that they'll refrain from calling in airstrikes on sunni neighborhoods, out of the goodness of their hearts.
Do we liberals have a plan? Actually- there IS no good plan for the situation we find ourselves in- the right may condemn me for a "lack of vision" in saying this, but they accused me of the same thing, back in the days leading up to this war. We are finding ourselves in, initially, for a penny, finally finding ourselves in for a pound.
However, considering the ruin we see staring us in the face, I can provide two plans far superior to Bush's "withdraw and bomb" plan:
1: American troops pull out, after we have worked within the UN to create a TRULY multinational force, drawn, preferably, predominantly from African, South Asian, and MIddle Eastern nations, to take over internal and international security (nations from these regions cannot be called "puppets of the west"). All US corporate contracts should be immediately rescinded, with the balance of their payments returned to the federal government. A congressional subcomittee (strictly bipartisain, with three chairpersons (democratic, republican, and independent (Ron Paul counts and an indie, just this once)) will oversee the refunds, to make sure that no graft is tolerated (the committee would have an operating budget of 100 million dollars.) Further reconstruction contracts will be granted by the UN, after passing muster with both the Security Council, and a bimonthly review by the general assembly. Firms from the United States are able to bid for contracts, but only those found to have no history of corruption in Iraq, by the aforementioned congressional comittee. Oh- and before any of this starts- we withdraw Bolton as US ambassador...
2: American troops pull out, and that's it. However, the corporations that have stolen so much U.S. cash in no-bid Iraqi "reconstruction" contracts, are barred from returning. The responsibility for the security of Iraq, and their own operations, is on their shoulders. They are free to hire foreign mercenaries, torture at will, whatever- hell- they can set up CONCENTRATION CAMPS. However, these corporations must stay in Iraq, until it reaches the same levels of per capita income and gross domestic product that it had, before the invasion. Further, during this time, these corporations are barred from doing business with the U.S. Government.
Not perfect plans, with many loopholes and unanswered questions- but they're better than Bush's plan...
FIVE MILLION UNIQUE VISITORS!
And over 8 million reloads... As good as this makes me feel...
I have to take a break, for a week. The e-mail is overflowing, I have obligations piling up, and quite frankly, I'm facing another great burnout, unless I address these issues.
So, until Dec 11th, I'll leave you with the following:
The above video, from "Trading Spouses" has been circulating the web, pretty heavilly, the past few days. I include it here, as an object lesson in why fundamentalist, right-wing christians can't be trusted with our government, because, for the most part, they are insane, destructive, intolerant, duplicitous hypocrites
Whenever you see Pat Robertson's face leering out at you, wreathed in his self-contented smirk, issuing forth gales of laughter, between belches of Rovian talking points, don't let yourself be swayed, thinking that these people are harmless, peaceful folks.
This good christian woman was asked to swap places with the mother in a buddhist/deist home, and her behaviour speaks for itself.
Note that, in the end, after she rips her share of the take to shreds, she accepts the charity offered to her by the family that she so hates, and condemns so vehemently.
Typical republican...
(how do I know she's a republican? Take a look at the video, and ask yourself- is this a "Kerry voter?")
DECEMBER 2, 2005
THE LATEST "MAJOR ADDRESS"
As you can see, from the photo above, the crew at Annapolis took advantage of their time serving as a photogenic audience for Bush's inarticulate ramble to catch a few Z's...
It's just as well- they didn't miss anything.
It was NOT a "plan for victory"- it was more of the same crapola we've been hearing for the last two years, with a few new labels to identify the various branches of the 80% of Iraqis who want us the hell out of their country.
My favorite newspeak of the whole show was "Saddamists." Sometimes, Bush's speechwriters attain the zen of utter stupidity in which this joke of a "president" lives, and they produce a line on par with his style of inept speechifyin'- this is a prime example.
I'm bereft of flowery metaphors.... All's I can say is that Bush's "Major Address" (Which, as it turns out, was only viewed by 10% of the american public) is stupid beyond any scatalogical zinger I could dream up. I'm currently consulting with a choreographer to see if we can produce an interperative dance production that would serve as an adequate commentary on this anti-spectacle, but so far, all we've been able to come up with is 12 people wearing Matador costumes, kneeing each other in the crotch again and again for 20 minutes.
Now, the true magic, last night, was tuning into Fox "news". I wanted to check out what the mighty Murdoch Machine had to say, after this laughable performance, and I hit the jackpot: Brit Hume.
