As of tomorrow (Easter Sunday) morning, morialekafa will depart on a three week vacation where he will not have to deal with the absurd situation and surreality that presently characterizes life in the U.S. If lucky, he may be able to escape even any news at all for a while.
Let's see, it is perfectly clear by now to anyone but the totally demented that Bush/Cheny/Rumsfeld/Rice/Powell and others deliberately lied us into an unnecessary, illegal, and immoral "war." Although most everyone knows this, no one seems willing to do anything much about it.
It is also perfectly obvious that the torture that went on at Abu Ghraib was not simply the result of a "few bad apples" but was, in fact, the result of policies handed down from above, particularly from Donald Rumsfeld. No one seems much interested in pursuing this.
Dick Cheney is now known to have been the instigator of the "get Wilsom" movement that resulted in the treasonous "outing" of his wife, Valerie Plame, a CIA operative. Bush himself is involved in this through his "declassification" of suppositively secret information. Not much happening on this front either.
Israel continues to use their overwhelmingly superior armed forces to destroy targets in Gaza and are now talking about re-entering that unfortunate place. They continue to grow their illegal settlements in the West Bank and to build their illegal wall, ignoring for the nth time the UN and the rest of world opinion. Bush/Cheney and the neocons continue to unconditionally support these criminal actions.
There is growing talk about impeachment. But that seems to be all it is - just talk. The Republican controlled House will never even consider such a thing and the Democrats are seemingly unable to even seriously criticize the present incompetent Administration or offer any suggestions for what to do.
Jack Abramoff is apparently "spilling his guts" which is presumably going to implicate many others - but so far, nada. The wheels of justice move slowly, if they are really moving at all.
Tom DeLay is supposedly going to jail but I suppose if they put him in charge of Budget and Management to replace Bolten he may get off the hook. Never underestimate the Hammer.
There are increasing calls for Rumsfeld, the most incompetent Secretary of Defense ever, to resign. Bush, of course, continues to support him because to do otherwise would be to admit to failure which he simply cannot do even though his stubborness is resulting in more lost lives on a daily basis. Six retired Senior Generals have called for his resignation and it is perfectly obvious they speak for a great many others who cannot freely speak out. Rumsfeld's pet Generals are saying the retired Generals are acting inappropriately. So by all means let us continue to act appropriately and kill and kill and kill. Aside from a few American troops the casualties are just uncounted "towel-heads."
Oh, yes, there is the problem of Iran. The talk is we are about to drop bombs on their nuclear facilities, maybe even nuclear bombs. Now this is an idea so insane that it truly boggles the mind. Bush/Cheney insist this is an option and refuse to take it off the table even though apparently senior players are threatening to resign if they don't give it up. The idea of attacking Iran in any way whatsoever given the current condition of American troops and the fact that our country is verging on bankruptcy does not seem like a very good idea.
There is growing awareness that the official version of 9/11 is most probably not true. More and more questions are being raised by more and more people, and these people are not just conspiracy kooks, but serious scholars who would like to know the truth. I wonder if the American public would be "able to handle the truth?"
Things on the immigration front aren't going too well either. On one extreme side there are demands for blanket amnesty for all illegals. On the other extreme there are those who want felony charges brought against all 11 or 12 million illegals, rounding them up and deporting them forthwith. How easily this would be to do escapes me. In between there may someday be found a solution - but it will have to satisfy our corporate masters who demand slave labor. The outlook here is not promising.
Now that the national debt has reached almost 9 trillion, and there is no let up in spending on Iraq or anything else, it will be interesting to see where we go from here. I guess we will just have to admit be being a third world country and admit we just can't pay. That ought to thrill the rest of the world.
Bush continues to make almost daily speeches trying to get support for his failed "war" and policies. No one is listening anymore but he keeps right on. Cheney, the real President, has a popularity rating somewhere below Jack-the-Ripper, but he occasionally comes out of his secret hiding places to give a speech to carefully picked sympathetic audiences (can there really be anyone still sympathetic to this evil man?) Everyone (well, virtually everyone) knows he is a war profiteer, a pathological liar, and a really lousy hunter, but he continues on unfazed.
