Lowered Expectations

Is anyone really surprised by this sort of shit anymore?

The Bush administration is significantly lowering expectations of what can be achieved in Iraq, recognizing that the United States will have to settle for far less progress than originally envisioned during the transition due to end in four months, according to U.S. officials in Washington and Baghdad.

The United States no longer expects to see a model new democracy, a self-supporting oil industry or a society in which the majority of people are free from serious security or economic challenges, U.S. officials say.

"What we expected to achieve was never realistic given the timetable or what unfolded on the ground," said a senior official involved in policy since the 2003 invasion. "We are in a process of absorbing the factors of the situation we're in and shedding the unreality that dominated at the beginning."

Dr. Tom More makes a decent case for the anonymous "senior official involved in policy" being Rumsfeld, which again would surprise no one. Certainly the abrupt verbal cadences and jargon-laden syntax have the whiff of Brylcreem and Ben-Gay, like pretty much everything else Rumsfeld touches. The only thing missing is his usual asinine habit of asking himself rhetorical diversionary questions.

Do we wish that what we expected to achieve had been realistic given the timetable and the unfolding of events on the ground? Sure, but you go to war with the retard half-assed policy-makers you have, not the intelligent, rational, reality-based decision-makers you want.

Administration officials still emphasize how much they have achieved despite the chaos that followed the invasion and the escalating insurgency. "Iraqis are taking control of their country, building a free nation that can govern itself, sustain itself and defend itself. And we're helping Iraqis succeed," President Bush said yesterday in his radio address.

Iraqi officials yesterday struggled to agree on a draft constitution by a deadline of tomorrow so the document can be submitted to a vote in October. The political transition would be completed in December by elections for a permanent government.

But the realities of daily life are a constant reminder of how the initial U.S. ambitions have not been fulfilled in ways that Americans and Iraqis once anticipated. Many of Baghdad's 6 million people go without electricity for days in 120-degree heat. Parents fearful of kidnapping are keeping children indoors.

Barbers post signs saying they do not shave men, after months of barbers being killed by religious extremists. Ethnic or religious-based militias police the northern and southern portions of Iraq. Analysts estimate that in the whole of Iraq, unemployment is 50 percent to 65 percent.

Does Bush even feel any pang of conscience when he spouts such obscene nonsense? I doubt it; in five years of lawn-darting this country (and the rest of the world right along with it), the one characteristic that has defined this buffoon is his certitude. Forget speculating about whether he second-guesses any of his decisions that turn out to be completely wrong -- he doesn't even seem to first-guess them, as it were. He goes with his gut, and the rest of the world is expected to just go right along with that. After all, he's the preznit.

This is not a small thing. Bush genuinely seems to feel that one of the trappings of his station is that everyone just has to do whatever he says. Well, that's what people call a monarchy. Someone seriously needs to sit this asshole down and explain the differences to him. In a democratic republic, you do not have divine right. In a democratic republic, the people are the boss -- you are supposed to do what they want you to do.

Right now, Bush's ideas from top to bottom poll consistently in a steadily decreasing minority. We learned to sneer and scoff at focus groups and push-polling and other such things during the Clinton years, and no one's saying that one poll of 49% means you must turn the ship around 180º, but Bush has been polling in the high 30's and low 40's for six months straight, on Iraq, on Social Security, on health care, on stem-cell research, on pretty much every major concrete issue. (Polls on intangibles like "likability" and "honesty" are useless and stupid. Not only do they require the sort of mind-meld that Shit-For-Brains claimed to have pulled on his former main squeeze Pooty-Poot, but they don't provide a clean metric to what exactly is being asked.)

Anyway, Bush has a clearly defined pattern of regarding any sort of scrutiny of his prior deeds and words to be some sort of admission of guilt. In his case, it is, because a lot of people have paid for his miscalculations and retard rhetoric with their lives. I defy George W. Bush to ask either Americans or Iraqis whether they're better off now than they were three years ago. I fucking dare him to. He can ask them again in 2008. I certainly hope the Democrats do.

The ferocious debate over a new constitution has particularly driven home the gap between the original U.S. goals and the realities after almost 28 months. The U.S. decision to invade Iraq was justified in part by the goal of establishing a secular and modern Iraq that honors human rights and unites disparate ethnic and religious communities.

But whatever the outcome on specific disputes, the document on which Iraq's future is to be built will require laws to be compliant with Islam. Kurds and Shiites are expecting de facto long-term political privileges. And women's rights will not be as firmly entrenched as Washington has tried to insist, U.S. officials and Iraq analysts say.

"We set out to establish a democracy, but we're slowly realizing we will have some form of Islamic republic," said another U.S. official familiar with policymaking from the beginning, who like some others interviewed would speak candidly only on the condition of anonymity. "That process is being repeated all over."

Dumb motherfuckers. What they're objectively saying here is that we spent $300 billion, sacrificed thousands of troops and tens of thousands of innocent lives, completely squandered both our allies' goodwill and our enemies' fear -- so that we could turn Iraq into an Iranian-influenced theocracy. Nice going, assholes.

It would be even nicer if these "senior officials" had the fucking balls to just go on the record, but I suppose that's just too much to ask.

But let us dispense with the "liberation" boilerplate once and for all. Iraqis lived in fear under Saddam's totalitarian nightmare, but they also had jobs, lives, homes, families, electricity and water. Now they have villages cordoned off with razor wire, cities that require biometric scans to enter or exit, Islamic thugs terrorizing women and, um, barbers, about eight hours of electricity in 125º heat, and no fucking jobs.

Again, good job, guys. You should all give each other Medals O' Freedom. You've really earned 'em.

Yet another insight into just how the mind of this small, petty man clicks and clunks along, as he comes up with a whopper of an excuse as to why he can't spare even five minutes for grieving Iraq War mother Cindy Sheehan:

President Bush, noting that lots of people want to talk to the president and "it's also important for me to go on with my life," on Saturday defended his decision not to meet with the grieving mom of a soldier killed in Iraq.

Bush said he is aware of the anti-war sentiments of Cindy Sheehan and others who have joined her protest near the Bush ranch.

"But whether it be here or in Washington or anywhere else, there's somebody who has got something to say to the president, that's part of the job," Bush said on the ranch. "And I think it's important for me to be thoughtful and sensitive to those who have got something to say."

"But," he added, "I think it's also important for me to go on with my life, to keep a balanced life."

The attitude basically boils down to "if I talk to her, I gotta talk to everybody". But that's not necessarily true -- thus far, only Cindy Sheehan has been this vocal about wanting a personal explanation from Bush. He really is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't, and he seems to know it. There's no upside for him to talk to her, politically speaking -- and no matter how many of these T-shirted morons waddle around claiming Bush is some sort of man of God, he is a cravenly political, calculating little man.

And he clearly doesn't give a shit whose lives get destroyed by the misery he's caused -- Americans or Iraqis. It all just interferes with his narcissistic, delusional vision of himself.

The comments came prior to a bike ride on the ranch with journalists and aides. It also came as the crowd of protesters grew in support of Sheehan, the California mother who came here Aug. 6 demanding to talk to Bush about the death of her son Casey. Sheehan arrived earlier in the week with about a half dozen supporters. As of yesterday (Saturday) there were about 300 anti-war protesters and approximately 100 people supporting the Bush Administration. In addition to the two-hour bike ride, Bush's Saturday schedule included an evening Little League Baseball playoff game, a lunch meeting with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, a nap, some fishing and some reading. "I think the people want the president to be in a position to make good, crisp decisions and to stay healthy," he said when asked about bike riding while a grieving mom wanted to speak with him. "And part of my being is to be outside exercising."

On Friday, Bush's motorcade drove by the protest site en route to a Republican fund-raising event at a nearby ranch.

As Bush rolled by, Sheehan held a sign that said, "Why do you make time for donors and not for me?" [emphasis mine]

Yeah. God forbid he interrupt nappy time to listen to someone who disagrees with him, whose life has been permanently altered by Bush's "instinct" and his "gut". And really, I defy him to give one (1) example of a "good, crisp decision" he's made that benefited ordinary Americans. Just one. Ordinary Americans, them reg'lar folks Bush incessantly insists he's one of, though he's never ever been one, will be dealing with the consequences of Bush's "good, crisp decisions" for the next generation or so -- just like they had to pay off all the money his dipshit brother Neil "lost" in the savings and loan scandals of the 80's.

Too bad for Cindy Sheehan. If she were a "ranger" or a "pioneer", Bush would make time for her, much more than the perfunctory ten minutes he gave her last year, when he called her "Mom" because he clearly had no idea who she was or what her son's name was. Just another kid donating his life so that Iraq could become a violent theocracy with sharia courts and burqas. Such a noble cause.

More people whose names Bush will never remember, nor care about, have donated their lives to this cause with no end, no plan, no strategy, nor even just a simple description of goals and ambitions. They gave their lives so that we could move the goalposts clear out of the stadium and just settle for another Wingnutistan. Iraq wasn't a dangerous hotbed of terrorism with access to WMD before, but thanks to their new good friend Iran, and the feckless irresponsibility of Dear Leader, they're about to become exactly that.

Roadside bombs have killed five US soldiers in a weekend of attacks across Iraq which also claimed the lives of three Iraqi policemen.
In the deadliest attack, a bomb went off on Friday evening in Tuz, about 180km (110 miles) north of Baghdad, killing three and wounding one.

Iraqi forces report finding a recently dug mass grave during a battle with militants near the capital.

....

A mass grave found near Baghdad at Awereej contains the decomposed bodies of 30 people, including two women, Iraqi security forces said.

One report quotes police as saying the grave is about six months old.

