I have to say I'm with IOZ on this one. One assumes as a given that most people, regardless of ideology, are touched by the ongoing genocide in Darfur. It's a rational response to insist that Something Be Done. But what? How? Most importantly, by whom? UN peacekeeping forces have been remarkably ineffective in a wide variety of areas, standing idly by while butchers did their thing in Srebrenica and Rwanda. So you can propose a UN force in southern Sudan, sure, but don't be surprised if they fail to stanch the flow of blood. And that's if the Chinese and Russians don't overrule such a move, which is highly unlikely.
Because Americans like simple solutions to problems, and simple explanations for them as well, it is easier to look at Darfur as a simple dichotomous conflict between Arab Muslims and black animist Christians. But this is like calling the Grand Canyon a big hole; it explains nothing of the specifics. It makes more sense to look at this as a violent expropriation of restive lands from a minority ethnic group. Perhaps if the janjaweed gave their victims smallpox-laden blankets the historical parallel would become more evident.
So. There are issues of land use, water, oil and economics underlying the more obvious faultlines of ethnic strife. Global warming is probably directly contributing to the increasing Saharification in the region. You have an international organization that is far more adept at accentuating the petty grievances of its members than in pooling their resources for meaningful police action. And you have a cohort of people who, because of media coverage and frequently in religious kinship, have taken this issue under their collective wing and heightened their insistence for its necessary resolution.
But nobody seems to be proposing exactly how this is to be done. The U.S. could not intervene unilaterally, even if it had a compelling rational self-interest there, even if its military wasn't overstretched elsewhere, even if the Chinese wouldn't mind greatly our interference. The logistics alone of putting and keeping a force of any meaningful size in the region would be prohibitive. And that's just to stop the carnage. Who repatriates the refugees, in a country we know absolutely nothing about, and whose own government is actively oppressing and murdering these people? You can't just go down to the county clerk's office and look up everyone's property deed and give it all back to the rightful owners.
Humanitarian interventions, for all their stated good intentions, rarely work as advertised. Unnoticed in its recent self-declaration of independence is that Kosovo is little more than a way-station for organized crime, with a giant U.S. base (Camp, uh, Bondsteel) in the center. No water, no electricity, a seething young unemployed population, and lots of heroin and girls moving through. And the usual "rebuilding" contracts are handed out with the usual institutional opacity to the usual profiteers.
And that's a small, easily accessible, more ethnically similar region. Imagine trying to deal with all those problems and more in a much more inhospitable, inaccessible, culturally hostile, and geographically large region. I'm not exactly a Kaplan devotee, and his name seems to be mud in most bien pensant librul circles, but the guy knows the places and the people firsthand, and predicted many aspects of the current dynamic over a decade ago.
We have our hands full as it is, and Africa is an intractable problem, much of it post-colonial but much of it self-perpetuating too; when multitudes of individuals all over the continent take several wives and have dozens of uneducated, unemployed children in disease-ridden shitholes, demographic disaster is to be expected at some point. And China's massive ratcheting up of its own oil demand, and the attendant geopolitical contingencies, is an entirely predictable consequence of globalizing labor and finance to the degree we have with them. Hell, some circles of U.S. policymaking are still haggling over whether or not to hand out condoms in Africa. Talk about not being on the same page; some of these fools aren't even in the same library as cold, hard reality.
Certainly that doesn't mean Darfur should be ignored, nor should Congo's horrific ongoing slaughter (which is currently double Darfur's and has involved most of its bordering neighbors). But well-intentioned people can and should realize that the direct approach, while more fulfilling, is practically unworkable for a variety of reasons.
Yet there are clear economic interests which can be addressed through diplomatic back channels; a partnering arrangement with the Chinese could be proposed and undertaken, giving them the prestige they seek and allowing us to have a righteous hand in all this. Still, only the Chinese are going to be able to effectively lean on the Sudanese government. We can work with them, but not without them.
The other tack may be to address the acquisition of arms by the Sudanese government and the militias. Are these official government procurements, or are they clandestine large-scale arms dealers, such as Viktor Bout, animals for whom killing is a business, and business is always good?
There should be a way to proceed with the lessons of Kosovo (anticipating localized consequences of humanitarian intervention) and Iraq (knowing something about the place and people you plan on occupying; preparing for fourth- and fifth-generation tactics) intact, but blundering in on another misguided mission of self-righteousness is fortunately not even on the table.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Margin Call
Ready to take the plunge?
Every ten years something like this happens, where a financial Ponzi scheme eventually collapses under its own weight, and the taxpayers are forced to bail it out. After a while, you have to assume that it's deliberate, that the Masters of the Universe have figured out the perfect grift -- innovate creative loopholes in the financial regulation system, devise arcane derivatives (really, just high-falutin' bookmaking, basically figuring the point spread for Jets-Giants) from them, run them and take profits until they collapse, since it's all invented wealth spiralling out of nothing to begin with, and then take further profits on the inevitable bailout.
The key is pegging so many interdependent financial and economic interests on these things that they become too big to be allowed to go under. After the bailout, someone promises to Do Something About It, stern looks are cast, abject apologies are offered, patchwork legislation is hastily devised, applied, and summarily circumvented as the process begins anew. Springtime on Wall Street!
And all without actually having created a single thing of tangible value. It's all IOUs that have value only as long as everyone agrees to believe that they have value, but there is no actual intrinsic worth to these CDOs and SIVs and such. They are merely finding a viable point spread in the diddling of percentages and fractions. They are shuffling gigantic wads of scrip back and forth, nothing more.
This is what happens when all of this phantom wealth, paid for with thin air, is bet on thin air. Think about it -- Carlyle Group's mortgage holdings were about $670 million in actual shareholder funds, but had over $20 billion leveraged, and now collapsing because the bond insurers will go broke underwriting these worthless scraps of paper. Bear Stearns is taking on water for precisely the same reason: they massively, irresponsibly overextended themselves way out on the margin.
These are economic deformities, malfunctions of the market that should not be resuscitated and allowed to perpetuate on the public dole. It's a second- or even third-order scam that ultimately comes out of our pockets. But then, as the saying goes, when you rob Peter to pay Paul, you can generally count on having Paul's support.
The problem is, as we are finding out yet again, we are both Peter and Paul.
U.S. stocks plunged for the third day this week after Bear Stearns Cos. required a bailout from the Federal Reserve and JPMorgan Chase & Co. to avoid collapse.
Bear Stearns, the second-largest underwriter of U.S. mortgage bonds, tumbled the most ever after the brokerage said it ran short of cash, spurring concern other banks lack funding.
Every ten years something like this happens, where a financial Ponzi scheme eventually collapses under its own weight, and the taxpayers are forced to bail it out. After a while, you have to assume that it's deliberate, that the Masters of the Universe have figured out the perfect grift -- innovate creative loopholes in the financial regulation system, devise arcane derivatives (really, just high-falutin' bookmaking, basically figuring the point spread for Jets-Giants) from them, run them and take profits until they collapse, since it's all invented wealth spiralling out of nothing to begin with, and then take further profits on the inevitable bailout.
The key is pegging so many interdependent financial and economic interests on these things that they become too big to be allowed to go under. After the bailout, someone promises to Do Something About It, stern looks are cast, abject apologies are offered, patchwork legislation is hastily devised, applied, and summarily circumvented as the process begins anew. Springtime on Wall Street!
And all without actually having created a single thing of tangible value. It's all IOUs that have value only as long as everyone agrees to believe that they have value, but there is no actual intrinsic worth to these CDOs and SIVs and such. They are merely finding a viable point spread in the diddling of percentages and fractions. They are shuffling gigantic wads of scrip back and forth, nothing more.
This is what happens when all of this phantom wealth, paid for with thin air, is bet on thin air. Think about it -- Carlyle Group's mortgage holdings were about $670 million in actual shareholder funds, but had over $20 billion leveraged, and now collapsing because the bond insurers will go broke underwriting these worthless scraps of paper. Bear Stearns is taking on water for precisely the same reason: they massively, irresponsibly overextended themselves way out on the margin.
These are economic deformities, malfunctions of the market that should not be resuscitated and allowed to perpetuate on the public dole. It's a second- or even third-order scam that ultimately comes out of our pockets. But then, as the saying goes, when you rob Peter to pay Paul, you can generally count on having Paul's support.
The problem is, as we are finding out yet again, we are both Peter and Paul.
Romancing the Stoned
Just when you think Bush can't get any more sociopathically indifferent to the realities of war -- his war -- he goes and ups (or is it lowers?) the ante:
Funny how when he was "slightly younger", and had that very opportunity to bring Freedom's Gift™ to Charlie, Bushscrambled for a bullshit gig defending the Tortilla Curtain politely declined and went to Yale. Apparently branding Deke pledges and running his mouth to his professors was where his "front line" concerns were.
I honestly wonder sometimes just what is wrong with this person. All snark aside, there's just something very fundamental missing. The utter lack of genuine empathy, the complete incompetence -- no, dereliction -- at interpreting plain empirical data, the inability to avoid stock sales pitches instead of saying something meaningful (e.g., his habit of saying "in other words" in roughly the same manner as a teenage girl prefaces every phrase with "like" or "you know").
Coming from a family where people actually served in combat, I have heard a few (very few, since most veterans actually don't like regaling civilians with them) war stories over the years -- WW2, Vietnam, Korea. Not one was ever told as if it were "romantic". That Sands of Iwo Jima shit never comes from actual combat veterans, only the chickenhawks who live vicariously through them. It's truly pathological. He walks past mirrors buck naked, and sees only full regalia.
"I must say, I'm a little envious," Bush said. "If I were slightly younger and not employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front lines of helping this young democracy succeed."
"It must be exciting for you ... in some ways romantic, in some ways, you know, confronting danger. You're really making history, and thanks," Bush said.
Funny how when he was "slightly younger", and had that very opportunity to bring Freedom's Gift™ to Charlie, Bush
I honestly wonder sometimes just what is wrong with this person. All snark aside, there's just something very fundamental missing. The utter lack of genuine empathy, the complete incompetence -- no, dereliction -- at interpreting plain empirical data, the inability to avoid stock sales pitches instead of saying something meaningful (e.g., his habit of saying "in other words" in roughly the same manner as a teenage girl prefaces every phrase with "like" or "you know").
Coming from a family where people actually served in combat, I have heard a few (very few, since most veterans actually don't like regaling civilians with them) war stories over the years -- WW2, Vietnam, Korea. Not one was ever told as if it were "romantic". That Sands of Iwo Jima shit never comes from actual combat veterans, only the chickenhawks who live vicariously through them. It's truly pathological. He walks past mirrors buck naked, and sees only full regalia.
Friday, March 14, 2008
Race to the Bottom
Bigger dipshit: Geraldine Ferraro or Jeremiah Wright? Discuss.
It's as if these idiots decided to make John Hagee look good.
It's as if these idiots decided to make John Hagee look good.
So Like Us
I suppose I hadn't really thought about it, but it makes sense that Bobo might regard himself as the Jane Goodall of the political primate set. Since he is neither Type A nor an alpha male, his observations are by necessity too generalized to be useful, too broad-brushed to be insightful.
I can buy that a certain level of emotional stuntedness comes with that higher ground, when it comes to business and politics. For a well-groomed corporate running dog, everything is a commodity, including -- hell, especially -- other people. They are there to be conquered, after a fashion. They're either in competition with you, or they work for you.
And pols by definition have to gladhand every sentient body who approaches them. That's the gig; it's probably not habit so much as second nature with most of them. They only deal with people they want something from, and everyone who talks to them wants something from them.
And this is not a revelation either, but elite call girls make elite money to go home and to be discreet, something mistresses cannot typically be relied upon to do.
Still, what I don't buy is that, given the necessary differences in personality between "them" and "us" (and again Bobo, though he goes to the same parties and drinks from the same poisoned well, proffers this bemused detachment as if he had been dropped in on all this from another planet; klaatu barada appletini, indeed), that there is a necessarily higher preponderance of unseemly behavior in that crowd.
If anything, a good chunk of the reg'lar folks most of us encounter in our daily lives are as emotionally stunted as Larry Craig or Eliot Spitzer. Maybe their "wide stance" simply takes a more socially acceptable, economically opportunistic form; instead of hustling random cock in a public bathroom, they have jacked up their F-350 a couple feet, and race about as if they actually had somewhere to be. There's more than one way to overcompensate for shortcomings. It's all about what people can afford, and what they think will impress the neighbors.
That's what the "more in sorrow than in moralistic anger" tone elides, that people are on the run from themselves, and if they could afford to, they might very well become the party pig that thinks every woman is there to fuck him. I mean, nobody in their right mind actually wants to line up outside of Wal-Mart the day after Thanksgiving to save thirty bucks on a DVD player. They've just conditioned themselves to understand that that's the best they can hope for.
I can buy that a certain level of emotional stuntedness comes with that higher ground, when it comes to business and politics. For a well-groomed corporate running dog, everything is a commodity, including -- hell, especially -- other people. They are there to be conquered, after a fashion. They're either in competition with you, or they work for you.
And pols by definition have to gladhand every sentient body who approaches them. That's the gig; it's probably not habit so much as second nature with most of them. They only deal with people they want something from, and everyone who talks to them wants something from them.
And this is not a revelation either, but elite call girls make elite money to go home and to be discreet, something mistresses cannot typically be relied upon to do.
Still, what I don't buy is that, given the necessary differences in personality between "them" and "us" (and again Bobo, though he goes to the same parties and drinks from the same poisoned well, proffers this bemused detachment as if he had been dropped in on all this from another planet; klaatu barada appletini, indeed), that there is a necessarily higher preponderance of unseemly behavior in that crowd.
If anything, a good chunk of the reg'lar folks most of us encounter in our daily lives are as emotionally stunted as Larry Craig or Eliot Spitzer. Maybe their "wide stance" simply takes a more socially acceptable, economically opportunistic form; instead of hustling random cock in a public bathroom, they have jacked up their F-350 a couple feet, and race about as if they actually had somewhere to be. There's more than one way to overcompensate for shortcomings. It's all about what people can afford, and what they think will impress the neighbors.