We are still interested in knowing how it is/was that a known male prostitute with no Press Credentials was allowed to participate in Press Conferences for months and also have access to the White House under very questionable circumstances (at least I am still interested in knowing this).
Then, there is till the question of voting machines. Will they or will they not determine the 2006 elections? Given the climate of opinion at the moment how could Democrats lose? They may find a way. They seem to try very hard to lose elections.
When you think of elections think of Ohio and Florida. That should refresh your memory.
I am being told by "she who must be obeyed" that my tax man is insisting on attention right now.
Be advised that I really appreciate my readers, both of them (well, there might be a few more) and their comments. I trust that you will have straightened out this mess by the time I return. I may be swallowed by a whale but that will surely not be as strange as the surrealistc situation we presently experience.
Saturday, April 15, 2006
Friday, April 14, 2006
Gold Star Economy
Anonymous: The answer is yes. Even Hamas has now agreed, provided Israel gives up all their occupied Palestinian land (which I doubt they will ever do).
I saw somewhere today that the CEO of Exxon has been given a 400 million dollar golden parachute. This is on top of the 50 million he received in compensation last year. I don't care what he did, these are utterly absurd compensations. Of course all of the CEO's of major corporations make these truly big bucks. The top honchos at Disney I'm sure probably make somewhere around 100 million per year, maybe more. You might think they could take a bit less and maybe lower their prices for all the children they lure into their clutches each year. Then there are people like Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, and such, who count their money in billions rather than mere millions. Quite frankly, I don't understand this, nor do I believe it has any contact whatsoever with reality. First of all, what does one do with, say, 100 million dollars a year? Could anyone really spend that much even if they tried? And if so, what could they spend it on that would be in any way other than conspicuous consumption (bigger mansions, bigger yachts, expensive cars, drunken orgies, etc.)? Those who make this kind of money seemingly just can't get enough. Think of people like Michael Jordan or Tiger Woods. They have so much money they couldn't pssibly spend it all but they go right on making more commercials and more and more money. What do they do with it all? Oh, I know, they give to charity and set up foundations, and support causes and all that. And I'm sure that for most of them these are noble motives (but they still must result in enormous tax breaks). Don't misunderstand, I'm not criticizing these individuals for what they are doing. After all, that's the way the system works. I just think the system sort of stinks. Let me make some suggestions.
Do you remember when you were in grade school and you used to get gold stars (maybe I'm the only one old enough to remember this). That is, if you brushed your teeth every day, or read enough books, or learned your penmanship, or whatever, the teacher would give you a gold star. There was a big cardboard disply where you could see your gold stars and compare them with everyone else's. And you could be really proud if you had more gold stars than anyone else.
Why should we not institute a similar practice for those who succeed in making so much money they don't know what to do with it? I don't know how much money one needs to have enough, but it is clear that many nowadays have more than enough. Just for the sake of the argument, let's say that 50 million a year is enough (I think this is more than generous). For every 50 million more they get a gold star and the general fund of the United States gets the money. Then there could be an elected high-powered group that would decide how the money would be spent. Let's say they decided to spend it on some project having to do with stem cell research. They could make it public and say, "this valuable research is being made possible by the fantastic success of Joe Blow." That way Joe Blow would get his reward, be famous and appreciated, and, because he has so damn much money he wouldn't even know the difference.
Similarly, how much money does a billionare need? It seems to me that once someone has a billion dollars that ought to be enough. For every billion more (or even every 100 million more) they get a gold star and their surplus money goes toward the public good. I know, I know, Bill Gates and some of the others actually do donate large sums to different projects, and I certainly appreciate the fact that they do so. But with such huge sums of money why should how it is used be left up to the whims of individuals? If Bill Gates was allowed to maintain a billion dollar bank account do you think he would really miss all of those other billions? We could over time make it even more rewarding to produce money for the public good than just to make it for the sake of making more.
This gold star system would enable a society to maintain its capitalistic motivations while at the same time providing more for the needs of the less fortunate. It would not eliminate the gap between the rich and the poor but it would certainly make it less offensive and destructive. Maybe we could even fix the potholes on my country road: "These potholes were fixed due to the fantastic ceative and entrepreneural skills of our own revered citizen, McDonald Frump."