So it's bad and getting ever worse, and Bush is just completely disconnected and unconcerned with the reality of it all. He struts around trying to appear resolute, talking tough on Iran's nucular ambitions. Well, okay, how the hell do you plan to take military action if necessary? Are all these bumper sticker/ribbon idiots ready to send their kids over to get slaughtered for this "man"'s inchoate ambitions and whimsical dreams? Does Bush seriously think that the Chinese and Russians will just sit idly by and let us (or the Israelis) bomb the Bushehr facility?

Supposedly Bush has an MBA. I find this difficult to believe. I have nary a couple of semesters of Macro and Micro under my belt, twenty years ago at that, and even I know that one of the biggest elements of business decision-making is the cost-benefit analysis. There is simply no way Bush could have done an honest cost-benefit analysis on this engagement, and reached a conclusion that would have permitted an outcome such as the one we have.

At a certain point, people have to look at the facts, the events, and the attitudes and deeds and words of the major players in all this, and ask "cui bono?". Who benefits from all this? The entire Middle East is now in disarray; Iraq is in ruins; Iran is in expansionist mode and is flush with cash and is upfront about its nuclear ambitions; the withered and corrupt House of Saud is undergoing a sea change, as their tenuous hold on a fanatic populace begins to get even more unstable. What is the common consequence of all those events?

Did you see what the price of a barrel of oil was when the market closed Friday? Do you think the odds are greater that by the end of the year, oil prices will increase, decrease, or stay the same? And in the event of A or C, cui bono?

How do you think Dick Cheney's stock portfolio looks these days? And even if we dismiss the usual parade of conspiracy-mongering, it's still impossible to ignore the sheer incompetence and ineptitude that have led us to this point, to the brink of multi-theater war, to economic implosion and bankruptcy, to dances of encirclement and possible confrontation with an enormous world power (China) that already has us by the financial short hairs.

Two of the three countries in Bush's vaunted Axle Of Elvis now either have actual nuclear weapons, or are on the verge of getting them. They were working on them already, but it is difficult -- if not outright retarded -- to think that they weren't at least partly motivated by Bush's ignorant bluster to step up the pace of their respective (if not collaborative) research in that dangerous area.

The problem is that Bush really does have the reasoning capacity of a willful child. He will not brook dissent, he refuses to debate the factuality of the things he assumes and asserts. This is a recipe for disaster for all us reg'lar folks to run our lives in such a manner; it's certainly no way to run a nation of 300 million people.

---

Finally, Frank Rich has some sage observations about the delusions of a man whose greatest priorities right now are napping and fishing, while the planet burns.

LIKE the Japanese soldier marooned on an island for years after V-J Day, President Bush may be the last person in the country to learn that for Americans, if not Iraqis, the war in Iraq is over. "We will stay the course," he insistently tells us from his Texas ranch. What do you mean we, white man?

A president can't stay the course when his own citizens (let alone his own allies) won't stay with him. The approval rate for Mr. Bush's handling of Iraq plunged to 34 percent in last weekend's Newsweek poll - a match for the 32 percent that approved L.B.J.'s handling of Vietnam in early March 1968. (The two presidents' overall approval ratings have also converged: 41 percent for Johnson then, 42 percent for Bush now.) On March 31, 1968, as L.B.J.'s ratings plummeted further, he announced he wouldn't seek re-election, commencing our long extrication from that quagmire.

But our current Texas president has even outdone his predecessor; Mr. Bush has lost not only the country but also his army. Neither bonuses nor fudged standards nor the faking of high school diplomas has solved the recruitment shortfall. Now Jake Tapper of ABC News reports that the armed forces are so eager for bodies they will flout "don't ask, don't tell" and hang on to gay soldiers who tell, even if they tell the press.

And none of this means anything to Bush, quite literally. It appears that even if only 10% of Americans supported him and his policies, he'd rather hang on to that 10% and tell the other 90% to fuck off. That is how he does things. He thinks he's guided by principle in that regard, but as we discussed before, sincerity only gets you so far -- it does not grant certitude.

Those statistics -- growing disapproval among a clear majority of American citizens, consistent shortfalls in military recruiting despite the Army lowering their recruitment goals to make them easier to meet -- should be a clear indicator to Bush that his support is dwindling. And while principle is important, he is supposed to be the preznit of all Americans, not just the ones that slavishly follow him with moony Peggy Noonan crushes. If more and more Americans are unwilling to trust the lives of their children to his muddled idealism, that should tell him something.

But willful children, by definition, can never admit when they're wrong. Funny how 51% of the popular vote was some sort of huge mandate, but a 34% approval rating -- eh, who cares what people think? People will think what they're told to think.

As if the right-wing pundit crackup isn't unsettling enough, Mr. Bush's top war strategists, starting with Mr. Rumsfeld and Gen. Richard Myers, have of late tried to rebrand the war in Iraq as what the defense secretary calls "a global struggle against violent extremism." A struggle is what you have with your landlord. When the war's über-managers start using euphemisms for a conflict this lethal, it's a clear sign that the battle to keep the Iraq war afloat with the American public is lost.

That battle crashed past the tipping point this month in Ohio. There's historical symmetry in that. It was in Cincinnati on Oct. 7, 2002, that Mr. Bush gave the fateful address that sped Congressional ratification of the war just days later. The speech was a miasma of self-delusion, half-truths and hype. The president said that "we know that Iraq and Al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade," an exaggeration based on evidence that the Senate Intelligence Committee would later find far from conclusive. He said that Saddam "could have a nuclear weapon in less than a year" were he able to secure "an amount of highly enriched uranium a little larger than a single softball." Our own National Intelligence Estimate of Oct. 1 quoted State Department findings that claims of Iraqi pursuit of uranium in Africa were "highly dubious."

It was on these false premises - that Iraq was both a collaborator on 9/11 and about to inflict mushroom clouds on America - that honorable and brave young Americans were sent off to fight. Among them were the 19 marine reservists from a single suburban Cleveland battalion slaughtered in just three days at the start of this month. As they perished, another Ohio marine reservist who had served in Iraq came close to winning a Congressional election in southern Ohio. Paul Hackett, a Democrat who called the president a "chicken hawk," received 48 percent of the vote in exactly the kind of bedrock conservative Ohio district that decided the 2004 election for Mr. Bush.

These are the tea leaves that all Republicans, not just Chuck Hagel, are reading now. Newt Gingrich called the Hackett near-victory "a wake-up call." The resolutely pro-war New York Post editorial page begged Mr. Bush (to no avail) to "show some leadership" by showing up in Ohio to salute the fallen and their families. A Bush loyalist, Senator George Allen of Virginia, instructed the president to meet with Cindy Sheehan, the mother camping out in Crawford, as "a matter of courtesy and decency." Or, to translate his Washingtonese, as a matter of politics. Only someone as adrift from reality as Mr. Bush would need to be told that a vacationing president can't win a standoff with a grief-stricken parent commandeering TV cameras and the blogosphere 24/7.

That's it right there. Bush continues to indulge his childish whims at the very risk of his own party's short-term futures. Hackett's near-victory in a very red district is a clear indication what's to come if this mess doesn't start getting wrapped up.

But how can they? It would be morally repugnant, after visiting the mayhem of cluster bombs, checkpoints, power outages, rampant unemployment, and sharia theocracy on Iraq, to just leave it to civil war and Iranian interference. Not only that, but if we're coming home, then what the hell are we building a dozen permanent forward-deployment bases there for? Are we going to be there for the next 60 years, like we're still in Okinawa and Korea?

WHAT lies ahead now in Iraq instead is not victory, which Mr. Bush has never clearly defined anyway, but an exit (or triage) strategy that may echo Johnson's March 1968 plan for retreat from Vietnam: some kind of negotiations (in this case, with Sunni elements of the insurgency), followed by more inflated claims about the readiness of the local troops-in-training, whom we'll then throw to the wolves. Such an outcome may lead to even greater disaster, but this administration long ago squandered the credibility needed to make the difficult case that more human and financial resources might prevent Iraq from continuing its descent into civil war and its devolution into jihad central.

Thus the president's claim on Thursday that "no decision has been made yet" about withdrawing troops from Iraq can be taken exactly as seriously as the vice president's preceding fantasy that the insurgency is in its "last throes." The country has already made the decision for Mr. Bush. We're outta there. Now comes the hard task of identifying the leaders who can pick up the pieces of the fiasco that has made us more vulnerable, not less, to the terrorists who struck us four years ago next month.

Amen. And make no mistake, we are more vulnerable right now in the event of another attack. What happens if the next attack takes place in a city or area that doesn't have huge emergency services? New York City has enormous police and fire departments; they're practically paramilitary organizations unto themselves. But how about Topeka, or Omaha? That was what the National Guard and Army Reserves was for, but that's done. So what happens if they hit, say, a dam or a bridge? Somehow, I don't think it'll go nearly as efficiently as the rescue efforts at the World Trade Center did (and they did -- the death toll could very easily have been 5 or 10 times what it was; nearly 50,000 people worked in those towers).

There's no indication that Bush has any clue or care as to what to do. They can't even decide on nomenclature, for Christ's sake -- if you can't decide between GWOT and GSAVE, or whatever, how the fuck are you going to be on top of your game enough to evacuate entire cities if a dam gets hit or a dirty bomb goes off?

I hope Bush's nappy time went well, and I hope he caught a fish. And I hope he raised lots and lots of money the other day. He oughta be ashamed of himself, but we all know he isn't.

A Day In The Life

As our Fearless Dear Leader studiously ignores Cindy Sheehan and the ever-growing group of her supporters outside El Rancho Del Brush Clearo, one of the Atriots has the right idea.

10:00 AM: Wake up. Pay no attention to mother of dead solider outside.

10:15 AM - 12:15 PM: Work out. Pay no attention to mother of dead soldier outside. Ignore the 2,000 white crosses lining the road to the ranch.

12:15 - 2:00 PM: Lunch with the twins. Pay no attention to mother of dead solider outside and calls from all over America for the twins to

enlist.