That's what the "more in sorrow than in moralistic anger" tone elides, that people are on the run from themselves, and if they could afford to, they might very well become the party pig that thinks every woman is there to fuck him. I mean, nobody in their right mind actually wants to line up outside of Wal-Mart the day after Thanksgiving to save thirty bucks on a DVD player. They've just conditioned themselves to understand that that's the best they can hope for.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Eliot Mess
It's generally a good thing for a preening, sanctimonious asshole to get their comeuppance, regardless of party. Spitzer is certainly no exception to that rule; from the day he floated into the state house on the wafting clouds of his own crusading righteousness, ethics have been a real problem. Perhaps a nice motivational speaking tour with Benito Giuliani is in the cards, the balding douchebag version of "Dumb and Dumber". I mean really, how fuckin' stupid and full of yourself do you have to be to get caught up in stupid shit like this, especially when your entire schtick is about what an ethical guy you are?
But what's equally interesting about all this is the circumstances of the investigation, and the direction the prosecution could take. Seriously, federal wiretaps on an internet escort service? Invoking the Mann Act when both participants are adults and met up at a mutually-agreed place? It's not as if Spitzer was driving a 15-year-old girl across state lines. And they rarely go after the clients or the girls in these cases -- it's always about the money and the people at the top. So this does have more than a whiff of Don Siegelman about it.
Obviously, the people who are most jubilant about Spitzer's downfall are the bookies and thieves in the casino sector.
And then they went out and celebrated in the usual way -- cooking up some new liquidity-put scam over a few rounds of Ketel One and a couple grams of Bolivian marching powder, followed by a not-too-discreet circle-jerk out in the parking lot.
But what's equally interesting about all this is the circumstances of the investigation, and the direction the prosecution could take. Seriously, federal wiretaps on an internet escort service? Invoking the Mann Act when both participants are adults and met up at a mutually-agreed place? It's not as if Spitzer was driving a 15-year-old girl across state lines. And they rarely go after the clients or the girls in these cases -- it's always about the money and the people at the top. So this does have more than a whiff of Don Siegelman about it.
Obviously, the people who are most jubilant about Spitzer's downfall are the bookies and thieves in the casino sector.
Cheers went up on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange Monday in response to news that New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer might resign over his alleged involvement with a prostitute.
It's hard to think of a man who engendered more hatred on Wall Street - or more qualified admiration from investor advocates - than Spitzer.
And then they went out and celebrated in the usual way -- cooking up some new liquidity-put scam over a few rounds of Ketel One and a couple grams of Bolivian marching powder, followed by a not-too-discreet circle-jerk out in the parking lot.
Sunday, March 09, 2008
Mean Girls
The cool thing about politics is that there are tacks to take and excuses to make for virtually any occasion. Thus that rising gorge felt by a fair chunk of the electorate (not just the "Obamatons", as if every political candidate didn't have a devoted claque of drooling movement acolytes at its core) at the freewheeling manipulations and calumniations of the Clinton Machine is actually a failure on the part of the nauseated to grow sufficient hide.
Yeah, it's as if they were gettin' all weepy 'n' shit the day before New Hampshire, feeling picked on by self-aggrandizing opponents. Shit happens, not that every Republican transgression has ritualistically been treated with such emoting as well. It's not a coincidence that toxic people inspire emetic reactions, regardless of professed affiliation. Maybe when Clinton finally decides which party she is actually running against (or, for that matter, for), we can dispense with the more emotive niceties, because at least people will know precisely where they -- and she -- stand.
The value in voting for Clinton in the end, after all the lies and smears from her and at her have wafted and settled, is that once and for all she can be hung with great care around their necks. It's a win-win; if she loses in the general election to McCain, the math can show that too many "Democrats" defected to the Straight Talk Express, thus perhaps at least temporarily diverting the tedium of the Thanksralph!ers, whilst they scramble for yet another excuse for their inability to field a decent candidate.
And if she wins? Well, it's no stretch to assume she'll turn out to be exactly what she appears to be -- smack dab in between Straight Talk and Holy Joe on the dial, a smooth corporate shill who will emote "your" pain as insurance and pharmaceutical companies underwrite a reshuffled health-care plan, and various rooms of the White House are rented out to googoo-eyed quasi-celebs. Certainly the oratory will be more astute, but so will the permanent campaigning and professional leg-humping. "Let's look to '12 together and continue the good vibrations" would likely be the theme of governance.
And if I'm wrong by more than a matter of degrees, I'll gladly admit it, which will differentiate me from the folks who will desperately cling to the toeholds of correct grammar and less brazen (but no less effective) corporate glad-handing.
Oh, that's right, I forgot -- she'll bring the troops home and defuse tensions with Iran. Which is why she voted for Kyl-Lieberman, months after she insisted incessantly that she had learned her lesson about being rolled by these idjits.
Lawd, you'd think it was Judgment at Nuremberg, with all this lofty, Oscar-caliber emoting.
Yeah, it's as if they were gettin' all weepy 'n' shit the day before New Hampshire, feeling picked on by self-aggrandizing opponents. Shit happens, not that every Republican transgression has ritualistically been treated with such emoting as well. It's not a coincidence that toxic people inspire emetic reactions, regardless of professed affiliation. Maybe when Clinton finally decides which party she is actually running against (or, for that matter, for), we can dispense with the more emotive niceties, because at least people will know precisely where they -- and she -- stand.
The value in voting for Clinton in the end, after all the lies and smears from her and at her have wafted and settled, is that once and for all she can be hung with great care around their necks. It's a win-win; if she loses in the general election to McCain, the math can show that too many "Democrats" defected to the Straight Talk Express, thus perhaps at least temporarily diverting the tedium of the Thanksralph!ers, whilst they scramble for yet another excuse for their inability to field a decent candidate.
And if she wins? Well, it's no stretch to assume she'll turn out to be exactly what she appears to be -- smack dab in between Straight Talk and Holy Joe on the dial, a smooth corporate shill who will emote "your" pain as insurance and pharmaceutical companies underwrite a reshuffled health-care plan, and various rooms of the White House are rented out to googoo-eyed quasi-celebs. Certainly the oratory will be more astute, but so will the permanent campaigning and professional leg-humping. "Let's look to '12 together and continue the good vibrations" would likely be the theme of governance.
And if I'm wrong by more than a matter of degrees, I'll gladly admit it, which will differentiate me from the folks who will desperately cling to the toeholds of correct grammar and less brazen (but no less effective) corporate glad-handing.
Oh, that's right, I forgot -- she'll bring the troops home and defuse tensions with Iran. Which is why she voted for Kyl-Lieberman, months after she insisted incessantly that she had learned her lesson about being rolled by these idjits.
Secret Treaties
Edroso profiles yet another in the endless line of dish-it-out-but-can't-take-it conservapros, people who are otherwise largely unemployable, yet whinge aloud about why they put themselves through All This.
You have to almost figure that, somewhere in the hundreds of obfuscatory signing statements Fredo has signed over the years, one might have established a propaganda mini-arm (a meta-carpal, if you will, and you just might) for these folks. A Hire the Handicapped, They're Fun to Watch Department, full of cushy sinecures for sloppy thinkers, each bizarrely convinced that they work and live on a bed of nails.
You have to almost figure that, somewhere in the hundreds of obfuscatory signing statements Fredo has signed over the years, one might have established a propaganda mini-arm (a meta-carpal, if you will, and you just might) for these folks. A Hire the Handicapped, They're Fun to Watch Department, full of cushy sinecures for sloppy thinkers, each bizarrely convinced that they work and live on a bed of nails.
Saturday, March 08, 2008
My Biznitch Is Da Shiznit
I must have missed something with this Charlotte Allen thing. I mean, I read the essay or whatever it was, and came away largely disinterested, thinking that this sort of thing was more amusing back when Sam Kinison, Andrew Dice Clay, and 2Live Crew were doing it.
But that's about it. I don't get the outrage. Someone in the media wrote something ineffably stupid and pointless. Alert the med....ah, it seems kinda par for the course. Even my wife (who has no interest in any of the shows or movies mentioned, for the record) read it and was mildly amused, but not put off by any of it. Silly people write silly things, and silly newspapers publish them. So it goes.
Look, the real story is that, when it comes to undermining women, nobody does it like other women. Look at your garden-variety pro-life rally. Roughly 10:1 female, right? Sure, the organizers and media reps for the activist groups are male (if only technically), but all the foot soldiers are wimmins.
It may be sexist to say so, but so be it. It's the truth. Men certainly do their part to push women around, keep them down, disempower them, blah blah blah, but in free modern societies, it takes another woman to actually cobble together an "article" out of hoary borscht belt schtick. And get paid for it, no less! The marvels of capitalism are wondrous and manifold.
The other problem here is one that obviously permeated political writing long ago -- the idea that anything that whiffs "provocative" is worth printing. Hell, didn't that she-toad Coulter call for the disenfranchisement of her own (former, I assume) gender last summer? And one half of the commentariat goes batshit about it while the other half says, "oh, that Ann". Either way, she gets paid and she gets the attention she craves.
WaPo has figured out by now what riles people up, and they're happy to print it, and point to the surging click-through traffic from angry cyberprotesters. Allen's schtick seems to be that of the bourgeois contrarian, picking out this or that hornet's nest to whack, regardless of its accuracy or even coherence of point. Perhaps the Post and its readers might be better served if standards for publishing, rather than the content itself, were addressed.
But that's about it. I don't get the outrage. Someone in the media wrote something ineffably stupid and pointless. Alert the med....ah, it seems kinda par for the course. Even my wife (who has no interest in any of the shows or movies mentioned, for the record) read it and was mildly amused, but not put off by any of it. Silly people write silly things, and silly newspapers publish them. So it goes.
Look, the real story is that, when it comes to undermining women, nobody does it like other women. Look at your garden-variety pro-life rally. Roughly 10:1 female, right? Sure, the organizers and media reps for the activist groups are male (if only technically), but all the foot soldiers are wimmins.
It may be sexist to say so, but so be it. It's the truth. Men certainly do their part to push women around, keep them down, disempower them, blah blah blah, but in free modern societies, it takes another woman to actually cobble together an "article" out of hoary borscht belt schtick. And get paid for it, no less! The marvels of capitalism are wondrous and manifold.
The other problem here is one that obviously permeated political writing long ago -- the idea that anything that whiffs "provocative" is worth printing. Hell, didn't that she-toad Coulter call for the disenfranchisement of her own (former, I assume) gender last summer? And one half of the commentariat goes batshit about it while the other half says, "oh, that Ann". Either way, she gets paid and she gets the attention she craves.
WaPo has figured out by now what riles people up, and they're happy to print it, and point to the surging click-through traffic from angry cyberprotesters. Allen's schtick seems to be that of the bourgeois contrarian, picking out this or that hornet's nest to whack, regardless of its accuracy or even coherence of point. Perhaps the Post and its readers might be better served if standards for publishing, rather than the content itself, were addressed.
Friday, March 07, 2008
Monster's Balls
Maybe they should just have a once-and-for-all press conference, the Clinton campaign, to make it clear that any criticism is really unconscionable persecution. The hounding of the First Family and all. Christ, you know I've tried to be a good German here and voice my endorsement of the Democratic candidate, no matter how personally unpalatable. But right now, only Barack Hussein Obama seems to properly fit the bill of an actual Democrat. I'm not sure I own a pair of Vise-Grip™s big enough to hold my nose sufficiently to endorse the Clintonistas' full-bodied bullshit.
She's allowed to lob cheap rhetorical scuds at will, but any response in kind and you're Ken Starr. How fucking rich (and I don't mean Marc Rich, not yet). Turns out her staff stroked Canadian diplomats with reassurances that all that anti-NAFTA rhetoric was just syrup for the rubes in Ohio. Turns out that, good Democrat that she is, she'd rather have John "Like Fredo, only crazier" McCain win than Obama. (Can I get a Thanksralph?) And give me a break with the universal health care; what comes out my pocket on the job will now just come out of my taxes. The same people will still get paid the same money for the same quality of care.
Oh, but she's been "tested" and "vetted", right? Already her campaign has been awash with shady ties and furtive dealings, not terribly unlike her husband's tenure as chief executive. Sure, the Gingrichites managed to inflate every molehill into a proverbial mountain they could climb, but with each came its own tiresome soap opera, the litany of half-evasions and dog-ate-my-homework excuses and smug triangulations.
Now, none of this is to say that Clinton is not smart and capable, and an objectively "better" candidate than McCain. She is. But not to the scope and degree her fanclub thinks. She has been strident and conservative in her support of Israel vis-Ã -vis Iran; she has never missed an opportunity to at least rhetorically (and frequently in practice) genuflect to the mossback wing, as if they will ever regard her with anything but sheer contempt. Say what you will about the conservatards, but at least they know better than to play those stupid games.
From flag-burning amendments to video-game legislation, HRC has been at the forefront of symbolic me-too bandwagoneering. She stands for absolutely nothing, and there is no guarantee whatsoever that she won't continue those very practices when it comes time to change tack in foreign policy or select a Supreme Court Justice. It's still worth taking the chance, but that value steadily dwindles as she squanders her credibility, showing little more than a dedicated willingness to fuck up her own party's chances if need be. It would be helpful if just one (1) intrepid mediabot would just ask her point blank whom she would prefer to win this election if she doesn't get the nom. Seriously.
Because as it stands right now, I honestly can't tell, which makes me wonder why we peons are supposed to be more dedicated to the Party's success than she is. I'm not a Democrat, assholes, I'm a goddamned independent, and as such, maybe it's time they started doing a little better job of convincing me that they're on my side, rather than just expecting me to be on theirs.
She's allowed to lob cheap rhetorical scuds at will, but any response in kind and you're Ken Starr. How fucking rich (and I don't mean Marc Rich, not yet). Turns out her staff stroked Canadian diplomats with reassurances that all that anti-NAFTA rhetoric was just syrup for the rubes in Ohio. Turns out that, good Democrat that she is, she'd rather have John "Like Fredo, only crazier" McCain win than Obama. (Can I get a Thanksralph?) And give me a break with the universal health care; what comes out my pocket on the job will now just come out of my taxes. The same people will still get paid the same money for the same quality of care.