Think about it. Cheers and goodnight.
I saw somewhere today that the CEO of Exxon has been given a 400 million dollar golden parachute. This is on top of the 50 million he received in compensation last year. I don't care what he did, these are utterly absurd compensations. Of course all of the CEO's of major corporations make these truly big bucks. The top honchos at Disney I'm sure probably make somewhere around 100 million per year, maybe more. You might think they could take a bit less and maybe lower their prices for all the children they lure into their clutches each year. Then there are people like Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, and such, who count their money in billions rather than mere millions. Quite frankly, I don't understand this, nor do I believe it has any contact whatsoever with reality. First of all, what does one do with, say, 100 million dollars a year? Could anyone really spend that much even if they tried? And if so, what could they spend it on that would be in any way other than conspicuous consumption (bigger mansions, bigger yachts, expensive cars, drunken orgies, etc.)? Those who make this kind of money seemingly just can't get enough. Think of people like Michael Jordan or Tiger Woods. They have so much money they couldn't pssibly spend it all but they go right on making more commercials and more and more money. What do they do with it all? Oh, I know, they give to charity and set up foundations, and support causes and all that. And I'm sure that for most of them these are noble motives (but they still must result in enormous tax breaks). Don't misunderstand, I'm not criticizing these individuals for what they are doing. After all, that's the way the system works. I just think the system sort of stinks. Let me make some suggestions.
Do you remember when you were in grade school and you used to get gold stars (maybe I'm the only one old enough to remember this). That is, if you brushed your teeth every day, or read enough books, or learned your penmanship, or whatever, the teacher would give you a gold star. There was a big cardboard disply where you could see your gold stars and compare them with everyone else's. And you could be really proud if you had more gold stars than anyone else.
Why should we not institute a similar practice for those who succeed in making so much money they don't know what to do with it? I don't know how much money one needs to have enough, but it is clear that many nowadays have more than enough. Just for the sake of the argument, let's say that 50 million a year is enough (I think this is more than generous). For every 50 million more they get a gold star and the general fund of the United States gets the money. Then there could be an elected high-powered group that would decide how the money would be spent. Let's say they decided to spend it on some project having to do with stem cell research. They could make it public and say, "this valuable research is being made possible by the fantastic success of Joe Blow." That way Joe Blow would get his reward, be famous and appreciated, and, because he has so damn much money he wouldn't even know the difference.
Similarly, how much money does a billionare need? It seems to me that once someone has a billion dollars that ought to be enough. For every billion more (or even every 100 million more) they get a gold star and their surplus money goes toward the public good. I know, I know, Bill Gates and some of the others actually do donate large sums to different projects, and I certainly appreciate the fact that they do so. But with such huge sums of money why should how it is used be left up to the whims of individuals? If Bill Gates was allowed to maintain a billion dollar bank account do you think he would really miss all of those other billions? We could over time make it even more rewarding to produce money for the public good than just to make it for the sake of making more.
This gold star system would enable a society to maintain its capitalistic motivations while at the same time providing more for the needs of the less fortunate. It would not eliminate the gap between the rich and the poor but it would certainly make it less offensive and destructive. Maybe we could even fix the potholes on my country road: "These potholes were fixed due to the fantastic ceative and entrepreneural skills of our own revered citizen, McDonald Frump."
Think about it. Cheers and goodnight.
Thursday, April 13, 2006
Anti-Semitic?
First, how many high-powered, battle scarred, experienced, retired Generals does it take to unscrew a Rumsfeld? As of now six (count 'em) such Generals have said publicly that Rumsfeld is an arrogant, incompetent jerk (well, not in those precise words). It is perfectly obvious there must be many other senior officers who, because they are still on active duty, cannot come out and say the same thing. We know that Murtha, for example, was not only speaking for himself when he said we should rethink our strategy, but also had the ear of many senior military people. Bush continues to ignore any criticism and maintains his claim that Rummy is "doing a heck of a job." Bush is apparently constitutionally unable to accept advice or to admit that he might have made a mistake. This situation can only grow worse.