2:00 - 4:00 PM: Nap. Do not dream of mother of dead solider outside.

4:00 - 6:00 PM: Cocktails. Ooops! I don't do that any more. O'Douls only. Watch videos of me cheerleading at Yale. Pay no attention to the mother of the dead solider outside.

6:00 - 8:00 PM: Dinner. I mean HOE-DOWN. Make sure Secret Service brings in "real" food for me, Laura and the twins to eat. We don't eat that low-rent crap the morons around here eat. Pay not attention to the mother of the dead solider outside.

8:00 PM - 10:00AM: Sleep. Do not think of the mother of the dead solider outside right before falling off, otherwise she will haunt your dreams.

Of course I would have spiced it up a touch with gratuitous swipes at Bush watching pro wrestling and such, but you get the idea. And frankly, I seriously doubt that Bush loses a wink over Cindy Sheehan and people like her. After all, God speaks through Bush, not Mrs. Sheehan.

Also I would have put praying in there. As we all hear ad nauseam, Bush prays a lot. Clearly, it's paid off, for him anyway. For the rest of us, not so much.

But it might be a good time for Bush to start praying more anyway. Pray that the rapidly-dwindling number of supporters doesn't come to their senses anytime soon, and wonder just what the fuck they've gotten themselves and their country into by supporting this stupid little man and his stupid little ideas. Pray that they didn't see the footage yesterday of Bush and his fleet of Suburbans buzzing past the protesters -- safely ensconced out of tomato-chucking range, of course -- so he could attend a fundraiser at the ranch next door to his own.

Pray that it doesn't occur to the remaining retards that -- no matter what their rationalizations and justifications, no matter what they think they heard about what Cindy Sheehan supposedly said during her first meeting with Dear Leader -- nothing excuses the fact that he can't spend an hour talking to this woman, but he can spend all manner of time being seen raking weeds and doing assorted Hungry Man chores, he can spend time raising millions for his corrupt and ineffective agenda, he can travel hither and yon to sign off on highway pork and bullshit energy bills that spit in the face of the reality that we will have to deal with in the near future.

There is simply no excuse for it except naked political considerations -- something Bush has professed for far too long that he's above. Eventually it has to occur to even the most brain-dead of them that he's full of shit. Perhaps it already has, but admitting that they were wrong the whole time would be too much for their tribal view of the world to stand. Their heads would explode at the very prospect. All they can do now is sputter and babble about how it's all Clitnon's fault. Either one, doesn't matter; it just can't be Dear Leader's fault.

And while the likes of Bill O'Reilly and Michelle Maglalang continue to undermine their own credibility by defaming and vilifying a woman who lost her son in a bullshit war, the rest of the world sees themselves in Cindy Sheehan. Losing a child is every parent's worst nightmare, and the more time passes and the more information comes out, the clearer it becomes to Cindy Sheehan and everyone else who has lost a loved one in Iraq that not only didn't it need to happen this way, but that this administration has neither the brains nor the balls to see any of this through. They'll pull out just in time to make themselves look good for the midterms next year, no matter what the reality of it is. Looks like civil war, ending in an Iranian-controlled megastate, with what has been referred to as "the greatest prize of all" at stake.

With over 25% of the world's remaining oil, and a much lower depletion rate than that of Saudi Arabia (thanks to 15 years of sanctions and war following the historical efforts to keep iraqi production low), I guess its not such a far-fetched statement.

If we assign an average value of US$100 a barrel to this oil, you could say that this treasure is worth around $30 trillion dollars - which makes the hundreds of billions of dollars being spent by the US occupying the country a little more understandable.

We're all agog that oil prices ended at just under $67 yesterday, heading into Weekend Two of Dear Leader's Glorious Workin' Vacation, during which He reflects and rejuvenates and returns to the snakepit of Washington with the vision and wisdom to Make All Things Possible. Truly the blessings that flow from His humble brush-clearer's hand bring a tear to my one good eye [cheap rip-off of lame Billy Crystal imitating Sammy Davis Jr.; both my eyes are just fine, thanks]. How y'all likin' that $100 tank of gas now, Hummer suckers? It's only gonna get higher, and the only question is how the all the pelf gets divvied up between the Iranians who want to screw us and the oil companies who want to fuck us.

No, thanks to Cindy Sheehan's brave stand (and if you don't think it's brave, you try standing outside all day in Texas in August), people across the nation -- pro and con -- will be forced to reconsider their stance on the war and its practitioners. The assholes who smugly sit behind their keyboards of mass distraction and sneer at this woman have to keep in mind that everyone has seen her, we can all attach a face to the name, we all know what her son looked like -- so it all hits home that much more. It could have been us, it could have been our neighbor or our cousin.

That kind of universality drags all this academic horseshit, kicking and screaming, out of the wild blue abstract and right into our living rooms. The tough-guy radio talk-show host, who sat out his turn to serve with a boil on his ass, trashes away gleefully without pausing to think that it is Cindy Sheehan's very ordinariness which is her most compelling trait. Who's word you gonna take, America -- the fat fuck with an oxy problem (not to mention problems with women), or a grieving mother from a small town? A multi-millionaire with an CNN anchor girlfriend, or someone who could literally be your neighbor?

So to Rush, to Michelle, to The Falafel Factor and his magic loofah and his tanking ratings -- I say keep up the good work. Many of us already knew what kind of scumbags you were, but now you're proving the point to your own fans. Thanks for saving us the trouble.

Reclaiming Objectivity

We talk a lot about the feckless laziness of the mainstream media, how their role has morphed from "seekers of objective truth" to "professional enablers of political mendacity". A prime factor in this decline has been the replacement of objectivity with contrived even-handedness. The contrivance is that the even-handedness is being put forth as if it were the same thing as objectivity.

There are many examples of this syndrome, but the one most noticeable right now is the ongoing silliness of the "intelligent design" debate. The fact that there's a "debate" in the first place is a clue as to the dysfunction at hand here. No serious person in the scientific community is debating this, because there is simply no debate to be had among empirical realists -- which is what scientists are supposed to be the epitome of.

Now, I have certainly belabored the ID vs. evolution argument enough to where I really don't want to bother with it for the time being. What I want to talk about is how the media have allowed the faux debate to be kept alive. It is one thing to report that idiot school boards in Kansas or Pennsylvania are decreeing this or that -- after all, that is what constitutes actual news, reporting factual occurrences.

The problem is that, in a mealy-mouthed attempt to "flesh out" a story, the media grabs a person from each side and lets each say their piece. That is not news; that is point/counterpoint opinion-mongering, which is what they were really after anyway. The goal here is not to resolve the question, but rather to stoke the controversy with manufactured conflict.

It gets worse when political figures consistently come down on the wrong side of science -- that is, the rational explanation for empirical reality. Thus, George W. Bush can say in all seriousness that he believes that ID should be taught in science class alongside evolution. He can even bookend it with his sincere belief that Rafael Palmeiro has never taken steroids. How does he know the latter? Because he likes Palmeiro.

To rational people, this is a real insight into how the guy's brain works. We've already discussed that episode, and so has everyone else on the internets. But the thing is, nobody in the media calls him on it. Think about it -- he voiced his uneducated opinion about subjects he knows nothing about (again), and nobody blinks. It's as if they have come to expect it from him. Stem cells? Blabidy-blabidy culture of life. Evolution? Blabidy-blabidy both sides of the story. Simple solutions to simple problems.

Except it's not nearly that simple. If the debate were over the "theory" of gravity, and the dominant religious sect just decided amongst themselves that the Bible don't mention no gravity, therefore it doesn't exist, but hey here's a biblical alternative that says that angel wings and happy prayerful thoughts are really what holds airplanes up in the sky -- do you just accept it all as an honest difference of opinion, or do you recognize it for the willful ignorance that it is?

That's what we're facing here. It's all being presented as two divergent but equal opinions. And they are not. One can be reliably and consistently observed through the universally accepted process of scientific method; the other is an open-ended fable pulled from the asses of hucksters who bullshit rubes into thinking that Noah had dinosaurs on the ark.

It's old wine in new bottles; it's tent-revivalism dressed up as science for people who have no acquaintance with science at all. And a responsible media would say so; they'd go to the conferences and let everyone know just what kind of crazy bullshit these people are regurgitating, and using our tax dollars to ruin the brains of schoolchildren.

The media thinks it needs to dance politely around anything and everything that has to do with religion. Heaven forfend people of faith should have that faith tested by exculpatory facts, or even a different perspective. No, the media think they have to adopt the cheap posture of pretending that flat-earth thinking is just a different view of the shape of the earth, rather than the outmoded idiocy that it is.

And the even-handed stance applies to pretty much all aspects of how this administration is presented by the media, right down to foreign policy coverage. How the hell else does a propaganda tool like Saint Judy Miller get made into a martyr? Because no one working in the bigs wants to go digging in that part of the graveyard. They're scared shitless that they'll be back doing the weather in Dubuque.

But if they're not going to get at the truth, or tell it when they find it, then maybe they should get sent back to Dubuque. Fuck 'em if they're not going to do their jobs with competence and pride.

Paul Krugman has more:

There are several reasons why fake research is so effective. One is that nonscientists sometimes find it hard to tell the difference between research and advocacy - if it's got numbers and charts in it, doesn't that make it science?

Even when reporters do know the difference, the conventions of he-said-she-said journalism get in the way of conveying that knowledge to readers. I once joked that if President Bush said that the Earth was flat, the headlines of news articles would read, "Opinions Differ on Shape of the Earth." The headlines on many articles about the intelligent design controversy come pretty close.

Finally, the self-policing nature of science - scientific truth is determined by peer review, not public opinion - can be exploited by skilled purveyors of cultural resentment. Do virtually all biologists agree that Darwin was right? Well, that just shows that they're elitists who think they're smarter than the rest of us.