Oh, but she's been "tested" and "vetted", right? Already her campaign has been awash with shady ties and furtive dealings, not terribly unlike her husband's tenure as chief executive. Sure, the Gingrichites managed to inflate every molehill into a proverbial mountain they could climb, but with each came its own tiresome soap opera, the litany of half-evasions and dog-ate-my-homework excuses and smug triangulations.
Now, none of this is to say that Clinton is not smart and capable, and an objectively "better" candidate than McCain. She is. But not to the scope and degree her fanclub thinks. She has been strident and conservative in her support of Israel vis-Ã -vis Iran; she has never missed an opportunity to at least rhetorically (and frequently in practice) genuflect to the mossback wing, as if they will ever regard her with anything but sheer contempt. Say what you will about the conservatards, but at least they know better than to play those stupid games.
From flag-burning amendments to video-game legislation, HRC has been at the forefront of symbolic me-too bandwagoneering. She stands for absolutely nothing, and there is no guarantee whatsoever that she won't continue those very practices when it comes time to change tack in foreign policy or select a Supreme Court Justice. It's still worth taking the chance, but that value steadily dwindles as she squanders her credibility, showing little more than a dedicated willingness to fuck up her own party's chances if need be. It would be helpful if just one (1) intrepid mediabot would just ask her point blank whom she would prefer to win this election if she doesn't get the nom. Seriously.
Because as it stands right now, I honestly can't tell, which makes me wonder why we peons are supposed to be more dedicated to the Party's success than she is. I'm not a Democrat, assholes, I'm a goddamned independent, and as such, maybe it's time they started doing a little better job of convincing me that they're on my side, rather than just expecting me to be on theirs.
Thursday, March 06, 2008
Draw the Line
I recall when this case first came up, and it still nauseates me. This has to be the worst case of Stockholm syndrome ever:
So that's the going rate now for watching your psycho asshole boyfriend stomp your kid to death, then driving with all the way to Phoenix (at least a full day's drive from San Jose) to plant the kid. One year. Of course, if she has half a soul remaining, she'll be haunted by the image of poor Oscar Jr. looking at her, waiting for help that never came. Live with it the rest of your sorry life, bitch.
I dunno. I keep hearing how overcrowded the prisons and the planet are. Given the encroaching powers of the state to begin with, I honestly fail to understand why Corona should not be executed (since, let's be honest, trying to rehabilitate a person who stomps a six-year-old kid to death is a waste of everyone's time) and Jimenez not be sterilized (since an idiot who stays with a person such as Corona, even after he murdered her son right in front of her, is the very definition of an unfit parent).
Seriously. Why the hell not, just in utilitarian terms? Why do we keep trying to find "humane" ways to work around the inhumanity of killers and morons, only to find out again and again that no good deed goes unpunished?
A San Jose woman who watched as her boyfriend allegedly beat and stomped her 6-year-old son to death was sentenced today to a year in county jail after the defense argued she had been forced into submission by months of physical and emotional abuse.
So that's the going rate now for watching your psycho asshole boyfriend stomp your kid to death, then driving with all the way to Phoenix (at least a full day's drive from San Jose) to plant the kid. One year. Of course, if she has half a soul remaining, she'll be haunted by the image of poor Oscar Jr. looking at her, waiting for help that never came. Live with it the rest of your sorry life, bitch.
I dunno. I keep hearing how overcrowded the prisons and the planet are. Given the encroaching powers of the state to begin with, I honestly fail to understand why Corona should not be executed (since, let's be honest, trying to rehabilitate a person who stomps a six-year-old kid to death is a waste of everyone's time) and Jimenez not be sterilized (since an idiot who stays with a person such as Corona, even after he murdered her son right in front of her, is the very definition of an unfit parent).
Seriously. Why the hell not, just in utilitarian terms? Why do we keep trying to find "humane" ways to work around the inhumanity of killers and morons, only to find out again and again that no good deed goes unpunished?
Character Issues
What Marshall said. Look, if that fat fuck Russert can piss away time pompously "reading into the record" unsolicited praise from someone Obama has never met and has openly and repeatedly repudiated (instead of talking about jobs and trade and foreclosures in, you know, Cleveland), why can no one find the sack enough to ask Straight Talk about this fucking weirdo Hagee? Especially since Hagee is probably only a news cycle away from being photographed either with his cock in a purse dog, or someone else's cock lodged in one of his orifices.
I've said this before, but like most things, it bears repeating: I personally became fed-up with Straight Talk after he not only let the Bushies get clean away with calumniating his "black love child" (that would be his daughter Michelle, whom he adopted from one of Mother Teresa's orphanages in Bangladesh), but continued to snuggle up ever closer to these fuckers. And now he's finally one of them, formally invited to kiss Fredo's ring yesterday, breaking him in a way even Charlie hadn't.
Say what you will about the Clintons, but there's no way in hell they would ever let anyone get away with that sort of smear at their daughter. There's an awful lot of empty talk about "character" and such, and I am really at a loss to figure out what sort of man allows his child to be treated so shabbily. By his fucking friends, no less. Politics ain't beanbag, but it ain't that, either.
I've said this before, but like most things, it bears repeating: I personally became fed-up with Straight Talk after he not only let the Bushies get clean away with calumniating his "black love child" (that would be his daughter Michelle, whom he adopted from one of Mother Teresa's orphanages in Bangladesh), but continued to snuggle up ever closer to these fuckers. And now he's finally one of them, formally invited to kiss Fredo's ring yesterday, breaking him in a way even Charlie hadn't.
Say what you will about the Clintons, but there's no way in hell they would ever let anyone get away with that sort of smear at their daughter. There's an awful lot of empty talk about "character" and such, and I am really at a loss to figure out what sort of man allows his child to be treated so shabbily. By his fucking friends, no less. Politics ain't beanbag, but it ain't that, either.
Chapter and Verse
Esteemed reader thedevilzone points to this interesting poll which might tend to undermine certain catechisms of the Gospel According to Thanksralph!!1!1:
Obviously, there are a few questions about the poll results, not even taking methodology (which varies by company) into account. It's March, the Donkles are looking more and more like they're headed to a contentious, brokered convention, andFloridiansinbred Wangeroos have their skidmarked overalls in a wad over how their efforts to move up their primary got tossed.
The primary system is an evil joke anyway, a chorus of "everybody louder than everybody else" assholes all jockeying to Be Special, or they'll boil your bunny or something. (Well, it's Florida, so they'll probably sodomize the poor creature first.) But obviously there's so much more money in protracting this tedious charade, so it's only going to get worse with each quadrennial circle-jerk.
At any rate, should this not belie the heartfelt calls-to-arms with which Teh N8rites are besieged? Of course not, since common sense is anything but, and the N8r h8r premises are based on faulty assumptions (particularly that Nader voters were even going to vote at all, much less vote specifically Democratic). They slap down the "where ya gonna go" faction while genuflecting -- or saying nothing at all -- to the most perfidious of electoral slivers, the "swing" voter.
A "swing" voter in this particular election is either a liar or a fool, and probably a lot of both. Look, the Democratic candidates, whatever their faults, have been very clear that they are repudiating this administration and everything about it. (Whether their actions can be predicted to match their lofty rhetoric is a different point.) McCain has quite openly embraced the current regime, will not only change nothing but promises to continue it, and since he admittedly knows squat about economic policy, is basically going to be Fredo without that coveted Harvard Em Bee Ay.
There is no "swing", there's just self-indulgent assholes who find Hillary Clinton off-putting, and think the ballot box is there to validate their fucking feewings, and thus once again find an excuse to cast their vote out of spite.
Special family fun bonus: because I always enjoy incoherent caterwauling, I thought I'd highlight this gem from the comments at that link (1:26 PM):
Indeed. One hopes that if "OBAMMA" defeats "MACAIN", cooler heads will prevail and he can be trusted not to attack, um, "PACKISTAN" (which is apparently next to "DUFFELBAGISTAN"). I mean, I guess it's better for illiterate yokels to loudly transcribe the voices in their heads; at least they're taking a break from impregnating their cousins. But if they're to going to invent their own factoids, can it at least not read like a bar scene from My Name Is Earl?
McCain leads both Obama and Clinton in potential general-election match ups with either candidate in
the all-important swing state of FloridaAmerica's Syphilletic Wang, according to a Mason-Dixon poll out today.
McCain leads Obama 47%-37% and Clinton 49%-40%. The Arizona senator leads the Democrats across the board. About 80% of Republicans are behind McCain. Only 66% of Democrats are behind Obama and 72% are backing Clinton in one-one-one match-ups with McCain. Currently, 17% of Democrats indicate that in a match up with Obama, they'd support McCain; 16% say so in a match up with Clinton. Seventeen percent of Dems also say they are undecided in a match up with Obama; 13% say so with regard to McCain-Clinton.
Obviously, there are a few questions about the poll results, not even taking methodology (which varies by company) into account. It's March, the Donkles are looking more and more like they're headed to a contentious, brokered convention, and
The primary system is an evil joke anyway, a chorus of "everybody louder than everybody else" assholes all jockeying to Be Special, or they'll boil your bunny or something. (Well, it's Florida, so they'll probably sodomize the poor creature first.) But obviously there's so much more money in protracting this tedious charade, so it's only going to get worse with each quadrennial circle-jerk.
At any rate, should this not belie the heartfelt calls-to-arms with which Teh N8rites are besieged? Of course not, since common sense is anything but, and the N8r h8r premises are based on faulty assumptions (particularly that Nader voters were even going to vote at all, much less vote specifically Democratic). They slap down the "where ya gonna go" faction while genuflecting -- or saying nothing at all -- to the most perfidious of electoral slivers, the "swing" voter.
A "swing" voter in this particular election is either a liar or a fool, and probably a lot of both. Look, the Democratic candidates, whatever their faults, have been very clear that they are repudiating this administration and everything about it. (Whether their actions can be predicted to match their lofty rhetoric is a different point.) McCain has quite openly embraced the current regime, will not only change nothing but promises to continue it, and since he admittedly knows squat about economic policy, is basically going to be Fredo without that coveted Harvard Em Bee Ay.
There is no "swing", there's just self-indulgent assholes who find Hillary Clinton off-putting, and think the ballot box is there to validate their fucking feewings, and thus once again find an excuse to cast their vote out of spite.
Special family fun bonus: because I always enjoy incoherent caterwauling, I thought I'd highlight this gem from the comments at that link (1:26 PM):
To act as if MACAIN would send soldiers like himself off to die and abandon them whatever the history of the dems and repubs being misled by BUSH is against reason .HE WAS IN A NORTH VIETNAMESE PRISON CAMP he knows what its all about sacrifice .OBAMMA says he will attack PACKISTAN AFGANISTAN AND REENTER IRAQ all with out ever fighting in a war rather easy to talk the talk when never knowing the consequnces of your actions little man go to the back of the class and let a hero work things out.MACAIN will surely get dems votes as well as his share of disgusted dems OBAMMA will not get the repubs in the general they stick together look how they still support BUSH 63%
Indeed. One hopes that if "OBAMMA" defeats "MACAIN", cooler heads will prevail and he can be trusted not to attack, um, "PACKISTAN" (which is apparently next to "DUFFELBAGISTAN"). I mean, I guess it's better for illiterate yokels to loudly transcribe the voices in their heads; at least they're taking a break from impregnating their cousins. But if they're to going to invent their own factoids, can it at least not read like a bar scene from My Name Is Earl?
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
Rollin' Wit' Da Homiez
This will never stop being funny, for so many reasons. White people unironically co-opting black street slang; publishers so eager to get another bullshit "memoir" on the racks that they get gulled by a halfwitted valley girl with a contrived soap-opera in her back pocket; the "memoir" racket itself, an ostensibly high-falutin pastiche of Springer lifestyles shrink-wrapped with the requisite frisson of either redemption or nihilism.
It ain't about the people who slap this shit together and pass it off as autobiography because the fiction market is oversaturated. Nor is it about some contrived distinctions one way or t'other over "reality", as if a "reality" teevee besotted nation could tell the difference. It's about the people who buy into this shit for the same reason they watch Behind the Music.
Let's not get all existential -- or even surprised -- over this, folks. As I've said before, this is why they call it show bidness and not show friends. Probably the only commercial artistic field more over-inflated than the publishing world is the "art" world itself, where some asshole can make a pile of pants with some broad erasing a book, and some other asshole will wonder how to "save" it. I don't have enough cranial capacity to properly roll my eyes at that happy horseshit.
Believe dis, yo -- when I finally writes my membwars an' shit, muthafucka's gonna hafta come in a plain brown wrappa, an' I don' mean Fitty Cint.
It ain't about the people who slap this shit together and pass it off as autobiography because the fiction market is oversaturated. Nor is it about some contrived distinctions one way or t'other over "reality", as if a "reality" teevee besotted nation could tell the difference. It's about the people who buy into this shit for the same reason they watch Behind the Music.
Let's not get all existential -- or even surprised -- over this, folks. As I've said before, this is why they call it show bidness and not show friends. Probably the only commercial artistic field more over-inflated than the publishing world is the "art" world itself, where some asshole can make a pile of pants with some broad erasing a book, and some other asshole will wonder how to "save" it. I don't have enough cranial capacity to properly roll my eyes at that happy horseshit.
Believe dis, yo -- when I finally writes my membwars an' shit, muthafucka's gonna hafta come in a plain brown wrappa, an' I don' mean Fitty Cint.
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
Dogs of War
His parents must be so proud. And for the folks out there who will try to excuse this sickening conduct with the "but they're enduring extremes of stress and boredom, blah blah blah", get bent. For precisely the same reason that it would be wrong to broad-brush the 99% of service personnel who find this disgusting, so is it wrong to excuse or even try to explain away the sociopathic behavior of a few. They're all enduring essentially the same conditions; even the "fobbits" have to deal with mortars lobbed over the fortress walls.