Two Professors, Mearsheimer (Harvard) and Walt (Chicago) recently published a paper on the Israeli Lobby. Basically, they pointed out that there is such a Lobby and that it has a great deal of influence on American Foreign Policy, particularly in the Middle East. From the response to this paper you might think they said the Jews killed Jesus and ate all the first born babies born in Babylon. They have been roundly accused of Anti-Semitism by virtually everyone.
Is it not the case that Israel is illegally occupying Palestinian land, and has been for years? Is it not the case that they have systematically attempted to take land and water from the Palestinians? Is it not the case they are building an illegal "wall" that will incorporate Palestinian land? Is it not the case they have been and continue to be opposed to the creation of a viable Palestinian State? Is it not the case they have oppressed and humiliated Palestinians for years? Is it not the case that at this very moment they are firing on the Gaza strip, killing civilians at will with their overwhelming military superiority? Is it not the case that Israel has ignored all U.N. resolutions for years on end, far more egregiously than even Sadam Hussein? I could go on but you get the point I am sure.
It is my understanding that at least 25% of Israeli residents are not Jewish. It is also my understanding that American Evangelicals are more supportive of Israel than are many Israelis. It is also the case that many Israelis do not support the policies of their own Administration. So what is it that is Anti-Semitic about criticizing Israel? Personally, I don't care if Israel is populated by Jews, Abyssinians, Ethiopians, or Congo Pygmies, what Israel has been doing, and continues to do to the Palestinians is wrong, criminal, and not much better than genocidal.
If you think there is no Israeli Lobby, and it has no influence on American Policy, I suggest you stop drinking the kool aid and ask yourself why we continue to blindly, uncritically support what has become a criminal regime? It is said that only the U.S. can solve this problem. So why don't we?
Two Professors, Mearsheimer (Harvard) and Walt (Chicago) recently published a paper on the Israeli Lobby. Basically, they pointed out that there is such a Lobby and that it has a great deal of influence on American Foreign Policy, particularly in the Middle East. From the response to this paper you might think they said the Jews killed Jesus and ate all the first born babies born in Babylon. They have been roundly accused of Anti-Semitism by virtually everyone.
Is it not the case that Israel is illegally occupying Palestinian land, and has been for years? Is it not the case that they have systematically attempted to take land and water from the Palestinians? Is it not the case they are building an illegal "wall" that will incorporate Palestinian land? Is it not the case they have been and continue to be opposed to the creation of a viable Palestinian State? Is it not the case they have oppressed and humiliated Palestinians for years? Is it not the case that at this very moment they are firing on the Gaza strip, killing civilians at will with their overwhelming military superiority? Is it not the case that Israel has ignored all U.N. resolutions for years on end, far more egregiously than even Sadam Hussein? I could go on but you get the point I am sure.
It is my understanding that at least 25% of Israeli residents are not Jewish. It is also my understanding that American Evangelicals are more supportive of Israel than are many Israelis. It is also the case that many Israelis do not support the policies of their own Administration. So what is it that is Anti-Semitic about criticizing Israel? Personally, I don't care if Israel is populated by Jews, Abyssinians, Ethiopians, or Congo Pygmies, what Israel has been doing, and continues to do to the Palestinians is wrong, criminal, and not much better than genocidal.
If you think there is no Israeli Lobby, and it has no influence on American Policy, I suggest you stop drinking the kool aid and ask yourself why we continue to blindly, uncritically support what has become a criminal regime? It is said that only the U.S. can solve this problem. So why don't we?
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
The Farce Continues
Bush and Cheney continue to appear at public events such as baseball games and such, and they also continue making speeches (especially Bush who seems to be on a non-stop speaking tour), but for all intents and purposes, no one is listening anymore. It is now no more than a charade where they pretend to be our chief executives and for some peculiar inexplicable reason we continue to go along with the gag. By now everyone knows they have lied shamelessly and continue to do so. The latest revelation has to do with Bush's claim that "we have found WMD's" (in the form of mobile biological labs). Two days before he made this claim it was unanimously decided by those who were investigating this matter that they were definitely not such labs. So now Bush's unprincipled defenders are saying something to the effect that in only two days there was no time for this information to have penetrated the White House. This would seem to be a poor defense, given the fact that Bush went on claiming this same erroneous claim for another year. Someone questioned whether Bush was ignorant or just out of the loop. I suspect he was both. We seem to be witnessing Bush's emulation of Captain Queeg.