There ya go, that's the reflexive attitude right there. The thing is, those "elitist" scientists are smarter the rest of us. They spent years in real colleges and universities busting their ass to get a degree, while you knocked up your high school sweetheart and took the first McJob you could find. They're smarter than you, even if you go to church for the next eighty years and repeat every verse in the Bible one thousand times. Okay? Some people are smarter than other people. Such is life. Get over it, and realize when you're outclassed.

Digby puts it wonderfully, as always:

Honestly, this blind defense of Palmiero has little to do with loyalty. It's about Bush's faith based approach to everything. If he believes it, it must be true. He does not use reason to come to conclusions. He makes decisions based on feelings and beliefs and "instinct." In this case, his instinct is that Palmiero is a good guy and therefore could not have lied. His "instinct" is that creationism makes sense and therefore, is as legitimate as evolution. His "instinct" was that Saddam was a threat and therefore, we had to invade.

We have a man with a child's mind running this country. Millions of us can see this as clearly as we can see his face on our television screens. People can call me an elitist and a snob for pointing this out but I will never stop. It's like telling me it's rude to notice that the sun came up this morning or that gravity exists. It is observable fact that this president is intellectually stunted. I'm not going to pretend otherwise so that certain people's feelings don't get hurt. I'll lose my mind.

Amen. We have got to stop dancing around these sick, empty equivalencies, these callow attempts to equate superstition with empirical reality. A case in point was something I had the misfortune to overhear on the morning "news" as I was eating my breakfast. Apparently some asshole is selling a mystical pierogi on E-Bay. This pierogi has the image of Jesus in it. It's a holy pierogi. Do the newscasters crack on this, let everyone in on the joke, maybe opine that the guy auctioning this thing off is a con artist, and any potential bidders would be morons? Of course not. We mustn't ever offend people who will go and pray and leave votive candles before every inventively-shaped dried soap film or oil slick, be it on a bank window or a freeway underpass.

This is ridiculous. Sincerity is a fine quality; it does not automatically grant the gift of holy certitude. The Spanish Inquisition was quite sincere about what they were doing. Nobody doubts Osama bin Laden's sincerity. Even Bush, dipshit that he is, is probably quite sincere about many of the stupid things that tumble out of his piehole.

American culture, enabled by a complaisant media, equates mere sincerity with actual knowledge, without imparting the cold hard fact that knowledge is work. Anyone can be sincere about anything; there's no skill or talent or much effort involved there. But to acquire meaningful levels and disciplines of knowledge takes time, and patience, and effort. And we are a spoiled, narcissistic, now culture, post-ironic post-cynic self-indulgent slacker cool, so effort is for suckers. Why spend time cultivating a skill or learning a craft, when you can do something stupid and instantly become meta-famous through the contrived prism of "reality" shows?

Well, this very attitude permeates many aspects of our society, and one of those aspects is how we have commodified knowledge and the acquisition thereof. That's ironic, considering this is the vaunted Age of Information, and as such, we have vastly more informational resources at hand than ever before -- exponentially more than even just ten short years ago.

The problem is, since we worship and pursue the almighty dollar like Rosie O'Donnell pursues Ring Dings and Devil Dogs, the rate of increase of our access to useful information has far outstripped our collective ability to absorb and process even a meaningful sliver of it all. And since we are undisciplined, we don't even try to conquer just one worthwhile subject -- say, being able to locate Canada on a globe.

So we just keep careening our way through life, fat, drunk, and stupid, without even the goddamned common sense enough to know snake-oil scams when they stare us in the face and slap us upside the head. No wonder the Chinese and Koreans are laughing their asses off at us right now. They're cloning dogs and pirating movies and loaning us ever more money to buy more shit from them, and watching us argue over something with about as much scientific validity as a pet rock.

As P.T. Barnum famously said, it is morally wrong to allow suckers to keep their money.

Ghost Writers In The Sky

Seems that the usual complaining assholes are indulging their favorite pastime by offering their unwanted 2¢ on the upcoming movie of The Da Vinci Code, which is apparently some book that many of the kids are reading these days. Since I just re-read those Henry Porter the Magician Kid books over and over again, I never hear about the new stuff.

The book, which is fiction, takes aim at central Christian dogma, claiming that Jesus had a child with Mary Magdalene, who was meant to be his true heir. It alleges an enormous coverup by the Roman Catholic Church, which, according to the book, usurped Mary's place in favor of a male-oriented hierarchy that has suppressed what Mr. Brown calls the "sacred feminine."

Even before production began, the studio and the producers Brian Grazer and John Calley received letters from groups like the Catholic League and Opus Dei expressing concern.

The Catholic League asked that Mr. Howard include a disclaimer acknowledging that the movie is fiction. Opus Dei, a conservative Catholic group, was particularly worried about its own depiction, because it is a central villain in the book. "The novel portrays Opus Dei in a completely inaccurate way; if the movie does the same thing it's something we'd be concerned about," Brian Finnerty, a spokesman for the group, said.

Studio officials have consulted with Catholic and other Christian specialists on how they might alter the plot of the novel to avoid offending the devout. In doing so, the studio has been asked to consider such measures as making the central premise - that Jesus had a child with Mary Magdalene - more ambiguous, and removing the name of Opus Dei.

Look, do you want to make a movie, or do you want to stand around and try to sell the world a Coke? Obviously, those things are not mutually exclusive -- indeed, they're basically the same thing when you get right down to it.

But does it occur to any of these yahoos that the book itself did just fine, despite these nattering nabobs of the Nativity? And uh, you know, how exactly would Opus Dei's spokesman like them to be portrayed -- as a non-creepy cult-like organization of control freaks?

Due to the radical demands of the prelature of Opus Dei, some critics, especially former members, accuse it of acting as a religious cult within the Church.

They say that Opus Dei shows characteristic cult behaviour such as:

aggressive recruitment methods - includes love bombing techniques, monitoring of members' recruitment efforts, formation of recruitment teams and strategies;

undue pressure to join - vocational crises are staged; threats are issued: saying no to a calling leads to a life of misery;

lack of informed consent on the part of the new recruits - they vaguely commit themselves to a certain "spirit of the Work";

encouraging members to relinquish contact with their friends and families in favour of contacts within the group;

controlling the environment of the member; loss of freedom of the members

threatening members when they try to leave. The strongest form of threat is the threat of condemnation, i.e. it is not a physical but a psychological threat.;

making members focus on efforts in favor of the growth of the group. The most important job for an Opus Dei member is to attract other people to become members too. His social life, the circles that he frequents, the kinds of people he tries to become a friend of, are always geared towards proselytism.;

Cilice - Traditional mortification belt used by Catholic organisations: Critics say this is a bizarre, cult-like requirement; Supporters say it is the free choice of adults who want to do penance and become saints;

requiring numerary members to perform what critics view as highly suspicious practices such as mortification of the flesh, involving the use of the cilice for two hours a day and the discipline; its founder is frequently alleged by critics to have whipped himself until there was blood on the walls. In The Way, point 208, Escriva writes: "Let us bless pain. Love pain. Sanctify pain... Glorify pain!"

Sounds yummy. Where do we sign up? Seriously, a cult's a fuckin' cult -- these guys might as well be $cientologists or Hale-Boppers. Pass the applesauce and glorify pain, beeyotches!

Anyway, back to our movie, and the crusaders thereof:

Among those who take Mr. Brown's revelations seriously is Olivia Hsu Decker, a real estate agent who owns the Château de Villette and lived there during the shoot in June and July. "This book revealed the truth that the Catholics have been hiding for thousands of years," she said in a telephone interview. "The book is fiction, but it's based on truth."

Ms. Decker added, "The book kind of explains to the world how the Catholic Church demonized women such as Mary Magdalene, and also have killed millions of women during the Crusades."

A half-dozen books published in the last two years rebut that very notion, and it is just this attitude that has fueled concern not only among Catholics, but Christian activists of other denominations as well.

Oh, well I guess that settles that then. There's books rebutting what anyone who's paid attention to history knows to be obvious -- the church has been responsible for as much mayhem and murder throughout its history as the bloodiest of empires. This is simply indisputable by any rational observation, as is the fact that the church is still the institutionalized repository of some of the finest sexual hangups the 12th century had to offer. That Dan Brown fictionalized some things (and no, I really haven't read the book, so I don't know many specifics about it) doesn't change the basic truth -- nor does the lobbying of the professionally faithful change either the nasty history or the current ugliness.

Really, if the damage control department of the Vatican spent half as much time turning their child rapists over to the proper legal authorities as they do protecting their precious delusional image of themselves, they might get somewhere. As it is, they gave Bernard Law a sinecure in Rome.

Yeah, the Catholic Church is just misunderstood. Give me a fuckin' break.

"A lot of people are getting their view of Christianity and the Bible from the book," said Alex McFarland, a speaker and writer for Focus on the Family, an evangelical group. He said the message of the book "broke my heart."

In searching for a middle road through this thicket of competing agendas, Sony has opted to say nothing, at least for the moment. And there are signs that the studio has not ruled out attracting religious moviegoers, including those who made an international sensation last year of Mel Gibson's film, "The Passion of the Christ."

"The phrase I heard used several times was 'Passion dollars'; they want to try to get 'The Passion' dollars if they can," said Ms. Nicolosi, referring to her conversations about the film. "They're wrong," she added. "It's sacrilegious, irreligious. They're thinking they can ride the 'Passion' wave with this. And I said, 'Are you kidding me?' "

They are being silly if they think they're going to get the Passion demographic. They shouldn't even try for it. Just let Ron Howard make the movie he wants to make, stay faithful to the story, and if people don't like it, they don't have to see it.

Funny they should mention Mel Gibson, because that's exactly what he did -- he made the snuff film he wanted to make. It was his right to make it the way he wanted to, and it was people's right to decide whether to see the thing or not. That should be the end of it.