And you know, nobody made this asshole join up. He volunteered. He can't not have known what he was getting into; it's been in all the papers and everything. Newsflash for all you kids out there: Iraq is excruciatingly hot in the summer, merely miserable the rest of the year, and incredibly dangerous throughout. Everybody there hates us and speaks an utterly incomprehensible moonman language. If you think those conditions might drive you to sociopathic behavior, then do us all a fucking favor and stay home.
I'm sure we'll hear about this hump again some time in the future; while correlation is not causation, a great many killers get their start abusing animals, since they're cowards at heart.
[Update: Naturally, there is also pre-emptively defensive speculation (not going to link it) that the puppy was actually a stuffed animal, the yelps were added in, that it was "just" a sick "prank". Okely-dokely then. I suppose anything's possible at this point, but seems like a stretch. We'll see. Regardless, even if it proves to be exactly what it looks like, people will always concoct moronic excuses for indefensible behavior.]
And you know, nobody made this asshole join up. He volunteered. He can't not have known what he was getting into; it's been in all the papers and everything. Newsflash for all you kids out there: Iraq is excruciatingly hot in the summer, merely miserable the rest of the year, and incredibly dangerous throughout. Everybody there hates us and speaks an utterly incomprehensible moonman language. If you think those conditions might drive you to sociopathic behavior, then do us all a fucking favor and stay home.
I'm sure we'll hear about this hump again some time in the future; while correlation is not causation, a great many killers get their start abusing animals, since they're cowards at heart.
[Update: Naturally, there is also pre-emptively defensive speculation (not going to link it) that the puppy was actually a stuffed animal, the yelps were added in, that it was "just" a sick "prank". Okely-dokely then. I suppose anything's possible at this point, but seems like a stretch. We'll see. Regardless, even if it proves to be exactly what it looks like, people will always concoct moronic excuses for indefensible behavior.]
Monday, March 03, 2008
They Ask Questions
Russia bothers to hold elections for many of the same reasons we bother to hold elections -- to consolidate power and legitimize predation; to apportion favors back to corporations who underwrite both sides; to debase the commentary into endless horserace coverage; to whip up incoherent nationalism at useful intervals. The Russians are just less circumspect about such things. They don't waste time with feelgood bullshit about "change"; change comes at the end of either a gun or a bottle of vodka.
Friday, February 29, 2008
There Will Be Blog
The first six weeks of this year were absolutely wretched for me -- kicked off the new year with a massive storm and an extended power outage that left me and my family holed up in a noisy, frozen hotel room for the weekend, while all three of us were battling the flu, then a matching set of nasty ear infections, all without enough PTO to call in sick to work.
(I get sick maybe once a year for a couple of days, and have no patience with even that, so I was about ready to drive an icepick through my second infected ear by the end of it all. One week is longer than any person should have to feel like shit, not be able to taste food, and not feel like sex. Six weeks is ridiculous. It throws me completely off my game.)
So since the last couple weeks have actually been pretty good, it's as if I've forgotten my usual routines, plus having a few medium-sized early-spring weekend projects on the honey-do list, plus having become one of the many folks with newly minted degrees who now have to try to get a much better job in a bad market, in that window before the student loan payments kick in. Hello, American dream; wake me up when it's over.
The thing is, I feel like writing, I just don't feel like sitting down and initiating the process of writing, if that makes sense. A good chunk of what I've thrown down lately has actually been the product of brief spates of cyberloafing at work. What's really dumb about this is that I have cobbled together another epic jeremiad, just needs a quick finish and editing, about two weeks ago. But then Thanksralph came in and set everyone's panties in a wad, and that collective reaction made me rethink some of my premises and observations on the theme of change and whether people really want it -- or would even recognize it as such.
All this is a roundabout way of saying that I should be back scratching some itches over the weekend.
(I get sick maybe once a year for a couple of days, and have no patience with even that, so I was about ready to drive an icepick through my second infected ear by the end of it all. One week is longer than any person should have to feel like shit, not be able to taste food, and not feel like sex. Six weeks is ridiculous. It throws me completely off my game.)
So since the last couple weeks have actually been pretty good, it's as if I've forgotten my usual routines, plus having a few medium-sized early-spring weekend projects on the honey-do list, plus having become one of the many folks with newly minted degrees who now have to try to get a much better job in a bad market, in that window before the student loan payments kick in. Hello, American dream; wake me up when it's over.
The thing is, I feel like writing, I just don't feel like sitting down and initiating the process of writing, if that makes sense. A good chunk of what I've thrown down lately has actually been the product of brief spates of cyberloafing at work. What's really dumb about this is that I have cobbled together another epic jeremiad, just needs a quick finish and editing, about two weeks ago. But then Thanksralph came in and set everyone's panties in a wad, and that collective reaction made me rethink some of my premises and observations on the theme of change and whether people really want it -- or would even recognize it as such.
All this is a roundabout way of saying that I should be back scratching some itches over the weekend.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Doughovah's Witlesses
Doughy Ramone drinks our milkshake, eats our Cheetos, and impregnates our Airedale. His carefully crafted arguments have rocked our worldz, virtual and otherwise. He's the rubber to our glue, the umbrella in the fruity drink, the led in the listing conservatard zeppelin. Just ask him; he's totally pwned all us librul fashizznits and our deviously bien pensant ways.
You can just picture poor Jonah hunched at his computer, in his padded helmet, repeatedly yipping, "I know you are, but what am I?" at his monitor, until his mom finally comes down to the basement and threatens to cut off his allowance. Beats working.
You can just picture poor Jonah hunched at his computer, in his padded helmet, repeatedly yipping, "I know you are, but what am I?" at his monitor, until his mom finally comes down to the basement and threatens to cut off his allowance. Beats working.
Monday, February 25, 2008
The Dime and the Difference
Some details to keep in mind as we spend the coming months sussing the important distinctions between and among our corporate-vetted selections:
So McCain's campaign strategist works for Clinton's campaign strategist, and both have made careers defending some of the most reprehensible corporate misdeeds, as well as overseen propaganda efforts both domestically and abroad. These guys aren't just in the belly of the beast, they're part of the stomach lining.
While of course there are clear distinctions in ideological principles between Democrats and Republicans, in practice many of these distinctions diminish somewhat. No, Al Gore would not have let 9/11 happen, and thus would not have disastrously invaded Iraq under false pretexts. But he also would not have halted the ongoing bombing campaign, nor the sanctions which were already responsible for hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children dying young, a price which Madeline Albright once smugly stated was well worth it. Well, it's always "worth" it when you aren't the one paying, dearie. And while he's become the demi-god of the enviro movement on his permanent vacation, it is helpful to recall that the CAFE standards were gutted under Saint Albert's stewardship in the first place.
As for the current candidates, one notable assumption has been that Hillary will prevent an escalation of hostilities with Iran, yet she voted for Kyl-Lieberman without batting an eye, and has been consistently emphatic in her unconditional support for Israel. She voted for the PATRIOT Act twice, and has yet to take a stand against the abuses of FISA. There are no guarantees, only bets to be hedged.
And domestically, the distinctions are refined even more tightly; aside from health care, abortion, welfare, and gay rights (the last two of which the Clintons were more than happy to punt on the first chance they got), there's not a whole lot to write home about. Even on health care, you can have all the "universal" happy talk you like, but any plan is going to be underwritten by the insurance and pharmaceutical lobbies right from the start. Instead of taking it out of your hide on the job, it'll just be another taxpayer-funded sop, an across-the-board feel-good boondoggle that will neither improve care, cut costs, nor fix the ruinous shareholder-driven revenue model. Just another spreadsheet adjustment.
Which leaves abortion rights, and if you want to hang your hat on that one, vaya con dios, folks. I would prefer that HRC or Obama pick the next couple SCOTUS justices, rather than Straight Talk, but there are no guarantees there either, especially with Clinton's instinct to always cater to people who will never not despise her. On economic issues, there were decent (if much-delayed) gains in real wages during the Clinton years, which have since been more than offset by huge increases in basic living expenses. This is not a "Democrat" versus "Republican" issue so much as a labor vs. management issue. Guess who's winning.
What always bugged me most about the Clintons and their acolytes back in the day was the ease with which they bought their own hype. They appeared to honestly think that they could rent themselves out to management and still help out the little guy. Sort of like encouraging a vampire to utilize a less painful method of attacking victims.
This shouldn't even need to be said: People who represent military juntas for a living are not typically concerned much with the travails of the commoner, except insofar as there's a buck to be turned acting concerned.
Again, I do still think that there are substantial differences in terms of respective intent, a brief perusal of all the candidates' stated positions makes that clear enough. But if the past year or so has been any indication, good intentions are not enough. Even a clear, consistent mandate by the voters has not been enough to empower the Democrats to simply accomplish (or even make more than a token effort at) what they promised they would do.
The differences do not matter if they are not sufficiently acted upon, and many of us continue to harp on the foolish consistencies of ideological semaphore, when the fact of the matter is that this is all about money. Not the war, not the preservation of choice, not education, not universal health care. The issue is money and who gets to preserve and expand their share of making it, and maintaining access to it.
The recently departed Wire character Omar Little sagely pointed out, as he robbed drug kingpin Marlo Stanfield at a card game, that money has no owners, only spenders. True dat. By the time the election is over this year, over half a billion dollars will have been raised, donated, spent. Much more doubtlessly will have been generated in selling ad space in the corporate media to provide two straight years of horserace coverage, to skew information and consent as needed, to treat the corrupted opinions of known liars and calumniators as received wisdom, to lobby the very same people they talk about.
Whose pockets are the origins and destinations for all these wads of dough, the thick envelopes and four-figure-a-plate rubber-chicken stemwinders; whence does the money come and where does it go -- and for what purposes? Not fucking universal health care, you'd best believe that.
Nader is just the typical blind pig finding the quadrennial acorn, once again, and with none of the intellectual heft or constructive responsibility that should accompany his increasingly strained attempts. But that doesn't mean he's wrong; it doesn't mean we haven't become emotionally invested in gutless incrementalism posturing as "change". The very definitions and perceptions of that word have been compromised.
[to be continued]
After the 1994 election, Democrats had just lost both houses of Congress, and President Clinton was floundering in the polls. At the urging of his wife, he turned to Dick Morris, a friend from their time in Arkansas. Morris brought in two pollsters from New York, Doug Schoen and his partner, Mark Penn, a portly, combative workaholic. Morris decided what to poll and Penn polled it. They immediately pushed Clinton to the right, enacting the now-infamous strategy of "triangulation," which co-opted Republican policies like welfare reform and tax cuts and emphasized small-bore issues that supposedly cut across the ideological divide. "They were the ones who said, 'Make the '96 election about nothing except V-chips and school uniforms,'" says a former adviser to Bill. When Morris got caught with a call girl, Penn became the most important adviser in Clinton's second term. "In a White House where polling is virtually a religion," the Washington Post reported in 1996, "Penn is the high priest."
Penn, who had previously worked in the business world for companies like Texaco and Eli Lilly, brought his corporate ideology to the White House. After moving to Washington he aggressively expanded his polling firm, Penn, Schoen & Berland (PSB). It was said that Penn was the only person who could get Bill Clinton and Bill Gates on the same line. Penn's largest client was Microsoft, and he saw no contradiction between working for both the plaintiff and the defense in what was at the time the country's largest antitrust case. A variety of controversial clients enlisted PSB. The firm defended Procter & Gamble's Olestra from charges that the food additive caused anal leakage, blamed Texaco's bankruptcy on greedy jurors and market-tested genetically modified foods for Monsanto. PSB introduced to consulting the concept of "inoculation": shielding corporations from scandal through clever advertising and marketing.
In 2000 Penn became the chief architect of Hillary's Senate victory in New York, persuading her, in a rerun of '96, to eschew big themes and relentlessly focus on poll-tested pothole politics, such as suburban transit lines and dairy farming upstate. Following that election, Penn became a very rich man--and an even more valued commodity in the business world (Hillary paid him $1 million for her re-election campaign in '06 and $277,000 in the first quarter of this year). The massive PR empire WPP Group acquired Penn's polling firm for an undisclosed sum in 2001 and four years later named him worldwide CEO of one of its most prized properties, the PR firm Burson-Marsteller (B-M). A key player in the decision to hire Penn was Howard Paster, President Clinton's chief lobbyist to Capitol Hill and an influential presence inside WPP. "Clients of stature come to Mark constantly for counsel," says Paster, who informally advises Hillary, explaining the hire. The press release announcing Penn's promotion noted his work "developing and implementing deregulation informational programs for the electric utilities industry and in the financial services sector." The release blithely ignored how utility deregulation contributed to the California electricity crisis manipulated by Enron and the blackout of 2003, which darkened much of the Northeast and upper Midwest.
Burson-Marsteller is hardly a natural fit for a prominent Democrat. The firm has represented everyone from the Argentine military junta to Union Carbide after the 1984 Bhopal disaster in India, in which thousands were killed when toxic fumes were released by one of its plants, to Royal Dutch Shell, which has been accused of colluding with the Nigerian government in committing major human rights violations. B-M pioneered the use of pseudo-grassroots front groups, known as "astroturfing," to wage stealth corporate attacks against environmental and consumer groups. It set up the National Smokers Alliance on behalf of Philip Morris to fight tobacco regulation in the early 1990s. Its current clients include major players in the finance, pharmaceutical and energy industries. In 2006, with Penn at the helm, the company gave 57 percent of its campaign contributions to Republican candidates.
A host of prominent Republicans fall under Penn's purview. B-M's Washington lobbying arm, BKSH & Associates, is run by Charlie Black, a leading GOP operative who maintains close ties to the White House, including Karl Rove, and was a partner with Lee Atwater, the consultant who crafted the Willie Horton smear campaign for George H.W. Bush in 1988. In recent years Black's clients have included the likes of Iraq's Ahmad Chalabi, the darling of the neocon right in the run-up to the war; Lockheed Martin; and Occidental Petroleum. In 2005 he landed a contract with the Lincoln Group, the disgraced PR firm that covertly placed US military propaganda in Iraqi news outlets.