Stephen Rademaker, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation, has now claimed that Iran could produce enough enhanced uranium for a bomb in 16 days. Where do they find these guys? What do they feed them or give them to smoke? As all the experts claim Iran could not have a bomb before anywhere from 3 to 10 years it would appear that Rademaker is stretching things more than just a bit. But of course the Republicans desperately need another "war" if they are to stay in power and out of jail so I guess it is understandable. It will not be understandable if they are allowed to get away with this utter bullshit once again.
Still another retired General has now said Rumsfeld should resign. What the hell, what do Generals know? Rumsfeld's mixture of arrogance and incompetence is truly a thing to behold. Nice job Rummy! Keep up the good work. Things are really going well in Iraq as you, Bush, Cheney, and Rice seem to uniquely understand. The rest of us, along with the known world, just doesn't get it.
Another kudo for the advertising world. They are now using children in ads promoting the use of coal for energy. I think I have now seen at least three versions in which children proclaim how much coal we have, have coal technology is great, and etc. Do you think these kids truly understand the arguments for and against the use of coal? Now, I know that if adults were saying these same things they probably wouldn't know any better than the children. But somehow you expect adults in advertising to be paid liars. I don't think that using children in this way is ethical. That is, you might expect that adults who make their living whoring in this way would know it was unethical to lie about such things and do it anyway. But children? I don't think so.
I guess I'm just an old fuddy-duddy. I remember when one didn't have to apologize for being an American. Oh, I forgot, praise Bush, the one Bush, Bush is great. Face West when you do your daily prayers to Bush. West, where the sun goes down, symbolic of death and the end of the day and other such things. East is where the day and life begins, West is where it all ends. How appropriate.
Stephen Rademaker, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation, has now claimed that Iran could produce enough enhanced uranium for a bomb in 16 days. Where do they find these guys? What do they feed them or give them to smoke? As all the experts claim Iran could not have a bomb before anywhere from 3 to 10 years it would appear that Rademaker is stretching things more than just a bit. But of course the Republicans desperately need another "war" if they are to stay in power and out of jail so I guess it is understandable. It will not be understandable if they are allowed to get away with this utter bullshit once again.
Still another retired General has now said Rumsfeld should resign. What the hell, what do Generals know? Rumsfeld's mixture of arrogance and incompetence is truly a thing to behold. Nice job Rummy! Keep up the good work. Things are really going well in Iraq as you, Bush, Cheney, and Rice seem to uniquely understand. The rest of us, along with the known world, just doesn't get it.
Another kudo for the advertising world. They are now using children in ads promoting the use of coal for energy. I think I have now seen at least three versions in which children proclaim how much coal we have, have coal technology is great, and etc. Do you think these kids truly understand the arguments for and against the use of coal? Now, I know that if adults were saying these same things they probably wouldn't know any better than the children. But somehow you expect adults in advertising to be paid liars. I don't think that using children in this way is ethical. That is, you might expect that adults who make their living whoring in this way would know it was unethical to lie about such things and do it anyway. But children? I don't think so.
I guess I'm just an old fuddy-duddy. I remember when one didn't have to apologize for being an American. Oh, I forgot, praise Bush, the one Bush, Bush is great. Face West when you do your daily prayers to Bush. West, where the sun goes down, symbolic of death and the end of the day and other such things. East is where the day and life begins, West is where it all ends. How appropriate.
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
How about some resignations?
Whatever happened to decent people? A decent person would surely resign the Vice-Presidency with ratings like those of Dick the Slimy. Let's see, last I heard he had only an 18% rating with the American people. Since then it must have gone down. When he threw out the first pitch at a Major League Baseball game he was apparently roundly booed. He is known to be up to his eyeballs in the Plame scandal. He has been a nakedly prominent war profiteer. He should resign. And the fact that he doesn't proves just what an evil, greedy, power-mad, maniac he is.