Ron Howard, Sony, Brian Grazer, Dan Brown, Tom Hanks -- none of them owe the church, or Focus on the Family, or any of the rest of the professional wingnut pressure groups a damned thing. Make the movie, be prepared to counter their nonsense....and go with God on that.

Worst. Preznit. Ever.

America's case of buyer's remorse with the tard-in-chief continues, and deepens, like a really bad sunburn. (That one's for all you red-staters out there -- hyuk hyuk.)

Bush has seen his approval rating plummet since he was sworn in for a second term in January, when 57 percent approved of his handling of the job and 40 percent disapproved.

The poll involved interviews with 1,004 adult Americans conducted by telephone Friday through Sunday. The total included 443 who identified themselves as Republicans and 466 who said they were Democrats.

Yeah well, it's not like the rest of us will accept your abject apologies, morons. Voting for a clear and proven dipshit like Bush (see accompanying photo)....

....just because you were "uncomfortable" with John Kerry is no defense, it is a confession to severe retardation. I mean, you did see the debates, didn't you? One guy was able to speak in a thorough and deliberate manner in an extemporaneous format; the other gibbered and babbled like a third-grader who was held back in his ESL classes. The contrast could hardly have been more stark.

While Bush's slide in approval rating continues, a former resident of the White House, Sen. Hillary Clinton, saw her poll numbers rise.

According to the poll, 68 percent of respondents said they feel Clinton is a strong and decisive leader, and 60 percent said they view the Democratic senator from New York as likable.

I've never been much of a Hillary! fan, but compared to a knuckle-dragging fool like George W. Bush, she's a godsend. Compared to George W. Bush, Homer Simpson would be a godsend.

Bush's slumping approval ratings seemed directly tied to the war in Iraq, where near-daily bombings have taken an increasing toll on U.S. troops, Iraqi police and civilians.

Fifty-six percent of those polled said they thought things were going badly for the United States in Iraq, and 43 percent said things were going well.

That same 43% were also likely to be distracted by bright and shiny objects, and be stumped by most Wheel of Fortune puzzles. People who have trouble putting their fingers together in the dark have to set their sights somewhat lower, and fortunately they have found a preznit who can stoop to those standards.

If their megachurch pastor told them to vote for a cartoon character (that is, someone even more cartoonish than Bush), they would probably weigh the pros and cons of such a move, at the very least. They'd vote for George W. Jetson if someone told them he was agin' fags gettin' hitched.

And that, boys and girls, is why we'll be eating the Koreans' dust in another generation. Stupid really is as stupid does.

Novak's Theorem

James Wolcott passes along the timeless musical question about Novakula:

DCMediaGirl--a gal on the go, a gal in the know--posts about Robert Novak's senior moment. She wonders, as do we all, why his slimeball behavior was tolerated for so long. It wasn't as if his on-air cussword was out of character.

....

This to me is the psychological puzzler regarding Novak's personality and career--or rather, the coddling of that career by his colleagues. Amy Sullivan did an outstanding job describing in forensic detail the size and scope of Novak's bulletproof protective bubble for The Washington Monthly--how none of the laws that apply to others ever seem applied to him--but she didn't get to the "why" of it, and I can't either.

....

Even on the final broadcast of The Capital Gang, Novak pissed on his colleagues from on high. He said that one of the most frequently asked questions from viewers was if the Gang went out for drinks or dinner afterwards, if they socialized after the broadcast. And Novak said that he had better things to do with his Saturday nights than hang out with his fellow panelists.

And maybe he did. But on the final broadcast, surrounded by fellow journalists, some of whom he had done the show with for decades, he could have said the same thing with a touch of class and grace. But, no, he couldn't resist dropping a final acid drop of disdain. He's an awful political operator, an awful writer, a blustering imposter when it comes to the truth, a swaggering little tinpot Napoleon of the Beltway for over a half-century, and the real mystery is how he got away with it, and why it took a profanity to torpedo a career that should have been mothballed decades ago.

I believe I know the answer to how Novak gets away with it, and I'm sure it's what you all were already thinking:

He knows where all the bodies are buried.

MADD

The Lone Star Iconoclast is giving an ongoing play-by-play of the protests at Bush's ranch by several anti-war groups.

Cindy Sheehan, the mother of a soldier killed in Iraq last year, is seeking a meeting with President Bush, who is vacationing in Crawford, to have some of her questions answered about the war. Several busloads of interested individuals are expected in Crawford to support her cause. Sheehan has said that she is willing to camp out in Crawford until she gets to meet with the President.

Mrs. Sheehan may want to consider joining forces with fellow mothers who have lost their children in combat, give it something snappy and memorable. I suggest Mothers Against Drunk Dipshits. They could use the media to establish a meme, rename Bush's ranch to the Arbusto Chickenhawk Sanctuary.

I'm dead serious here; I think given the current American mindset, the only thing required to really crumble the Bush house of cards is some smart sloganeering. The corollary to that is that only some smart sloganeering and idea marketing will work against a monster constructed of the same material.


[Tip O' The Hammer to Jurassic Pork for the link.]

[update: CNN also has coverage of the protest, and comments from Mrs. Sheehan.]

Sore Losers

Yeah, the post title is reference to the feckless leadership of the Democratic Party, as you've probably already guessed. But first, let's talk briefly about retiring Raiders quarterback Rich Gannon, who sustained a broken neck in the third game last season, and is just now finally facing reality and leaving the game.

Let's just say there's a lesson here.

Rich Gannon's mind, his arm, his legs and his heart desperately wanted this to be the beginning of his 19th year in the NFL.

His injured neck, with a fragile vertebra still mending following a vicious helmet-to-helmet tackle in Week 3 of the 2004 season, conspired to end his rags-to-riches football career before he was ready.

So Gannon, the fiery four-time Pro Bowler and 2002 NFL Most Valuable Player, reluctantly but officially closed the book on his playing days Saturday before a crowd of teammates, coaches and friends during an emotional ceremony at the team's training headquarters in Napa.

"As far as the decision to retire, it was an easy one for me. It really was not my decision," said Gannon, 39, who has signed with CBS Sports as a game-day analyst for their NFL broadcasts and has other television and radio opportunities before him. "I'm not able to continue to play physically, and that really takes all of the guesswork out of it.

"For a player like myself, who still feels that he's got enough left in his tank and enough left in his arms and legs to continue to play, unfortunately, my neck will not allow me to continue my career."

....

Raiders owner Al Davis saw the quarterback's upwardly mobile career track mimic that of the team, as Oakland progressed from 8-8 in 1999 under coach Jon Gruden to 12-4 in 2000, then 10-6 in '01 -- the year of the "Tuck Rule" playoff loss at New England -- to 11-5 and a Super Bowl berth in '02 under coach Bill Callahan.

"That's what I mean by work ethic." Davis said "Who hurts when you lose, who it really, really bothers them when you lose. And I think (Gannon) is a sore loser. But so am I. And so were the great quarterbacks -- sore losers. I think you have to be that way." [emphasis mine]

Amen. As absurd as it may sound at first blush, I believe that the solons of the Democratic Party could take a page from Rich Gannon's book. What exactly have they gained by brooking compromise with those who actively, publicly, and consistently seek their destruction as a viable political opposition? Not a goddamned thing, that's what.

The Democrats are so damned busy putting on their painfully earnest game face, to try to win back the defectors from 2000 (and by that, I don't mean the few percent that went for Nader, I mean the much greater number of people who jumped over to Bush because they bought into that "compassionate conservative" horseshit), that they have forgotten about the people who've stuck with them.

I'm sick of fence-straddlers like Dianne Feinstein cynically endorsing flag-burning amendments every time she's up for re-election (she did it last time too, which is why I voted for Tom Campbell); either you are for the free expression of speech, or you're not -- not to mention the obvious fact that a flag-burning amendment is the answer to a question nobody with any sense of priority or proportion is even asking. Joementum Lieberman is another example of a gutless shill who refuses to just step up and tell idiots like Rick Santorum and Tom Coburn to just fucking get bent already.

Back to Rich Gannon. Here's a guy who wants to win so fucking bad, he wanted back in after breaking his neck. Okay? And keep in mind, Gannon was actually drafted by New England as a defensive back. Once again, here is a guy who wants to win so bad, he's willing to learn a whole new skill set so he can get in and contribute. He's literally sacrificed his health and jeopardized even his very ability to physically move around.

Gannon didn't break his neck on some fluke play, either -- in the Tampa Bay game last year, as the Raiders neared the goal line, Gannon scrambled right up the middle and lowered his head as Tampa Bay linebacker Derrick Brooks lowered his to make the tackle. Gannon frequently did this sort of thing anyway, but in this instance he had extra motivation, as it was an opportunity to stick it to former Oakland coach Jon Gruden, who had gone on to Tampa Bay and thwarted Gannon's sole attempt at winning a Super Bowl.

Whether you're a football fan or not, you at least have to appreciate the fact that DiFi or Lieberman will never stick their necks out for their team, no matter how many times the other team taunts them and makes them suck on it. For a creature like Lieberman, to actually take a risk would be to invite Joeblivion. I'm sure he thinks he's pulling some martial-arts shit, using the opponent's force against him, but it doesn't work that way. There's simply no room in 4GW politics for Joejitsu.

Politicans and their hangers-on will respond that this is not football, this is life, and thus the stakes are infinitely higher. I say that that's precisely why they should be willing to give it all they've got. The time for the old gutless standby of politics being the "art of the possible" is past. This is the new millennium, baby, and if you don't get that Iraq is not the only milieu which uses fourth-generation warfare, then fucking go home already and let someone have your political seat who is willing to fight. Let me have that Senate seat -- I'll tell Rick Santorum to suck my cock before I lend his medieval thought patterns any credence just for the sake of bipartisan comity. Fuck that shit.