Black is only one cannon in B-M's Republican arsenal. Its "grassroots" lobbying branch, Direct Impact--which specializes in corporate-funded astroturfing--is run by Dennis Whitfield, a former Reagan Cabinet official, and Dave DenHerder, the political director of the Bush/Cheney '04 campaign in Ohio. That's not all. B-M recently partnered with lobbyist Ed Gillespie, the former head of the Republican National Committee, in creating the new ad firm 360Advantage, run by two admen for the Bush/Cheney campaigns. Its first project was a campaign against "liberal bias" in the media for the neoconservative Weekly Standard magazine.
As expected with such a lineup, B-M has a highly confrontational relationship with organized labor. "Companies cannot be caught unprepared by Organized Labor's coordinated campaigns," read the "Labor Relations" section of its website, describing that branch of the company (the section was altered after The American Prospect quoted it in March).
So McCain's campaign strategist works for Clinton's campaign strategist, and both have made careers defending some of the most reprehensible corporate misdeeds, as well as overseen propaganda efforts both domestically and abroad. These guys aren't just in the belly of the beast, they're part of the stomach lining.
While of course there are clear distinctions in ideological principles between Democrats and Republicans, in practice many of these distinctions diminish somewhat. No, Al Gore would not have let 9/11 happen, and thus would not have disastrously invaded Iraq under false pretexts. But he also would not have halted the ongoing bombing campaign, nor the sanctions which were already responsible for hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children dying young, a price which Madeline Albright once smugly stated was well worth it. Well, it's always "worth" it when you aren't the one paying, dearie. And while he's become the demi-god of the enviro movement on his permanent vacation, it is helpful to recall that the CAFE standards were gutted under Saint Albert's stewardship in the first place.
As for the current candidates, one notable assumption has been that Hillary will prevent an escalation of hostilities with Iran, yet she voted for Kyl-Lieberman without batting an eye, and has been consistently emphatic in her unconditional support for Israel. She voted for the PATRIOT Act twice, and has yet to take a stand against the abuses of FISA. There are no guarantees, only bets to be hedged.
And domestically, the distinctions are refined even more tightly; aside from health care, abortion, welfare, and gay rights (the last two of which the Clintons were more than happy to punt on the first chance they got), there's not a whole lot to write home about. Even on health care, you can have all the "universal" happy talk you like, but any plan is going to be underwritten by the insurance and pharmaceutical lobbies right from the start. Instead of taking it out of your hide on the job, it'll just be another taxpayer-funded sop, an across-the-board feel-good boondoggle that will neither improve care, cut costs, nor fix the ruinous shareholder-driven revenue model. Just another spreadsheet adjustment.
Which leaves abortion rights, and if you want to hang your hat on that one, vaya con dios, folks. I would prefer that HRC or Obama pick the next couple SCOTUS justices, rather than Straight Talk, but there are no guarantees there either, especially with Clinton's instinct to always cater to people who will never not despise her. On economic issues, there were decent (if much-delayed) gains in real wages during the Clinton years, which have since been more than offset by huge increases in basic living expenses. This is not a "Democrat" versus "Republican" issue so much as a labor vs. management issue. Guess who's winning.
What always bugged me most about the Clintons and their acolytes back in the day was the ease with which they bought their own hype. They appeared to honestly think that they could rent themselves out to management and still help out the little guy. Sort of like encouraging a vampire to utilize a less painful method of attacking victims.
This shouldn't even need to be said: People who represent military juntas for a living are not typically concerned much with the travails of the commoner, except insofar as there's a buck to be turned acting concerned.
Again, I do still think that there are substantial differences in terms of respective intent, a brief perusal of all the candidates' stated positions makes that clear enough. But if the past year or so has been any indication, good intentions are not enough. Even a clear, consistent mandate by the voters has not been enough to empower the Democrats to simply accomplish (or even make more than a token effort at) what they promised they would do.
The differences do not matter if they are not sufficiently acted upon, and many of us continue to harp on the foolish consistencies of ideological semaphore, when the fact of the matter is that this is all about money. Not the war, not the preservation of choice, not education, not universal health care. The issue is money and who gets to preserve and expand their share of making it, and maintaining access to it.
The recently departed Wire character Omar Little sagely pointed out, as he robbed drug kingpin Marlo Stanfield at a card game, that money has no owners, only spenders. True dat. By the time the election is over this year, over half a billion dollars will have been raised, donated, spent. Much more doubtlessly will have been generated in selling ad space in the corporate media to provide two straight years of horserace coverage, to skew information and consent as needed, to treat the corrupted opinions of known liars and calumniators as received wisdom, to lobby the very same people they talk about.
Whose pockets are the origins and destinations for all these wads of dough, the thick envelopes and four-figure-a-plate rubber-chicken stemwinders; whence does the money come and where does it go -- and for what purposes? Not fucking universal health care, you'd best believe that.
Nader is just the typical blind pig finding the quadrennial acorn, once again, and with none of the intellectual heft or constructive responsibility that should accompany his increasingly strained attempts. But that doesn't mean he's wrong; it doesn't mean we haven't become emotionally invested in gutless incrementalism posturing as "change". The very definitions and perceptions of that word have been compromised.
[to be continued]
Democracy At Work
Here we go -- the endless litany of putative swingers who are going to show those dickheads at the Times, goddammit. I'll be as brief as possible: fuck them and their imaginary swing.
Let's look at this from the other end of the coin for these halfwits. Say one of the numberless scrivening retards at the NYT penned some gushing panegyric to Poor Ol' Straight Talk -- would these stout defenders o' freedomocracy then rush to tell the world about their plan to hold a grudge for eight months and then vote against POST because of the intellectual dishonesty and shameless inaccuracy? Is that how they would tell those NYT smart-asses -- who think they're soooo fuckin' smart, smarter'n yew, bunky -- what they think?
More importantly, is that what the ballot box is for, for a bunch of self-indulgent, barely cognizant, sanctimonious asshole "swing voters" to validate their petty grievances over something they essentially grabbed the wrong end of the stick of? Well you know what, you tell 'em, Tonto, and when your kid or your grandkid gets sent over to keep Tehran British, you can explain your pretzel logic to them. Show the New York Times what's what, little fighter! Don't let Big Ink keep you down!
You know, having read the Mencken Chrestomathy a couple times, I initially found myself somewhat unsettled at his utter loathing for actual democracy. But more and more, it makes sense.
Let's look at this from the other end of the coin for these halfwits. Say one of the numberless scrivening retards at the NYT penned some gushing panegyric to Poor Ol' Straight Talk -- would these stout defenders o' freedomocracy then rush to tell the world about their plan to hold a grudge for eight months and then vote against POST because of the intellectual dishonesty and shameless inaccuracy? Is that how they would tell those NYT smart-asses -- who think they're soooo fuckin' smart, smarter'n yew, bunky -- what they think?
More importantly, is that what the ballot box is for, for a bunch of self-indulgent, barely cognizant, sanctimonious asshole "swing voters" to validate their petty grievances over something they essentially grabbed the wrong end of the stick of? Well you know what, you tell 'em, Tonto, and when your kid or your grandkid gets sent over to keep Tehran British, you can explain your pretzel logic to them. Show the New York Times what's what, little fighter! Don't let Big Ink keep you down!
You know, having read the Mencken Chrestomathy a couple times, I initially found myself somewhat unsettled at his utter loathing for actual democracy. But more and more, it makes sense.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Omar Dead
Big night on The Wire, though you could see it coming. Even a bit of foreshadowing, by first showing that little psychopath fucker getting ready to burn a cat in the alley (a similar scene in The Corner literally caused me to give up on that book, and I have a pretty strong stomach).
Tim Goodman has been bringing the noise on this show since day one, so if you're a fan of the show, check out the de-co. I don't really have much to add, except to comment on how such seemingly unrealistic story arcs (McNulty faking a serial killer to get funding; Omar leaping five stories and limping away) have resolved with such relentless, inexorable realism. Two episodes left, and the bodies are dropping, both literally and figuratively.
Tim Goodman has been bringing the noise on this show since day one, so if you're a fan of the show, check out the de-co. I don't really have much to add, except to comment on how such seemingly unrealistic story arcs (McNulty faking a serial killer to get funding; Omar leaping five stories and limping away) have resolved with such relentless, inexorable realism. Two episodes left, and the bodies are dropping, both literally and figuratively.
The Gay Super Bowl
Yeah, I watched about half of it, even though I haven't seen any of the major nominees yet (first time for that in a long time). I'll be Netflixing most of them, and as catchy as it is, "I drink your milkshake" is the gayest catchphrase I've heard in some time, as ripe for corruption by the Other Team as "Where's the beef?".
But I have seen Once, and liked it a great deal, and the obvious connection between Glen Hansard and Marketa Irglova is a major reason why. It was a great move to let Irglova come back out and give a proper acceptance speech after being rudely hustled off. Other than that, it's fun as long as the participants don't take it too seriously (actually, that might be the funnest part), and the requisite drinking games don't get out of hand (again, it may be more fun if they do).
But I have seen Once, and liked it a great deal, and the obvious connection between Glen Hansard and Marketa Irglova is a major reason why. It was a great move to let Irglova come back out and give a proper acceptance speech after being rudely hustled off. Other than that, it's fun as long as the participants don't take it too seriously (actually, that might be the funnest part), and the requisite drinking games don't get out of hand (again, it may be more fun if they do).
Let's All Go to the Lobby (Slight Return)
Well, I'm convinced:
So let's see if we have this straight -- a longtime lobbyist, who is running the presidential campaign of a senator whose claim to fame is exonerating himself of being part of the Keating Five by inveighing against lobbyists, is as sure as sure can be that said senator's junkets on a corporate jet and letters on behalf of the same corporation are just coincidence.
Where the Times really fucked up on this story is by allowing the more salacious allegations creep into the storyline. If you have no corroboration, only anonymous insinuations, that McCain and Iseman had something going on, then don't bother bringing it up.
They allowed Straight Talk to at least feint toward the high ground on the sex aspect, and avoid mentioning the real part of the story, the money. This is the kind of incompetent shit you expect out of the local fishwrap, and instead of pressing the reporters to come up with some corroboration, the editorial staff just instinctively reaches for the kneepads.
``John McCain does no favors for, nor gives no special treatment to, any lobbyists -- even if they are a friend of his,'' Charlie Black, a longtime Republican strategist, said on CBS's ``Face the Nation'' program. ``He listens to both sides of issues from representatives from both sides, makes a decision on the merits and goes ahead.''
The New York Times raised questions about McCain's relationship with Washington telecommunications lobbyist Vicki Iseman in a front-page story Feb. 21, suggesting that the senator's ties with the lobbyist were behind his decision to write a letter to the Federal Communications Commission on behalf of a company she represented.
``Senator McCain does not act in his own self-interest or in his own political interests in making decisions, but rather in the interest of the country even if there's a cost to him politically,'' Black, now chairman of BKSH & Associates, a Washington lobbying firm, said.
So let's see if we have this straight -- a longtime lobbyist, who is running the presidential campaign of a senator whose claim to fame is exonerating himself of being part of the Keating Five by inveighing against lobbyists, is as sure as sure can be that said senator's junkets on a corporate jet and letters on behalf of the same corporation are just coincidence.
Where the Times really fucked up on this story is by allowing the more salacious allegations creep into the storyline. If you have no corroboration, only anonymous insinuations, that McCain and Iseman had something going on, then don't bother bringing it up.
They allowed Straight Talk to at least feint toward the high ground on the sex aspect, and avoid mentioning the real part of the story, the money. This is the kind of incompetent shit you expect out of the local fishwrap, and instead of pressing the reporters to come up with some corroboration, the editorial staff just instinctively reaches for the kneepads.
Unsafe At Any Spin
So Pumpkinhead hands his show over to Nader this morning to indulge the latter's increasingly malignant narcissism, and predictably folks run to the backyard to dig up their Ralph bone and gnaw on it for the week, which is about how long this will be remotely a news item.
I've rehashed this ad nauseam, but what the hell: Ralph's quest to theoretically heighten the contradictions had some validity in '96 and 2000, but no longer. All the cranky-old-man schtick that gets flung at McCain goes as well for Nader, who is 1½ years older than Straight Talk, but that's really the least of it. Nader did a decent job of maintaining reasonable gadfly viability in the nineties, but now seems to just pop out of his hole every four years to fuck with the process, and as his .38% showing in '04 proves, he can't even do that anymore.
It's just disappointing that Nader feels the need to be part of the circus he spent so many years decrying, because that's really all he's doing here. But in the political sense, if anything it's a boon -- he will probably galvanize the Democratic apparatchiks more forcefully in general, and perhaps they'll bank some of their Nader rage for, you know, Straight Talk McCain. And if the Republicans want to waste money funneling cash to front groups for Nader, let them.
No one's going to vote for Ralph this year, so again, people might want to get off their crosses and be aware that this time around, if Hillary or Obama cannot sufficiently draw serious distinctions between themselves and McCain (and there are plenty of genuine distinctions, don't get me wrong, but there are also plenty of retards who are unable to get that, which explains why so many more registered Democrats voted for Bush than for Nader in 2000), there won't be any protest vote to whine about for the next decade. People just won't bother.
That's the biggest untapped pool out there anyway -- the non-voters who refrain not because they're too stupid or lazy, but because they are frustrated with choosing between someone bought by the telecom lobby, and someone bought by the insurance and pharmaceutical lobbies.
Maybe if the pelf were taken out of it, and the lobbyists and horse-race announcers were forced to find real work instead of contriving and milking a permanent campaign season, more people would feel like their government actually works for them, instead of around them. I think if there were a referendum for Russert and Tweety and the rest of the assorted weasels and loobyists to spend the rest of their lives asking us if we want fries with that, it would pass roughly 99-1%.