I SERIOUSLY need to get TIVO, and a cable to hook my TV up to my comp, so I can record moments like this- because last night, Fox "News", well, got a little too excited, and soiled itself.
The first correpondent they brought on the air to comment was almost peeing her knickers as she exulted into the camera:
"Finally,what the american people have been WAITING FOR- strong words from President Bush, today...."
Pshaw- do tell...
The naked partisanship was laughable. After five months of bad news, the folks at Fox are clearly desperate. This was over-exhuberant propaganda that would have made Kim Jong Il blush...
In other words- just another day at Fox "News"... And speaking of such:
FALAFEL MAN GOES NUTZOID!
O'Lielly's tenuous grasp on reality has broken, suddenly, over the past week, and it's been quite a show... Whatever triggered this cavalcade of insanity, can only be a matter of speculation to us, in the reality-based community, but I suspect that, as more and more stations drop his radio show, the more he retreats into his shell of personal delusion.
First, he decides to score one for the "Extra-Chromosome Republicans" (as the late republican strategist Lee Atwater called them,) by claiming that there's a dire "War on Christmas" going on, orchestrated by the damned "Liberal Elite."
Uhh- Okay... I live in Montclair, perhaps the bluest town in the solidly blue state of New Jersey, and It's odd: Just about every business on the street has Christmas decorations up. Yeah, they don't have six-by-eight foot signs up proclaiming that they're "celebrating the birth of the one and only lord and savior of mankind, Jesus Christ of Nazareth, The Word made flesh", but I suspect that they don't, because, well, people get the idea...
Anyhoo, when that didn't fly, O'Reilly fell back on his continuing slanderfest against Media Matters, a website that had the temerity to post his own words (in context). Pretty innocuous behavior, but Bill just can't take it, because the last thing he wants is a concrete record of his idiocy available to the world. However, this time around, he decided to become the new Joe McCarthy/Nixon, and declare, proudly, that he was compiling an "enemies list", which would be posted, publicly, on his website. This list would ostensibly shame "Media Operations that Traffic in Misinformation", but, it turns out, that it's just more organizations that, like Media Matters, quote him in context.
Now, as silly as Bill's hand-wringing is, as he claims once again to be such an "innocent Victim", I was gonna let it slide, until Bill rolled his sorry behind into the Today Show set, and said that folks like me are the the moral equvalent of Nazi Sympathizers. (Ann Coulter quickly jumped to the fore, calling us "Nazi Block Watchers")
In the wake of these comments, I have only one thing to say:
(WARNING- EXPLICIT LANGUAGE FOLLOWS)
Bill O'Reilly, a married, self-described "observant Catholic", was once so stricken with a certain underling of his organization (33-year-old Andrea Mackris), that he decided to take her under his wing, telling her "stick with me, and I'll take care of you"
And indeed, he took good care of her. He started engaging in hours-long late-night telephone conversations with this hapless woman, which consisted of:
(words in quotations are from the court records. If you are offended by the language, remember that the words came from O'Reilly, not me. )
1: Suggestions that she buy a vibrator. Quoth O'Reilly:
“Just use your vibrator to blow off steam.” When the plaintiff reddened, O’Reilly asked lewdly, “What, you’ve got a vibrator don’t you? Every girl does.” When the Plaintiff responded indignantly, “No, they don’t. Does your wife?” O’Reilly replied, “Yes, in fact she does. She’d kill me if she knew I was telling you.”
2: “(A)llud(ing) to having a ménage a trios with the Plaintiff and her friend”
3: Bragging about how he “lost his virginity to a girl in a car at JFK”
4: Reminiscing about "(attending) sex shows in Thailand"
5: Holding forth on his “extra-marital dalliances with 'hot' Italian women”
6: “(S)uggesting that he would perform oral sex upon Andrea Mackris, and that she would start to perform fellatio upon his ‘big cock’”
During his more heated moments, Bill would get the words "Loofah" and "Falafel" mixed up in his head, and would verbally fantasize about soaping this young woman up with a lebanese sandwich.
When Mackris protested at being subjected to this grotesque behavior, Bill would threaten to fire her, and ruin her career.
Mackris refused to put up with it, though, and when she brought a suit against O'Reilly, he quickly and quietly settled out of court, never disputing the charges.
Oh- One last thing: While Bill was engaging in these fair discourses, he had a virbrator up his butt, and was "pleasuring" himself.
Now, that having been said:
Bill, you have two choices: either you add me to your "Traffickers of Disinformation" page, or do nothing, admitting that every word above is 100% true (which it is, anyway.)