Seriously, people are abuzz at how Paul Hackett's near-miss in Ohio is damned near equivalent to an upset, in terms of political momentum. I agree, but I also think that the powers that be need to take the proper lesson from Hackett's campaign, and look at specifically what he brought to it. Fire. Passion. The resonance of rightness, as Robert Fripp once referred to it. Hackett never watered down the visceral nature of his argument for the sake of fake civility. He called Bush an SOB because Bush is an SOB; he called Bush and his lackeys chickenhawks because that is exactly what they are.

Hackett has demonstrated what Howard Dean demonstrated before him, before Dean got derailed by the orchestrations of a callow and bored "free press" -- indeed, the Republicans have been demonstrating it for a good decade now. Passion and anger, properly directed, can be very useful and constructive, and despite the false cries for civility, it's what people want in these polarized times.

Sometimes it takes those intangible qualities to find that fabled "fire within", and stand up resolutely for what the fuck you believe in, without worrying about what all the focus groups and NASCAR dads and security moms will think. You know what they'll think? They'll think you mean what you say, that they can count on you, that your word means something, that their successes and failures are your successes and failures.

Let's take a look at a story which is resurfacing as of late, a story which epitomizes the failure of the Democrats to function as a viable opposition. Let's talk about Ohio.

Like a lot of people in this country (and like most all of my colleagues in the journalism world), my instinctual reaction to the Ohio electoral-mess story has always been one of revulsion and irritation. Almost on principle I had refused even to look at any of the news stories surrounding the Ohio vote; there is a part of me that did not want to be associated with any sore-loser hysteria of the political margins, and in particular with this story, the great conspiratorial Snuffleupagus of the defeated left.

It had always seemed to me that I understood the psychology of the Ohio story without having to examine the facts involved. I thought the story appealed most directly to a group of people who were still reeling after 2000, an election which George W. Bush not only lost according to the popular vote, but plainly stole in the electoral college. The evidence for this theft has been there for everyone to see for five years now; few serious thinkers even dispute the matter anymore, just as few Democrats would even bother denying now that John Kennedy stole the 1960 election.

Yet, Bush remains president. And not only has he remained president, he hasn't even had the decency to act embarrassed about it. He's remained president right out in the open, in front of our faces, like he's proud of that shit.

For a certain segment of the population, this state of affairs must have been psychologically unacceptable....Ohio, it always seemed to me, was a wish their hearts made.

I think most of the people who voted for Kerry, not just those mythical monolithic "leftists", had similar sentiments. The 2004 campaign was exhausting, for the spectators as well as the participants, and in defeat, the anti-Bush crowd's last best fading hope was that if they didn't squawk too much about some of the more egregious shenanigans, the lame-duck Bushies might be a bit gracious in victory.

We can all see how that worked out for us. If this administration has a motto, it's "Suck On It". Not sure how that would translate in Latin -- "E Pluribus Suckum", maybe.

That in itself didn't make the Ohio story illegitimate. It did, however, make it something I wanted to avoid precisely because I disliked George Bush. On some level I suspected that the more publicity the Ohio mess got, the more discredited Bush's political opponents would be in the end. The media, I knew, would dismiss the Ohio story in exactly the casually vicious manner described above—as hysteria, as the delusional work of professional conspiracy theorists, as the behavior of sore losers unable to accept George Bush's clear popular victory.

That last part, incidentally, was the formulation most journalists used when picking their official excuse for ignoring the '04 Ohio story. Because Bush really did win the popular vote, they argued, there was no point in investigating a possible electoral fraud in Ohio, because no one had really been cheated out of office.

That idea allowed the media simply sidestep the entire issue, and escape having to make a pronouncement about the legitimacy of the Ohio elections—something they seemed hell bent on avoiding.

Even when they had a completely plausible excuse to at least investigate the Ohio charges on their own—after Michigan congressman John Conyers issued a lengthy report detailing the Ohio indiscretions—the big dailies still blew off the case. The New York Times mentioned the Conyers report only in the context of a 381-word page A16 item in January about John Kerry endorsing the election results ("Election Results to Be Certified, With Little Fuss From Kerry," 1/16/05). That piece ended with a quote by Dennis Hastert, who dismissed the Conyers report as the work of the "loony left."

Here Taibbi gets to what I really think is the crux of the biscuit -- the media's complicity in all this simply cannot be ignored anymore. Whether passive or active, the sheer disregard for prioritizing facts, for caving to political pressure, for just being fucking lazy and indifferent to the truly important stories that affect the very ability of this nation to continue to function as a true representative democracy -- all of it, it's just unforgivable. It's pathetic that people sitting in their rooms, most probably only half-clothed, with Winamp blaring, typing for free, are frequently doing better and more consistent work than overpaid hacks like Leslie Blitzer.

All the media needs to do is make an honest effort to uncover and report facts -- if there's nothing to the Ohio stories, then make that the story. But there's an awful lot of somethings to it, and now that both the Democrats and the media are finally starting to figure out that they will never win with the neocons and theocons, no matter how much they capitulate, they have nothing left to lose by just sifting through the wreckage.

Here's the thing about Ohio. Until you really look at it, you won't understand its significance, which is this: the techniques used in this particular theft have the capacity to alter elections not by dozens or hundreds or even thousands of votes, but by tens of thousands.

And if we ignore this now, we're putting proven methods for easily ripping off major elections in the hands of the same party that had no qualms whatsoever about lying its way into a war in Iraq. In the hands of a merely corrupt political party, a bad election or two would be no big deal. But these clowns we have in power now imagine themselves to be revolutionaries, and their psychology is a lot like that of the leadership of Enron, pre-meltdown—with each passing day that they get away with it, they become more convinced by a delusion of righteousness.

Obviously people who have followed this story before know the basic facts already, but for those who ignored Ohio until now, here's a very brief greatest hits of Ohio irregularities:

• As was the case in Florida, the secretary of state (Kenneth Blackwell, in Ohio), who is in charge of elections, was also the co-chair of the state's Bush-Cheney campaign.

• In a technique reminiscent of the semantic gymnastics of pre-Civil Rights Act election officials, Blackwell replaced the word "jurisdiction" with "precinct" in an electoral directive that would ultimately result in perhaps tens of thousands of provisional ballots—votes cast mainly by low-income residents—being disallowed.

• Blackwell initially rejected thousands of voter registrations because they were printed on paper that was, according to him, the wrong weight.

• In conservative, Bush-friendly Miami County, voter turnout was an Uzbekistan-esque 98.55 percent.

• In Warren county, election officials locked down the administration building and prevented reporters from observing the ballot counting, citing a "terrorist threat" (described as being a "10" on a scale of 1 to 10) that had been reported to them by the FBI. The FBI made no such report. Recounts conducted during this lockdown resulted in increased votes for Bush.

• In Franklin County, 4,258 votes were cast for Bush in a precinct where there were only 800 registered voters.

And so on. There are dozens more such glitches, which taken together suggest that the exit polls in Ohio, showing Kerry the victor, were probably accurate. But this is just a primer. More facts next week, plus an interview with Sherrod Brown—and a guide to what to do next.

I dunno. If I were a professional journamalist with corporate resources at my disposal, I would look at Taibbi's brief laundry list and find several things worth looking into. If I were an elected representative in the Democratic Party and I saw this list, I would want to launch an investigation -- and if I were repudiated in this effort by my Republican brethren, I would want to use whatever powers and status my office had to make sure every media outlet I could find publicized that fact, as well as the list itself.

John Kerry had that opportunity right after the election. Reports had come in about the Gahanna precinct machines tallying several thousand votes for Bush, in a precinct with only a few hundred total registered voters. Kerry had about $15 million left in his legal fund -- money that was there specifically to prevent another Florida. But Kerry allowed himself to be cowed by the Republican douchebags and the shitbirds in the punditocracy. He allowed himself to be intimidated by cheap assertions that "nobody" wanted a repeat of 2000, that he shouldn't be a "sore loser".

Well, bullshit. He should have been a sore loser; he should have been the sorest motherfucker on the planet. He got jobbed in Ohio, the way Gore got wilded in Florida in 2000. The Democrats have permitted themselves to be tempered by sneers of "get over it". They've actually tried to "get over it". This "let's come together for the sake of the country" shit is nice and all, but it's gotten them exactly bupkis.

Do they seriously think that if the tables had been turned, that Gore had gotten the nod in 2000 instead of Bush, that the GOP would have "gotten over it"? Are you fucking kidding? These people are sore winners -- what kind of losers do you think they are?

The Republican Party has done a bang-up job in fracturing the cohesiveness of the Democratic Party, but that doesn't mean it has to be that way. Either they decide to stick up for themselves, for their constituents, for their core principles, or they continue to allow themselves to be pushed around for the sake of temporary political expediency. And it is temporary; the fact that they brazenly spent the first half of 2005 trying to dismantle Social Security (and lie about it) demonstrates quite clearly that if the Republicans can't get the government small enough to drown in the bathtub, they'll settle for doing it to the Democrats.

And they'll start with the ones that helped them the most, so I hope DiFi and Joementum can breathe underwater.

Poll Smokers

As Vacation Boy heads off to clear his brush for a month -- which at this point might as well be moving to Montana to raise him a crop o' dennil floss -- the new poll numbers tell the tale.

Americans' approval of President Bush's handling of Iraq is at its lowest level yet, according to an AP-Ipsos poll that also suggests fewer than half now think he is honest.

Seriously, you have to wonder just what that "fewer than half" still think he's being "honest" about. He hasn't been honest about a damned thing since he strutted into the office; he sure as fuck hasn't been forthcoming since then, as he and his gang of little shitbirds continue to defile the place.