I've rehashed this ad nauseam, but what the hell: Ralph's quest to theoretically heighten the contradictions had some validity in '96 and 2000, but no longer. All the cranky-old-man schtick that gets flung at McCain goes as well for Nader, who is 1½ years older than Straight Talk, but that's really the least of it. Nader did a decent job of maintaining reasonable gadfly viability in the nineties, but now seems to just pop out of his hole every four years to fuck with the process, and as his .38% showing in '04 proves, he can't even do that anymore.
It's just disappointing that Nader feels the need to be part of the circus he spent so many years decrying, because that's really all he's doing here. But in the political sense, if anything it's a boon -- he will probably galvanize the Democratic apparatchiks more forcefully in general, and perhaps they'll bank some of their Nader rage for, you know, Straight Talk McCain. And if the Republicans want to waste money funneling cash to front groups for Nader, let them.
No one's going to vote for Ralph this year, so again, people might want to get off their crosses and be aware that this time around, if Hillary or Obama cannot sufficiently draw serious distinctions between themselves and McCain (and there are plenty of genuine distinctions, don't get me wrong, but there are also plenty of retards who are unable to get that, which explains why so many more registered Democrats voted for Bush than for Nader in 2000), there won't be any protest vote to whine about for the next decade. People just won't bother.
That's the biggest untapped pool out there anyway -- the non-voters who refrain not because they're too stupid or lazy, but because they are frustrated with choosing between someone bought by the telecom lobby, and someone bought by the insurance and pharmaceutical lobbies.
Maybe if the pelf were taken out of it, and the lobbyists and horse-race announcers were forced to find real work instead of contriving and milking a permanent campaign season, more people would feel like their government actually works for them, instead of around them. I think if there were a referendum for Russert and Tweety and the rest of the assorted weasels and loobyists to spend the rest of their lives asking us if we want fries with that, it would pass roughly 99-1%.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
The Iseman Cometh
On the one hand, I suppose most of us -- especially Republicans -- are just relieved that for once, a Republican has a potential sex scandal that doesn't involve diapers or dildos or cruising for man-chowder in a park or airport bathroom. At this point, there's almost something genteel and respectable about boinking a lobbyist on a corporate jet.
If it happened. Eight fuckin' years ago.
And on the other hand, it's almost comforting to see the MSM, Saint Olbermann right along with 'em, scrambling to man the battle stations over this stupid non-story. See, McCain can joke about starting more disastrous wars, talk about being stuck in the desert for the next millennium or so, and have absolutely no comprehensive economic plan as the country veers into recession, and they don't say shit. They hump his leg like a varicose couch pillow.
But the possibility that his advisers thought he might be potentially embarrassed or even tempted -- once again, nearly a damned decade ago, ferchrissake -- and they're on it like the jackals they really are at heart. If they're looking for a way to get a grip on McCain and show his ample feet of clay, he's got handles all over him. Funny how they always only notice the handle that smells like pooter.
If it happened. Eight fuckin' years ago.
And on the other hand, it's almost comforting to see the MSM, Saint Olbermann right along with 'em, scrambling to man the battle stations over this stupid non-story. See, McCain can joke about starting more disastrous wars, talk about being stuck in the desert for the next millennium or so, and have absolutely no comprehensive economic plan as the country veers into recession, and they don't say shit. They hump his leg like a varicose couch pillow.
But the possibility that his advisers thought he might be potentially embarrassed or even tempted -- once again, nearly a damned decade ago, ferchrissake -- and they're on it like the jackals they really are at heart. If they're looking for a way to get a grip on McCain and show his ample feet of clay, he's got handles all over him. Funny how they always only notice the handle that smells like pooter.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
If It Ain't Broke
Shorter Grumpy Old Man: I got your change right here, ya little bastards. Now get the fuck offa my lawn.
[Update: If McCain wants to cut the shit and compare Obama's actual positions and proposals to McCain's own, then he should step the fuck up and do so. Because from all I've seen and heard, McCain's got plenty of high-handed rhetorical bromides of his own, but on actual issues, McCain promises more of the same.
There's a slogan for ya: Like Fredo's crazy uncle.
Anyone who says they're sick of the war, or want a better economy, and still votes for McCain is either an idiot or a lying sack of shit, period. And it will not (well, should not) take long for either Democratic candidate to start picking McCain's substantive positions right apart.]
[Update: If McCain wants to cut the shit and compare Obama's actual positions and proposals to McCain's own, then he should step the fuck up and do so. Because from all I've seen and heard, McCain's got plenty of high-handed rhetorical bromides of his own, but on actual issues, McCain promises more of the same.
There's a slogan for ya: Like Fredo's crazy uncle.
Anyone who says they're sick of the war, or want a better economy, and still votes for McCain is either an idiot or a lying sack of shit, period. And it will not (well, should not) take long for either Democratic candidate to start picking McCain's substantive positions right apart.]
Monday, February 18, 2008
Titties and Beer
Seems I've gotten a lot of hits already today from folks looking for this layout. And while I'm not a huge fan of Lohan nor Marilyn Monroe, funbags is funbags, and it's a nice break from the usual barrage of political sniping and seething misanthropy. There's plenty more of that coming anyway. Never say I don't look out for y'all, at least once in a while.
(Now, if this were real, and there was a "tape" and all, that'd be a different story. They'd have to drag me out of here feet first.)
Global Warming Upside
Couldn't have asked for more spectacular weather this (quasi-)holiday weekend. There's something about barbecues and beer in February that is wonderfully unsettling. Chicken and linguica skewers Saturday night, surf & turf tonight, all with Sierra Nevada Stout and ESB accompanying, and there's a few eps of Arrested Development second season left on the Netflix disc for tonight. And a friend is bringing back a couple bottles of Patròn from Ensenada, for about a quarter of what you pay at the Costco. Everybody should have weekends like this all the time.
Spins of the Father
As the saying goes, success has many parents, failure is an orphan. Abject, incompetent, ass-pounding failure has a father -- Poppy Bush, who has thrown his coveted endorsement behind our good friend John McCain.
Perfect. So let's deconstruct this a bit -- Poppy is an emeritus of the realpolitik school, and his son has spent the last eight years overwhelmingly, deliberately repudiating and dismantling that legacy. Poppy cries in public when he thinks about all the unfair criticism poor Fredo has had to endure from mean, um, citizens. Fredo talks about how much he prays, and re-reads George Washington biographies, and that damned yellow rug.
John McCain very likely would have been president in the 2000 campaign had Fredo not calumniated him in a most despicable fashion in South Carolina. In retaliation for said character assassination, McCain has been as faithful a lapdog as this fiery wreck of an administration could have hoped for. He's shown quite thoroughly that he'll say and do whatever anyone with a voting bloc wants him to, albeit with an insouciant crack that makes the media's pants wet with excitement.
And this really is the coup de grace, because now the Bushies own McCain's ass. If they want him to wear a gimp mask and a ball-gag on the campaign trail, he'd best start changing outfits, because he's their boy now, and no matter how much he tries to tack center this summer, and weasel out from under his own role in Fredo's follies, he's pinned under them. All that's left is consolidating the retards who would vote for a random farm animal before they'd go Democrat, and peeling off a few more idjits who have somehow conflated honorable service with actual expertise.
But if nothing else comes from this dog-and-pony show, the least we can step up and do is get the Bush family out of American politics, once and for all. Let them be Moonie water-carriers in perpetuity; if they think they're keeping their foot in the door by making McCain their butt-boy, they're mistaken.
Mr Bush described Mr McCain's character as "forged in the crucible of war" and said he would carry conservative values to the White House in November's vote.
Perfect. So let's deconstruct this a bit -- Poppy is an emeritus of the realpolitik school, and his son has spent the last eight years overwhelmingly, deliberately repudiating and dismantling that legacy. Poppy cries in public when he thinks about all the unfair criticism poor Fredo has had to endure from mean, um, citizens. Fredo talks about how much he prays, and re-reads George Washington biographies, and that damned yellow rug.
John McCain very likely would have been president in the 2000 campaign had Fredo not calumniated him in a most despicable fashion in South Carolina. In retaliation for said character assassination, McCain has been as faithful a lapdog as this fiery wreck of an administration could have hoped for. He's shown quite thoroughly that he'll say and do whatever anyone with a voting bloc wants him to, albeit with an insouciant crack that makes the media's pants wet with excitement.
And this really is the coup de grace, because now the Bushies own McCain's ass. If they want him to wear a gimp mask and a ball-gag on the campaign trail, he'd best start changing outfits, because he's their boy now, and no matter how much he tries to tack center this summer, and weasel out from under his own role in Fredo's follies, he's pinned under them. All that's left is consolidating the retards who would vote for a random farm animal before they'd go Democrat, and peeling off a few more idjits who have somehow conflated honorable service with actual expertise.
But if nothing else comes from this dog-and-pony show, the least we can step up and do is get the Bush family out of American politics, once and for all. Let them be Moonie water-carriers in perpetuity; if they think they're keeping their foot in the door by making McCain their butt-boy, they're mistaken.
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Life in the Sausage Factory
Here's the deal, for the thousandth fucking time -- Coulter moves product. If she didn't, she'd be down the road faster than Bushmills and liver paté through Tweety Matthews. Tweety gives her an entire hour because his publishing company owns her publishing company, and chances are either NBC or GE or one of their countless subsidiaries and/or partners owns them both.
This is not that complicated. This is an ongoing business decision to cater to some sort of toxic Archie Bunker subset which is presumed to watch PMSNBC, at least when the horse-faced tranny is braying. Banning idiotic euphemisms and moronic assertions is not the issue, impacting the profitability of such is.
So make a list of advertisers, check it twice, and start gang-faxing them. That's what they do every time a new teevee show hurts their wittle feewings. And it works. Watch how fast the high-minded idealism about airing both sides dissipates like so many Tranny Annie verbal air-biscuits.
But above all, let's please do disabuse ourselves of the notion that basic cable -- Saint Olbermann included -- exists to inform and edify. Who the fuck do you think is keeping all those Prison Bitch and To Catch a Predator pseudo-docs on after hours at Keith's Network?
This is not that complicated. This is an ongoing business decision to cater to some sort of toxic Archie Bunker subset which is presumed to watch PMSNBC, at least when the horse-faced tranny is braying. Banning idiotic euphemisms and moronic assertions is not the issue, impacting the profitability of such is.
So make a list of advertisers, check it twice, and start gang-faxing them. That's what they do every time a new teevee show hurts their wittle feewings. And it works. Watch how fast the high-minded idealism about airing both sides dissipates like so many Tranny Annie verbal air-biscuits.
But above all, let's please do disabuse ourselves of the notion that basic cable -- Saint Olbermann included -- exists to inform and edify. Who the fuck do you think is keeping all those Prison Bitch and To Catch a Predator pseudo-docs on after hours at Keith's Network?
Cult of Personality
Yes, folks, it's Obama's acolytes that are the problem, because we haven't been watching and listening to the claque of Reagan necrophiliacs for Jeebus knows how many years now.
Ordinarily I'd just call these media morons "lazy cocksuckers" and leave it at that, but even a passed-out milf puts more effort into it. These are people, quite frankly, who would return their paychecks uncashed and immediately start looking into a different line of work, if they were honest with themselves.
I like Obama more than I did a year ago, though I carry no torch for him nor any other candidate. I think it's silly, just as a matter of principle, to emotionally invest in anyone so heavily, outside of your immediate family. It's emotionally unhealthy and intellectually purblind. But, you know, a "cult" is just a religion that hasn't found its sea legs yet and become a financially viable institution. Obama, in comparison with both the other candidates, appears quite viable finanacially, certainly more so than, for example, Jake Tapper or Carol Costello.
Whom, if anyone, do they plan on casting their vote for, after they finish casting their irresponsibly selective observations? And when can we expect the offsetting barrage of breathless "belligerent codger" pronunciamentos re John McCain?
Ordinarily I'd just call these media morons "lazy cocksuckers" and leave it at that, but even a passed-out milf puts more effort into it. These are people, quite frankly, who would return their paychecks uncashed and immediately start looking into a different line of work, if they were honest with themselves.
I like Obama more than I did a year ago, though I carry no torch for him nor any other candidate. I think it's silly, just as a matter of principle, to emotionally invest in anyone so heavily, outside of your immediate family. It's emotionally unhealthy and intellectually purblind. But, you know, a "cult" is just a religion that hasn't found its sea legs yet and become a financially viable institution. Obama, in comparison with both the other candidates, appears quite viable finanacially, certainly more so than, for example, Jake Tapper or Carol Costello.
Whom, if anyone, do they plan on casting their vote for, after they finish casting their irresponsibly selective observations? And when can we expect the offsetting barrage of breathless "belligerent codger" pronunciamentos re John McCain?
Friday, February 15, 2008
The Torture Never Stops
Haven't read Kristof (or any of them, really; less volatile emetics and laxatives can be had over the counter) in some time, but he effectively puts a face on all the abstract talk and fake hand-wringing over torture:
In the parlance of current bien pensant activism, I don't think we've "had enough", nor are we insisting on "change", at least not in the conventional senses of those ideas. Maybe if Arlen Specter thought Bill Belichick had taped some of the goings-on in al-Hajj's dungeon existence, he might care enough to grandstand. Anything's possible.
The most famous journalist you may never have heard of is Sami al-Hajj, an Al Jazeera cameraman who is on a hunger strike to protest abuse during more than six years in a Kafkaesque prison system.
....
After Mr. Hajj was arrested in Afghanistan in December 2001, he was beaten, starved, frozen and subjected to anal searches in public to humiliate him, his lawyers say. The U.S. government initially seems to have confused him with another cameraman, and then offered vague accusations that he had been a financial courier and otherwise assisted extremist groups.
....
Military officials did acknowledge that Mr. Hajj was not considered a potential suicide bomber and probably would have been released long ago if he had just “come clean” by responding in greater detail to the allegations and showing remorse.
Mr. Hajj’s lawyers contend that he has already responded in great detail to every allegation. One indication that the government doesn’t take its own charges seriously, the lawyers say, is that the U.S. offered Mr. Hajj a deal: immediate freedom if he would spy on Al Jazeera. Mr. Hajj refused.