Really, all the "what the hell are these people smoking" sarcasm aside, just what are they thinking? He has been questioned consistently about his policies on what he would do if Karl Rove is in fact indicted (and, of course, Rove has already contradicted himself and implicated himself in outing Plame, so it's not as if it's a reach) or convicted, and he won't even answer that. It's a simple hypothetical; there's no need to sit there and publicly woolgather over the presumption of innocence and the need for all the facts. Enough facts are already known to make it a valid question worthy of the straight answer that Bush is supposedly admired for by his iconodules.

On matters of policy, Bush and his minions have been far more opaque. He has been nothing but wrong about Iraq, and very well may have even fucked up Afghanistan through neglect. The key to his continued ability to stay intact is to simply not admit even the existence of a problem.

Even though Bush famously did not use a 12-step program to overcome his alcoholism, it still would be interesting if he went through it, just to see how it'd be for him at the "make amends" step. He could use it; as notoriously un-self-reflective as he is, he desperately needs to critically examine his own motivations and insecurities. He's a whole bundle of demons and stupids, and ignoring them has clearly only emboldened them. If he were a floor manager at the Midland Circuit City, as he would be in a rational universe, it wouldn't be much of a problem.

In a world where he runs a country and he's on the short end of the aggregate intellect curve, it's a fuckin' problem.

A solid majority still see Bush as a strong and likable leader, though the poll indicates the president's confidence is seen as arrogance by a growing number.

Approval of Bush's handling of Iraq, which had been hovering in the low- to mid-40s most of the year, dipped to 38 percent. Midwesterners and young women and men with a high school education or less were most likely to disapprove of Bush on his handling of Iraq in the past six months.

American troops have suffered heavy casualties in Iraq this month. On Wednesday, 14 Marines were killed in the Euphrates River valley in the worst roadside bombing targeting Americans since the war began in March 2003.

On Monday, seven Marines were killed, six of whom died in a gun battle near Haditha in western Iraq.

William Anderson, a retired Republican from Fort Worth, Texas, said Bush "has the right intentions, but he's going about them the wrong way."

"Iraq is one of the issues that everybody has a problem with," Anderson said. "There are some big discussions about it around town. Everybody's got their agreements and disagreements. It seems like there's no end. Is it going to end up another Vietnam?"

One has to give Mr. Anderson some small measure of props here. There may be hope that principled, concerned, true conservatives are finally seeing this small "man" for what he truly is -- a feckless, irresponsible frat boy with no real concern for the damage he causes, because Daddy's always been there to clean up his messes.

And it's not just arrogance, it's not just a warped variation of noblesse oblige -- it's a pattern of willful negligence and ignorance. It's like letting a chimp operate a howitzer; don't be too surprised when he levels your house, and then tries to tear you up when you go to stop him. After all, he's a fuckin' chimp.

....And Justice For All

So now we have secret jails. Raise your hand if you're actually surprised by this.

OK, Dubya, you can put yours back down. Thanks for playing. Perhaps the secret jails were a result of "intelligent design". Go with that.

Two Yemeni prisoners have claimed they were held in secret, underground US jails for more than 18 months, Amnesty International has said.
The human rights group has called on the US to reveal details of the alleged secret detention of suspects abroad.

Amnesty has said it fears the case is part of a "much broader picture" in which the US is holding prisoners at a network of undisclosed locations.

The US state department had no immediate comment to make.

Well, of course they didn't. If they did, it'd be along the lines of the "few bad apples" sort of misdirection they specialize in. Or is that the Defense Department? It's so hard to keep 'em straight these days.

The two Yemeni men, Muhammad Faraj Ahmed Bashmilah and Salah Nasser Salim Ali, were arrested separately but reported almost identical experiences to Amnesty.

Both say they were arrested in 2003 in Jordan and tortured for four days by Jordanian intelligence services.

Alleged methods include being beaten on the feet while bound and suspended upside-down. One of the men claims he was threatened with sexual abuse and electric shocks.

Each says he was then flown to an unnamed underground jail, where he was held in solitary confinement for six to eight months with no access to lawyers.

So it's really another case of "extraordinary rendition", except these people are being rendered -- that is, disappeared -- to extranational jails run by us. Sweet.

Of course, we've also been doing okay with the jails we admit to.

Iraqi Maj. Gen. Abed Hamed Mowhoush was being stubborn with his American captors, and a series of intense beatings and creative interrogation tactics were not enough to break his will. On the morning of Nov. 26, 2003, a U.S. Army interrogator and a military guard grabbed a green sleeping bag, stuffed Mowhoush inside, wrapped him in an electrical cord, laid him on the floor and began to go to work. Again.

It was inside the sleeping bag that the 56-year-old detainee took his last breath through broken ribs, lying on the floor beneath a U.S. soldier in Interrogation Room 6 in the western Iraqi desert. Two days before, a secret CIA-sponsored group of Iraqi paramilitaries, working with Army interrogators, had beaten Mowhoush nearly senseless, using fists, a club and a rubber hose, according to classified documents.

The sleeping bag was the idea of a soldier who remembered how his older brother used to force him into one, and how scared and vulnerable it made him feel. Senior officers in charge of the facility near the Syrian border believed that such "claustrophobic techniques" were approved ways to gain information from detainees, part of what military regulations refer to as a "fear up" tactic, according to military court documents.

The circumstances that led up to Mowhoush's death paint a vivid example of how the pressure to produce intelligence for anti-terrorism efforts and the war in Iraq led U.S. military interrogators to improvise and develop abusive measures, not just at Abu Ghraib but in detention centers elsewhere in Iraq, in Afghanistan and at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Mowhoush's ordeal in Qaim, over 16 days in November 2003, also reflects U.S. government secrecy surrounding some abuse cases and gives a glimpse into a covert CIA unit that was set up to foment rebellion before the war and took part in some interrogations during the insurgency.

Yep, just a few bad apples, just a bunch of crazy kids blowin' off steam. Nothing systematic or deliberate, nobody here but us chickens. Hey, weren't they going to release the rest of those Abu Ghraib photos a couple months ago? Sure they were, until we all got distracted by Karl Rove and Bob Roberts.
And then there are some who just don't give a shit about the silly concept of due process of law, those brave souls that don't consider the likelihood that most of the people in Gitmo were apparently sold to us by warlords looking to turn a quick buck on reward money. Oh well, let's just kill 'em all and let Allah sort 'em out.

O’REILLY: I don’t give them any protection. I don’t feel sorry for them. In fact, I probably would have ordered their execution if I had the power.

Do people still watch The Falafel Factor?

So I guess it's no wonder that Brand America is beginning to take a real beating in the world marketplace of ideas and respectability. But hey, we don't care what the other 95% thinks. Good thing.

The US is increasingly viewed as a "culture-free zone" inhabited by arrogant and unfriendly people, according to study of 25 countries' brand reputations.


The findings, published online today, will add to concerns that anti-Americanism is hurting companies whose products are considered to be distinctly "American".

The Anholt-GMI Nation Brands Index found that although US foreign policy remained a key driver of hostility, dissatisfaction with the world's sole superpower might run deeper.

"The US is still recognised as a leading place to do business, the home of desirable brands and popular culture," said Simon Anholt, author of the survey. "But its governance, its cultural heritage and its people are no longer widely respected or admired by the world."

But, but....but we've got balls of plastic wrap, dude! Those poncey euros just don't understand, we're the country of balls.

Last Throe Update

On top of the six Marine snipers who were ambushed and killed yesterday, another 14 Marines were killed early this morning.

Fourteen U.S. Marines and a civilian interpreter were killed and another Marine was wounded in an insurgent attack today northwest of Baghdad, the military said.

The Marines died when their amphibious assault vehicle hit a bomb during combat 1.2 miles (2 kilometers) south of Haditha, the military said in a statement e-mailed from the city of Fallujah. The incident brought to 21 the number of Marines killed in the region in three days.

U.S. and Iraqi forces in the past week have fought insurgents around Haditha, killing at least 20 rebels since July 29, the military said yesterday. Haditha is in al-Anbar province, where Iraqi and U.S. forces began operations against insurgents in late May.

The leader of the al-Qaeda terrorist network in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, has sought refuge with local tribes in the province who give him support and shelter, the military says.

U.S.-led troops and Iraqi security forces are struggling to contain an insurgency that has become more violent with the approach of an Aug. 15 deadline to draft the country's new constitution. The charter is scheduled for a national referendum Oct. 15, paving the way for general elections by the end of the year.

Marines Killed

The interpreter's nationality and other details weren't given. The Marines killed today were assigned to Regimental Combat Team 2, 2nd Marine Division, II Marine Expeditionary Force (Forward), the military said.

Seven Marines from the same unit died in action two days ago. Today's casualties bring to 1,816 the number of U.S. military personnel who have died in Iraq since the 2003 invasion to oust Saddam Hussein, according to Defense Department figures.

The insurgency has killed more than 4,000 Iraqis, including 2,000 civilians, since January, according to figures released by the defense, interior and health ministries, Agence France-Presse reported.

As many as 26,264 Iraqi civilians have died as a result of the invasion and subsequent violence, according to a tally by Iraq Body Count, a London-based group that opposes the war and compiles its casualty toll from English-language media reports and official statements.

Jesus. Almost two dozen troops from the same unit.

Americans Worried

A survey of the U.S. public released today shows that 56 percent said they ``worry a lot'' that the war in Iraq is leading to too many casualties, while 26 percent said they ``worry somewhat.'' Eighteen percent said they don't worry at all in the poll, which surveyed 1,004 adults by telephone June 1-13 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

The poll, conducted for the first time, and scheduled to be repeated every six months, was a joint effort of the nonpartisan research group Public Agenda and Foreign Affairs magazine. Sixty- four percent said that the U.S., in its war on terrorism, should put more emphasis on diplomatic and economic efforts.

American reporter Steven Vincent was found dead in the southern city of Basra, the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad said today. The freelancer was abducted and shot dead yesterday, AFP said.