Most Americans, including myself, originally gave President Bush the benefit of the doubt and assumed that the inmates truly were “the worst of the worst.” But evidence has grown that many are simply the unluckiest of the unluckiest.
Some were aid workers who were kidnapped by armed Afghan groups and sold to the C.I.A. as extremists. One longtime Sudanese aid worker employed by an international charity, Adel Hamad, was just released by the U.S. in December after five years in captivity. A U.S. Army major reviewing his case called it “unconscionable.”
Mr. Hajj began his hunger strike more than a year ago, so twice daily he is strapped down and a tube is wound up his nose and down his throat to his stomach. Sometimes a lubricant is used, and sometimes it isn’t, so his throat and nose have been rubbed raw. Sometimes a tube still bloody from another hunger striker is used, his lawyers say.
In the parlance of current bien pensant activism, I don't think we've "had enough", nor are we insisting on "change", at least not in the conventional senses of those ideas. Maybe if Arlen Specter thought Bill Belichick had taped some of the goings-on in al-Hajj's dungeon existence, he might care enough to grandstand. Anything's possible.
Ninny State
Let's make it an even trifecta of these retards-on-parade stories: The only thing Billy Ray Cyrus should be apologizing for is Achy Breaky Heart. Anyone using Miley or Britney or Whatever-y for anything more complicated than fashion tips or how not to raise Kevin Federline's yard demons, they deserve precisely what they get. Seriously, regardless of your position on automotive safety features and the enforced use thereof, what brand of halfwit is going to say, "Well, Hannah Montana didn't wear a seat belt in that one scene in her movie, so why should I?"
All Choked Up
As if to provide me an opportunity to be an equal opportunity heartless bastard, another thinning-the-herd story comes down the pike.
Actually it's not even the herd-thinning aspect that's most interesting, it's the notion that 82 deaths over the course of thirteen years is somehow statistically significant enough for the CDC to be spending time and effort looking into it. Hundreds of times as many teenagers have died in the same time period from car accidents, gun accidents, off-road vehicle accidents, suicide. And according to Google News, right now there are 319 news articles on this "story" -- nearly four times the number of actual deaths over the past decade-plus. I suppose a sense of proportion is, as always, too much to ask for.
I don't have me one-a them fancy pee-aych-dees, but I find it passing strange that otherwise smart people in smart organizations feel the urge to waste time and money and effort compiling data to sound the alarum that, well, dumb people do dumb things. Hey kids, stay safe -- don't pull a fuckin' vending machine on yourself, ai-aight? Let's make a PSA out of it with, say, Hannah Montana or one of the High School Musical kidz, and a snappy jingle.
At least 82 youths in the US have died from a "choking game", according to the first official tally of such fatalities.
In the so-called game, a leash or rope is wrapped around the neck to temporarily cut the blood supply to the brain. The goal is a dreamlike, floating-in-space feeling when blood rushes back into the brain. Up to 20% of teenagers and pre-teens play the game, sometimes in groups, according to some estimates based on local studies. But nearly all the deaths were of those who played alone, according to the count compiled by the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Actually it's not even the herd-thinning aspect that's most interesting, it's the notion that 82 deaths over the course of thirteen years is somehow statistically significant enough for the CDC to be spending time and effort looking into it. Hundreds of times as many teenagers have died in the same time period from car accidents, gun accidents, off-road vehicle accidents, suicide. And according to Google News, right now there are 319 news articles on this "story" -- nearly four times the number of actual deaths over the past decade-plus. I suppose a sense of proportion is, as always, too much to ask for.
I don't have me one-a them fancy pee-aych-dees, but I find it passing strange that otherwise smart people in smart organizations feel the urge to waste time and money and effort compiling data to sound the alarum that, well, dumb people do dumb things. Hey kids, stay safe -- don't pull a fuckin' vending machine on yourself, ai-aight? Let's make a PSA out of it with, say, Hannah Montana or one of the High School Musical kidz, and a snappy jingle.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Up In Smoke
Considering the obvious externalities of a nation of over one billion people still in the process of industrializing and modernizing, with all the messy externalities that entails, I don't think the word "crisis" means what these people think it means.
Right. The planet is not quite overpopulated enough, so Something Must Be Done about this self-inflicted pandemic. I know they're just doing what doctors are supposed to do, but a "crisis" this is not. More like job security.
One million people a year will die from tobacco smoking in India during the 2010s, research predicts.
The New England Journal of Medicine study found smoking already accounts for 900,000 deaths a year in India.
The study warns that without action, the death toll from smoking will climb still further.
Right. The planet is not quite overpopulated enough, so Something Must Be Done about this self-inflicted pandemic. I know they're just doing what doctors are supposed to do, but a "crisis" this is not. More like job security.
Priorities
Maybe if there were some way to make our esteemed legislators think that FISA was using steroids and HGH, they might give enough of a hot monkey-fuck to do something about it.
Then again, Harry Reid couldn't convince a girl scout troop to go out and sell cookies.
Then again, Harry Reid couldn't convince a girl scout troop to go out and sell cookies.
CNN Sucks
No news there, right? After all, how can you have Nancy Grace and Glenn Beck (not to mention GOP op-by-marriage Campbell Brown) and not be morally compromised? But here's a new one.
Producer Chez Pazienza, a fine writer and proprietor of the excellent blog Deus Ex Malcontent, has been canned from his CNN producer post -- you guessed it, for blogging unapproved content.
Figures. And it didn't matter that he refrained from mentioning CNN at all, but this is the way they operate these days. I'd say boycott, but I honestly don't recall the last time I actually watched either CNN or Headline News.
Producer Chez Pazienza, a fine writer and proprietor of the excellent blog Deus Ex Malcontent, has been canned from his CNN producer post -- you guessed it, for blogging unapproved content.
According to Chez, he was terminated for violating network policy by not running what he was writing through their vetting system. So he was fired not for blogging but for the content of his blog. “It’s not that I’ve been writing,” he wrote in an email. “It’s WHAT I’ve been writing.”
Figures. And it didn't matter that he refrained from mentioning CNN at all, but this is the way they operate these days. I'd say boycott, but I honestly don't recall the last time I actually watched either CNN or Headline News.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
This Just In
You know, I vowed to lay off Kanye West after his moms died, but jebus, the guy is an incurable douchenozzle, an incoherent babbler who thinks every turd that tumbles out of his piehole is manna from heaven. Common should kick your ass, son. And Morris Day and Jerome would fuck Kanye's shit up on a bad day.
Didn't people give up on the Grammys back when they gave the Best Heavy Metal award to Jethro Tull?
Didn't people give up on the Grammys back when they gave the Best Heavy Metal award to Jethro Tull?
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Deck Chair Shuffle
Despite having an advantage on superdelegates and party machinery, Hillary's campaign manager has been bounced:
That would be this Maggie Williams:
Yeah. No oppo researcher on the planet is going to take this and run streaking through the stadium with it, until everyone recalls how they were so sick of mealy-mouthed caveats and bullshit defenses by the summer of 2000, they settled for an inbred moron over Al Gore.
I've been pretty even-handed in my qualified support for the Democratic candidates, in that I've stressed that even though I think the party as a whole is, well, a hole, even pussified capitulation squeaks ahead of belligerent insanity, which is all the Republicans have had to offer for many years. And I know that there has never been any moment in the history of time when the universe has given the poor Clintons a break, that they persevere into the headwinds of a media conspiracy, right-wing and otherwise.
Still, never let it be said that they don't consistently find ways to make even fence-sitters sick of them. Between this and the possibility of David Shuster getting fired (and hey, ya think Faux Noise isn't drawing up an offer for Shuster right now so's he can spend the entire summer lobbing far more vicious and personal attacks?), I'm already tired of them all over again.
As far as Solis' dismissal in and of itself is concerned, it bespeaks exactly what was apparent in the aftermath of Super Tuesday -- Hillary has peaked, but Obama has not yet. We'll see how Texas and Ohio go, as well as how Michigan and Florida's delegates are counted (after Hillary welshed on the handshake deal she had with Obama and Edwards in those two states), but I'd put money down that this could turn into a nasty intraparty squabble over the role of superdelegates in determining a nominee.
Patti Solis Doyle has stepped down as Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign manager, the campaign announced on Sunday.
She will be replaced by Maggie Williams, a senior adviser to the campaign.
That would be this Maggie Williams:
One Secret Service agent alleged that on the night of Vince Foster's suicide, he saw Williams leaving Foster's office with a box of files. Williams denied this, and passed two polygraph tests. She did say, though, that two days after Foster's death, she took some of the Clinton's personal files from his office.
Yeah. No oppo researcher on the planet is going to take this and run streaking through the stadium with it, until everyone recalls how they were so sick of mealy-mouthed caveats and bullshit defenses by the summer of 2000, they settled for an inbred moron over Al Gore.
I've been pretty even-handed in my qualified support for the Democratic candidates, in that I've stressed that even though I think the party as a whole is, well, a hole, even pussified capitulation squeaks ahead of belligerent insanity, which is all the Republicans have had to offer for many years. And I know that there has never been any moment in the history of time when the universe has given the poor Clintons a break, that they persevere into the headwinds of a media conspiracy, right-wing and otherwise.
Still, never let it be said that they don't consistently find ways to make even fence-sitters sick of them. Between this and the possibility of David Shuster getting fired (and hey, ya think Faux Noise isn't drawing up an offer for Shuster right now so's he can spend the entire summer lobbing far more vicious and personal attacks?), I'm already tired of them all over again.
As far as Solis' dismissal in and of itself is concerned, it bespeaks exactly what was apparent in the aftermath of Super Tuesday -- Hillary has peaked, but Obama has not yet. We'll see how Texas and Ohio go, as well as how Michigan and Florida's delegates are counted (after Hillary welshed on the handshake deal she had with Obama and Edwards in those two states), but I'd put money down that this could turn into a nasty intraparty squabble over the role of superdelegates in determining a nominee.
Semper Fried
Here's something the Code Pink bozos need to get through their thick-ass skulls -- your half-witted attempts at street theater are unwelcome, and indeed profoundly counterproductive. These antics are reminiscent of nothing so much as right-wing fringetards such as Operation Rescue and Fred Phelps' Caravan O' Incest. Standing outside with signs and slogans is one thing; chaining yourselves to the door is quite another. These idiots curiously seem to only hold their own rights to free speech sacred.
This is an unpopular war led by an unpopular preznit. And yes, recruiters have been known to use some fairly unscrupulous methods to make their sales quotas. Look, if you are somehow not adequately apprised of what exactly the Marines do, then maybe you deserve to get roped into action. In the meantime, a lot of serious people have made a lot of serious efforts to address this war in a coherent fashion.
I am not opposed to genuine revolutionary tactics, but this is just a sideshow that ends up minimizing serious, principled opposition to a tragically failed policy. It perpetuates useless hippie stereotypes, and further hardens the antidisestablishmentarian bent of the dead-end supporters. They don't have to support the war overtly; all they have to do is point at the Code Pink goofball chained to the door of a recruiting center, calling people "baby killers", and state their case against that. And it doesn't matter if there's only six or seven goofballs at any given moment. It might as well be a thousand, though if it actually were a thousand, someone who could actually do something might pay some attention.
Sometimes people need to think beyond their own individual antics and realize how they can galvanize the very people they're trying to oppose. I'm just saying.
This is an unpopular war led by an unpopular preznit. And yes, recruiters have been known to use some fairly unscrupulous methods to make their sales quotas. Look, if you are somehow not adequately apprised of what exactly the Marines do, then maybe you deserve to get roped into action. In the meantime, a lot of serious people have made a lot of serious efforts to address this war in a coherent fashion.
I am not opposed to genuine revolutionary tactics, but this is just a sideshow that ends up minimizing serious, principled opposition to a tragically failed policy. It perpetuates useless hippie stereotypes, and further hardens the antidisestablishmentarian bent of the dead-end supporters. They don't have to support the war overtly; all they have to do is point at the Code Pink goofball chained to the door of a recruiting center, calling people "baby killers", and state their case against that. And it doesn't matter if there's only six or seven goofballs at any given moment. It might as well be a thousand, though if it actually were a thousand, someone who could actually do something might pay some attention.
Sometimes people need to think beyond their own individual antics and realize how they can galvanize the very people they're trying to oppose. I'm just saying.
Operation Dumbo Drop
I'm not going to make some phony-bold outta-my-ass claim that Washington is some sort of bellwether state. I do know that the state, like California, is not quite as librul as non-left-coasters assume; the eastern half of Washington tends to offset the tidy corporate liberalism of the SeaTac corridor.
But when your party has been given the backhanded gift of an early coronation in what really could be a do-or-die year for significant factions of said party, when the Daddy Warbucks candidate deliberately took a knee to help Grampa Simpson consolidate things and get a little mo', something's up when said front-runner is less than two points ahead, only fourteen points ahead of perennial contender None of the Above, and facing a total 3:1 opposition in the running.
And the Washington state GOP is a bit over-eager in trying to seal this one up for Poor Ol' Straight Talk. I know the Democrats have entire playbooks devoted to the fine Shrumian art of how to fuck up a shit sandwich and snatch defeat from the jaws of sure victory, but damned if you might not be looking at the opening cracks of a summer-long Republican implosion. McCain can't win over the conservatards without openly fellating them and buggering the tiny-pecker-riddled corpse of Saint Reagan, which he just spent the last week doing. And he lost most of the independents a long time ago. He has to shit or get off the pot, and once he does, one of his target demos is going to abandon him.
But never fear. Barack Obama could win with a 75% tally in November, and the Dems will still take Lieberman's shit and let the Blue Dogs push them around. So I wouldn't get too cocky.
But when your party has been given the backhanded gift of an early coronation in what really could be a do-or-die year for significant factions of said party, when the Daddy Warbucks candidate deliberately took a knee to help Grampa Simpson consolidate things and get a little mo', something's up when said front-runner is less than two points ahead, only fourteen points ahead of perennial contender None of the Above, and facing a total 3:1 opposition in the running.
And the Washington state GOP is a bit over-eager in trying to seal this one up for Poor Ol' Straight Talk. I know the Democrats have entire playbooks devoted to the fine Shrumian art of how to fuck up a shit sandwich and snatch defeat from the jaws of sure victory, but damned if you might not be looking at the opening cracks of a summer-long Republican implosion. McCain can't win over the conservatards without openly fellating them and buggering the tiny-pecker-riddled corpse of Saint Reagan, which he just spent the last week doing. And he lost most of the independents a long time ago. He has to shit or get off the pot, and once he does, one of his target demos is going to abandon him.
But never fear. Barack Obama could win with a 75% tally in November, and the Dems will still take Lieberman's shit and let the Blue Dogs push them around. So I wouldn't get too cocky.
Absolute Power
One of the most notable events of the past week, though you wouldn't know it to read the corporate media, was the fiendishly well-timed admission by the Cheney administration that, well, yes we have freedom-boarded several people in our War On Some Terra. Now, we only did it to three people, and all three of them were well-known puppy-killers and child-molesters who were shot-callers for their cells, presiding over ticking-time-bomb scenarios à la 24, blah blah blah. You know the drill, so to speak.
This "news" was followed up, with a rather uncomfortable enthusiasm, of the revelation that by gum the brain-trust reserves the right to do it again. That last was probably the truest thing anyone in the administration has said in months.
The always reliable Charles Pierce gets it way right:
The difference between the Democrats and the current incarnation of the Republicans seems to be this: one group has heard of The Art of War and The Prince, and expends more effort to maintain a noble, dickless veneer; the other has read and internalized both thoroughly, and understands that the lesson of each is simple -- power belongs to those who use it. It is not "earned" through a grinding process, nor "achieved" via pseudobipartisan capitulation, nor "granted" nor "given".
Power is taken, and it is used. It is so simple that even the simpletons clogging the far-right wing (as opposed to the center-right wing, which would be, you know, the Democrats) of the Corporate Party understand it, just as sure as they know that sisters are for fuckin', but first cousins are for marryin'.
This "news" was followed up, with a rather uncomfortable enthusiasm, of the revelation that by gum the brain-trust reserves the right to do it again. That last was probably the truest thing anyone in the administration has said in months.
The always reliable Charles Pierce gets it way right:
For the past couple of weeks, they've just gotten blatant about it. The administration of George W. Bush is bound by no law, bound by no precedent, bound not even by the forms of democratic self-government, let alone its actual substance, which is being used as a throw-rug in John Yoo's den these days. They will torture and the Congress can do nothing. Their powers to spy, to search, and to seize are unlimited and Congress is not remotely entitled to know even what those powers are. They can imprison without trial. They can force corporations -- and, indeed, individuals within the government -- to violate the law. They are not subject to treaties. They are not subject to oversight, nor even subpoenas. Read this swill from yesterday. Through his actions, and from the mouths of his minions, George Bush is now claiming fully the powers of a tyrant, by any reasonable definition of the term.
This is the only issue in the presidential campaign. It is the only truly existential threat to the country. Everything else -- health care, climate change, campaign finance, the deficit -- mean nothing if we fail on this fundamental issue.
The difference between the Democrats and the current incarnation of the Republicans seems to be this: one group has heard of The Art of War and The Prince, and expends more effort to maintain a noble, dickless veneer; the other has read and internalized both thoroughly, and understands that the lesson of each is simple -- power belongs to those who use it. It is not "earned" through a grinding process, nor "achieved" via pseudobipartisan capitulation, nor "granted" nor "given".
Power is taken, and it is used. It is so simple that even the simpletons clogging the far-right wing (as opposed to the center-right wing, which would be, you know, the Democrats) of the Corporate Party understand it, just as sure as they know that sisters are for fuckin', but first cousins are for marryin'.
Saturday, February 09, 2008
Pimp My Pride
Let's have a moment of silence, shall we, for the terrible awful no-good remark uttered by David Shuster regarding the daughter of the Prophet (peace be upon him). Of course, Shuster heretofore has been as reliable a media entity as any good librul could have asked for, issuing pointed questions and observations with an intellectual honesty that puts other attack poodles (see Gregory, David) to shame.
But now Shuster has apparently Crossed A Line, and must satisfactorily perform his auto-da-fé for the baying crowd, because the entire universe has conspired against the Prophet (PBUH) since he was but an uppity hick gubnor. And now, an extemporaneous (and, to be blunt about it, pretty stupid) remark by a basic-cable reporter has the perennially aggrieved up in arms -- which, by definition, is generally where such folks are found.
Here's the thing: once you absorb that every once in a while one of the good guys fucks up, and then check out the transcript of his e-mails with HRC's rep, the bigger picture clarifies. This is by no means the same thing as Rash Limpballs picking on poor 12-year-old Chelsea (as if he's some sort of Olympian stud-muffin, the fat fuck) back in the day.
It's one thing for a candidate's child to simply do the usual schtick of showing up at campaign events and rubber-chicken shows in a general display of support. Tagg and the rest of theOsmondRomney progeny had been doing exactly that for dear ol' dad for some time (though not, more notoriously, expressing their support for Dad's positions in more concrete terms; at least John McCain's sons are actually in Iraq). Giuliani's kids would have supported him on the campaign trail, except they're too busy studying for midterms, and happen to think for some reason that their dad's a skeevy asshole.
But Chelsea has been essentially functioning as a political operative it seems, lobbying superdelegates -- party flacks who are turning out to be hugely critical in determining the eventual nominee, because of the close spread -- to support her mother. Fair enough. It is not too much to ask, as Shuster rightly asserts, that the usual interview bubble on candidate's children (grown children at that) be lifted just a tad. Chelsea Clinton should not be automatically immune from questions, insofar as they pertain to her politicking efforts.
Well, Obama's kids aren't in their mid-twenties, with cushy six-figure gigs their parents got them, nor are they working the refs off-camera. Really, maybe it's the superdelegate system that's the problem in the first place. If it weren't set up so that a certain subset of inbred backroom hacks could supersede the actual vote, you wouldn't be having this fucking problem.
But now Shuster has apparently Crossed A Line, and must satisfactorily perform his auto-da-fé for the baying crowd, because the entire universe has conspired against the Prophet (PBUH) since he was but an uppity hick gubnor. And now, an extemporaneous (and, to be blunt about it, pretty stupid) remark by a basic-cable reporter has the perennially aggrieved up in arms -- which, by definition, is generally where such folks are found.
Here's the thing: once you absorb that every once in a while one of the good guys fucks up, and then check out the transcript of his e-mails with HRC's rep, the bigger picture clarifies. This is by no means the same thing as Rash Limpballs picking on poor 12-year-old Chelsea (as if he's some sort of Olympian stud-muffin, the fat fuck) back in the day.
It's one thing for a candidate's child to simply do the usual schtick of showing up at campaign events and rubber-chicken shows in a general display of support. Tagg and the rest of the
But Chelsea has been essentially functioning as a political operative it seems, lobbying superdelegates -- party flacks who are turning out to be hugely critical in determining the eventual nominee, because of the close spread -- to support her mother. Fair enough. It is not too much to ask, as Shuster rightly asserts, that the usual interview bubble on candidate's children (grown children at that) be lifted just a tad. Chelsea Clinton should not be automatically immune from questions, insofar as they pertain to her politicking efforts.
If Shuster had made this comment about Obama's kids, the furor we're witnessing right now would pale in comparison to the shouts for Shuster's head.
Well, Obama's kids aren't in their mid-twenties, with cushy six-figure gigs their parents got them, nor are they working the refs off-camera. Really, maybe it's the superdelegate system that's the problem in the first place. If it weren't set up so that a certain subset of inbred backroom hacks could supersede the actual vote, you wouldn't be having this fucking problem.
Friday, February 08, 2008
Self-Censorship
The reason we can brag about not having state-controlled media is because the state never has to bother with it.
Yes, and? If it makes Gibney feel any better, chances are that everyone who was ever going to give a shit about this story already knows about it. I certainly recall it, but don't know exactly where it would be in the archives here. [Update: Here.]
But I remain unconvinced that even airing on one of the big three networks during prime-time would motivate anyone. Might interrupt the latest Survivor iteration, or the fake pieties about "change", as if anybody really plans on changing a fuckin' thing.
Still, nicely done, Discovery Channel. Wouldn't want to break up the monotony of chasing monitor lizards and eating grubs, or whatever it is they're about these days. Discovering the bottom of one's own stomach, it seems.
Director Alex Gibney agreed to sell the rights of Taxi to the Discovery Channel because executives convinced him they would “give the film a prominent broadcast.” Now, however, Discovery has dropped its plans to air the documentary because the film is too controversial
....
It’s ironic that Taxi’s content is too “controversial,” considering it depicts real acts perpetrated by the current Bush administration. In an interview with the Center for American Progress, Gibney noted that Americans are excited about dramatizations of torture, such as in the show 24, but uncomfortable “with the reality of torture.”
Yes, and? If it makes Gibney feel any better, chances are that everyone who was ever going to give a shit about this story already knows about it. I certainly recall it, but don't know exactly where it would be in the archives here. [Update: Here.]
But I remain unconvinced that even airing on one of the big three networks during prime-time would motivate anyone. Might interrupt the latest Survivor iteration, or the fake pieties about "change", as if anybody really plans on changing a fuckin' thing.
Still, nicely done, Discovery Channel. Wouldn't want to break up the monotony of chasing monitor lizards and eating grubs, or whatever it is they're about these days. Discovering the bottom of one's own stomach, it seems.
Mitt For Brains
You know, I was sort of half-heartedly pulling for the Stormin' Mormon, if only because he appeared to be the least insane of a bad lot. But after his weird departing tirade at the Conservatard Political Action Conference (better known as NAMBLA), I'm just sorry he didn't blow the rest of Tagg's inheritance on his little tilt at the douchebag windmill.
No, folks like the Mittster would much rather be an accessory to vicious stupidity, and project their daddy issues onto everyone else.
Sounds familiar.
As the saying goes, every word in the above excerpt is a complete lie, including "and" and "the". Yes, the party of miserable failure has certainly earned another four years, haven't they? It'll be fun, after watching them swift-boat the one guy among them who actually served in combat, to see them spend the coming weeks trying to wrap their pouty lips around the m-word (that would be "McCain", for those having trouble keeping track of all the various political sausages these goobers smoke), or to just eat this one and spend the next four years in a more reality-based adversarial stance.
In his speech, Romney couched his decision to suspend his campaign in terms of what's best for the party and the country.
Staying in, "I'd forestall the launch of a national campaign and, frankly, I'd make it easier for Senator Clinton or Obama to win," he said. "Frankly, in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign be a part of aiding a surrender to terror."
No, folks like the Mittster would much rather be an accessory to vicious stupidity, and project their daddy issues onto everyone else.
Sounds familiar.
Although he did not explicitly mention Sen. John McCain, President Bush on Friday sought to unify the Republican Party behind its eventual nominee, describing the election of his successor as president as a stark ideological choice.
Mr. Bush’s remarks, delivered in an early morning speech to the Conservative Political Action Committee, presaged the role his aides said he would play all year: using the power of the presidency to shape the agenda and attack his Democratic critics.
“We have had good debates and soon we will have a nominee who will carry the conservative banner into this election and beyond,” Mr. Bush said to a boisterous audience. “Listen, the stakes in November are high. This is an important election. Prosperity and peace are in the balance.”
As the saying goes, every word in the above excerpt is a complete lie, including "and" and "the". Yes, the party of miserable failure has certainly earned another four years, haven't they? It'll be fun, after watching them swift-boat the one guy among them who actually served in combat, to see them spend the coming weeks trying to wrap their pouty lips around the m-word (that would be "McCain", for those having trouble keeping track of all the various political sausages these goobers smoke), or to just eat this one and spend the next four years in a more reality-based adversarial stance.
Tuesday, February 05, 2008
Nazi Punks Fuck Off
Roy unearths yet another conservatard tuber who wants to chuck Hitler grenades and then run from the blast radius. Personally, I'm fairly squeamish at any expression of potential mob mentality or groupthink, whether it's a political rally or a megachurch -- either way it's usually twenty-thousand blissfully unconscious assholes who drove there in SUVs with "Earth First" stickers on the never-used tow-bar, to express in unison their love for this or that icon. Hell, it's why I don't see rock bands or sports events in large arenas anymore, to be honest. It creeps me the fuck out, regardless of whether I personally like the team/band/political message. It's unnecessary; it's the antithesis of critical thinking.
But that is a different matter altogether than these puling little assholes trotting out their Triumph of the Will comparisons and their Hitler smiley-faces and such, and then backing away, lamely muttering, "Well uh, heh, see, we're not saying that you guys are, like, Nazis or anything, it's just that Hitler liked organic food and the environment, you know."
No, I don't know, you dumb motherfuckers, and if you're going to have the goddamned nerve to keep up with this shit, at least have the fucking balls to own it. Whatever nasty little scuds I launch at the people who are ruining this country, you can bet I fucking well mean it. Which is why I've never used that particular n-word on them, and probably never will. Some of us still have enough respect for the English language to not pull cheap imagery out of our asses, put it on the shelf, and tell everyone it's a nice collectible, when we can all see perfectly well what it is.
But that is a different matter altogether than these puling little assholes trotting out their Triumph of the Will comparisons and their Hitler smiley-faces and such, and then backing away, lamely muttering, "Well uh, heh, see, we're not saying that you guys are, like, Nazis or anything, it's just that Hitler liked organic food and the environment, you know."
No, I don't know, you dumb motherfuckers, and if you're going to have the goddamned nerve to keep up with this shit, at least have the fucking balls to own it. Whatever nasty little scuds I launch at the people who are ruining this country, you can bet I fucking well mean it. Which is why I've never used that particular n-word on them, and probably never will. Some of us still have enough respect for the English language to not pull cheap imagery out of our asses, put it on the shelf, and tell everyone it's a nice collectible, when we can all see perfectly well what it is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)