Vincent, who reported for the Christian Science Monitor and the New York Times, had been in Iraq for several months and was working on a book about the history of Basra, according to his Web site. He had also written a book entitled ``In the Red Zone,'' about Iraq, which was published last year.

The 50-year-old journalist was kidnapped along with his female translator and shot dead by unknown gunmen, AFP said, citing Basra police. The translator suffered injuries, AFP said.

In a July 31 article in the New York Times, Vincent wrote that Basra's police force had been heavily infiltrated by Shiite militants. He also criticized U.K. forces for ignoring abuses of power by Shiite extremists.

Haven't heard much from the braintrust about any of this, the increasing volume of attacks from the insurgents, the levels of infiltration in the military forces that we're handing the keys over to ASAP. It will devolve into civil war, as Iranian-backed Shia militias start getting even with the Sunnis who oppressed them for decades.

And in the end, we'll be less safe, oil and gas will continue to rise in price, the Iraqis' nightmare will continue under a different set of monsters (or maybe they're the old guard re-instated), and the world at once despises us and no longer fears us.

Then there's this little gem, going largely unnoticed as we meander through Year Three of Dear Leader's Glorious Democratic Transformation:

Despite having the world's second-largest reserves of oil, Iraq announced Monday that it would begin rationing gasoline over the next few months to cope with an ongoing fuel shortage.

Iraqis will be issued ration cards next month allowing them to buy limited quantities of kerosene and cooking gas. Later, they will face restrictions on gasoline purchases.

Increased demand for fuel and the failure of the U.S.-led reconstruction effort to restore refining capacity has led to chronic shortages, resulting in long lines and short tempers at gas stations. The government has been spending millions of dollars a month to import fuel to meet the nation's needs.

Imagine, for a second, just how monumentally inept you have to be to turn the world's second-largest proven oil reserve into an electricity-starved fuel importer. Yes, refining capacity has been sabotaged by insurgents. But still. They have to ration gas in Iraq.

Nice going, guys. Anything else you want to fuck up?

The Genius Strokes Again

Keeping in mind the gibbering idiot Assrocket's assertion last week that Bush is a misunderstood genius, we turn to the reality-based media for confirmation of that amazingly reckless declaration.

In a high-spirited and free-wheeling interview with a handful of Texas print reporters yesterday, President Bush:

· Expressed "complete confidence" in top aide Karl Rove -- while stubbornly refusing to say anything more about what he knows about the investigation into the leak of a CIA agent's identity.

· Said he still believes his friend, Baltimore Orioles first baseman Rafael Palmeiro, has never used steroids -- in spite of the player's suspension Monday for violating baseball's anti-drug policy.

· Endorsed efforts by Christian conservatives to include the teaching of "intelligent design" as an alternative to evolution in public school science classes.

Get all that? Rove, despite his ever-shifting "dog ate my homework" excuses, is just a good man (doing hard work, no doubt) getting rolled by tricksy journos (and it's a well-known fact that when a man is 100% innocent, you just can't say anything); Palmeiro is just an innocent man getting rolled by MLB, which apparently has a vested interest in losing money by suspending and embarrassing the people that put money into its coffers; and Jeebus deserves equal time in science class, even though by definition, He doesn't even want it. After all, either you believe or you don't.

Clearly, Bush does. He believes whatever anyone tells him, apparently. Read the whole transcript from Froomkin's article. It's a real window into the hamster wheel that passes for this guy's brain.

Now, is Bush really that freakin' stupid? I doubt it, if only because someone that truly stupid would be unable even to exercise the low rigors of regurgitating 3x5 cards at potemkin town-halls, which is all Bush does anymore when he talks to reg'lar Merkins. So that means that much of this is ass-covering and pitching to the mouth-breather base.

After all, how would it look if it turned out that Palmeiro had been using 'roids since he was a Texas Ranger, and George W. Bush was his boss? And it's not as if Bush was afraid to get his hands dirty with the baseball team -- he suckered the citizens of Arlington into buying him a nice new stadium, and he eminent-domained hisself a parkin' lot for the nice new stadium. To just instantly assume that he'd never tolerate one of his power hitters popping an occasional shot of stanozolol -- well, okay. Good luck with that blind assumption there.

One might also assume he was a misunderstood genius. Such are the inherent pitfalls of slavish hero-worship.

More on the creationism/evolution "debate" here.

"I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought," Mr Bush said in comments to five Texas newspapers on Monday. "You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, the answer is yes."

Although Mr Bush did not explicitly endorse the concept of Intelligent Design, which contends that certain features of biological systems are best explained by an "intelligent" cause rather than by natural selection, such influential groups as the National Academy of Sciences strongly oppose the teaching of ID in schools.

Mr Bush's comments threaten to place him outside the mainstream of scientific opinion and align him more closely with social conservatives and with "creationists" who challenge Darwinism on religious grounds.

"Mr Bush would have done better to heed his White House science adviser, John Marburger, who said that evolution was the 'cornerstone of modern biology' and who has characterised ID as not even being a scientific theory," said Glenn Branch, deputy director of the National Center for Science Education, a group that defends the teaching of evolution. Mr Marburger expres-sed those views in an online discussion with the Chronicle of Higher Education in March, Mr Branch said.

"The federal government has very little influence over curriculums and instruction. The most Mr Bush could accomplish is stirring up the feeling that he supports the creationists' position," said Mr Branch. Yet mainstream Republican opinion has begun to show differences on matters of religion and science. Last week Bill Frist, the Senate majority leader, distanced himself from Mr Bush's restrictive position on stem cell research, putting forward a bill that would enable the expansion of research using embryonic stem cells. "It isn't just a matter of faith, it's a matter of science," Mr Frist said.

Efforts to promote ID have been on the rise with the help of such groups as the Discovery Institute in Seattle. In a broadcast yesterday Dr James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, an influential conservative group, also predicted: "We are now on the verge of major changes in how the origins of life and evolution are taught in science class rooms across the nation."

In Kansas, the board of education is concluding hearings on whether creationism can be taught in schools. Georgia's Cobb County school system has placed labels on textbooks saying "Evolution is a theory, not a fact", and New York lawmakers attempted but lost a recent effort to enact a law requiring state schools to teach both ID and evolutionary theory.

John West, a director at the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture, recently accused "the new Darwinian fundamentalists of becoming just as intolerant as the religious fundamentalists they despise".

Yeah well, when you have facts and science on your side, you have the right to be "intolerant". He's right, and I for one will never apologize for it. I am intolerant of the notion that creation myths should be presented as science, just as I am intolerant of racism, or homophobia, of institutionalized corruption and thievery, of cruelty to children and animals -- of things that sensible people know objectively to be flat out wrong.

Put simply, there are just some subjects that do not require having both sides endlessly aired. After a while, it becomes obvious to even the slow kid in class that the airing of the contentious subject is the very point of it all. It's just a handy way to whip up political sentiment, and the accompanying monetary motivation. America's manufacturing base may have declined precipitously, but we never seem to run out of contrived conflict product.

I would sincerely encourage every would-be creationist out there to come up with a lesson plan for a comparative religion course, take it to their respective school boards, and prevail upon them to make such a course a required part of the curriculum. I see no problem whatsoever with that; children of any (or even no) religious background can learn a lot of constructive things about human history, and how intrinsically religion has entwined itself (and generally abused its role) with governmental power. That's one thing I can agree with Bush on -- part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought.

Of course, that's not what he really means -- what he really means is that he and his base of megachurch window-lickers want all children pummeled with explicitly Christian views, and they want taxpayers to pay for it.

If Bush or his minions just once had the fortitude to say what they really meant, the debates would end pretty damned quickly.

Stupid Bastards

Well, the highly-publicized Ohio congressional race between Iraq War vet Paul Hackett and corrupt shithouse rat Jean Schmidt ended, as most real-world elections seem to these days -- with the shithouse rat vote prevailing. Nice going, douchebags, so much for supporting the troops. It's not as if we didn't all know that that's just talk anyway. But shame on you all the same.

The good news is that in an area that generally runs about 70% Republican, Schmidt won 52-48. Still, 52% of these inbreds thought that the crazy bitch who trashed her opponent's war record and flat-out lied about it was a better choice than the guy who went to defend his country. Supposedly that's the most important, most honorable thing possible, or so we keep hearing from the professional pontificators.

As with the presidential election, the voting booth tells the truth, courtesy of Diebold. And on a day when six Marine snipers from Ohio were ambushed and murdered in Iraq today....hmmm, seems almost like an omen, doesn't it?

Yeah, Jean Schmidt will do a better job than Paul Hackett like George W. Bush is better than John Kerry (or hell, most Saturday morning cartoons, for that matter) would have been. The one day the yokels should have stayed home and worked on their giant balls of aluminum foil, they go out and legislate their spite and ignorance.

May their kids all get drafted.

Workin' Vacation

So I completely gutted the wife's bathroom over the weekend, and now I'm trying to get it all back together (repaint; tile the floor; new light fixture; new vanity/sink/faucet) before I start a new job on Thursday. So this week and next week are going to be pretty slow post-wise. Talk amongst yourselves, check out the archives, maybe even re-read one of the classics. Enjoy.

And at least I -- unlike some supposed leaders of the free world who shall remain nameless (and brainless) -- won't be walking away from lots of world-shattering issues on the table. War, economic distress, famine, unrest? Hell with that, I'm goin' ta Texas in August! Yeah, that sounds like vacation paradise to me, too. If you like the heat, you'll love the humidity.

But hey, as long as Himself believes in both Rafael Palmeiro and Santy Claus, he'll stay that course, with all the same resolute resolve and plasticene demeanor he brings to each and every "fuck you" end-run he does on the appointment process. And you gotta love the balls it takes to insist that a guy with a permanent milk mustache is qualified for anything other than peddling fried chicken. I think we'd have been better off if he'd appointed Michael Bolton to this gig.