Rumsfeld is another. More and more Generals are criticizing him and suggesting he has been a resounding failure as Secretary of Defense. That he has been a failure is perfectly obvious to anyone with even half a brain. Bush continues to not only support him but to make the outrageous claim that he has done a fine job. Not only should Rumsfeld resign, so should Bush. It is obvious that none of these incompetents will resign as if they did so they would probably end up in prison. But not only that, they won't resign because they don't give a damn about the United States or its citizens. All they care about is power and the money they can wring out of us to give to their corporate cronies. I defy anyone to name even one thing the Bush/Cheney Administration has done for the American people (as opposed to the corporations that control everything).
The Pakistan Frontier Post has a long article beseeching "rational Americans" to prevent Bush's insanity from running its course and attacking Iran. Are there any rational Americans listening? Are there even any rational Americans anymore? There don't seem to be any in either the House or the Senate.
I refuse to even comment on the question of immigration. Because of corporate greed and benign neglect for years and years we now have a problem that is virtually unsolvable. You can be sure that whatever happens it will make things worse. Way to go, corporate whores.
On a more comical front, if you are amused by signs of mental illness, consider the case of Katherine Harris.
Oh, yeah, Iraq. Remember Iraq. Things are going so well there it has virtually disappeared from the pages of our major newspapers. After Bush/Cheney and Rumsfeld's resounding success there I guess the troops will be coming home soon. Just in time for the Iran adventure. God, it must be great being a "war" President.
I also no longer intend to comment on Bush/Cheney's lies. I just assume, and you should too, that anything and everything they say is a lie, and no exceptions. It always has been and continues.
Rumsfeld is another. More and more Generals are criticizing him and suggesting he has been a resounding failure as Secretary of Defense. That he has been a failure is perfectly obvious to anyone with even half a brain. Bush continues to not only support him but to make the outrageous claim that he has done a fine job. Not only should Rumsfeld resign, so should Bush. It is obvious that none of these incompetents will resign as if they did so they would probably end up in prison. But not only that, they won't resign because they don't give a damn about the United States or its citizens. All they care about is power and the money they can wring out of us to give to their corporate cronies. I defy anyone to name even one thing the Bush/Cheney Administration has done for the American people (as opposed to the corporations that control everything).
The Pakistan Frontier Post has a long article beseeching "rational Americans" to prevent Bush's insanity from running its course and attacking Iran. Are there any rational Americans listening? Are there even any rational Americans anymore? There don't seem to be any in either the House or the Senate.
I refuse to even comment on the question of immigration. Because of corporate greed and benign neglect for years and years we now have a problem that is virtually unsolvable. You can be sure that whatever happens it will make things worse. Way to go, corporate whores.
On a more comical front, if you are amused by signs of mental illness, consider the case of Katherine Harris.
Oh, yeah, Iraq. Remember Iraq. Things are going so well there it has virtually disappeared from the pages of our major newspapers. After Bush/Cheney and Rumsfeld's resounding success there I guess the troops will be coming home soon. Just in time for the Iran adventure. God, it must be great being a "war" President.
I also no longer intend to comment on Bush/Cheney's lies. I just assume, and you should too, that anything and everything they say is a lie, and no exceptions. It always has been and continues.
Monday, April 10, 2006
Old scandals resurfacing?
It appears that one of my favorite White House scandals may be resurfacing. Apparently the Secret Service has anounced that there are questions about the presence of Gannon/Guckert in the White House on numerous occasions. There are times when he signed in but didn't sign out, times when he signed out but hadn't signed in, times when he was present even though there was no press conference, and other times when no one seems to know why he was there. Why this is coming up now I have no idea. I find it strange that these questions were raised over a year ago and then seemingly disappeared until now (see morialekafa 2/19/05, 2/24/05, 3/08/05, 4/24/05). Is it not a fascinating mystery? Here is a guy with no real Press credentials who attended routine Press Conferences for months, asked softball questions at awkward moments, apparently had the run of the White House at times, and was at the same time a known male prostitute. Was there no connection between his prostitution and his strange employment? Was the Secret Service simply unaware of his background? Did they even bother to check? Who sponsored him? Who enabled him to get passes into the White House. What was he doing there when there was no Press Conference? How in the hell did something like this happen? I had assumed that like all scandals involving this Administration this one would just disappear like the rest but perhaps not. I have to agree that compared to other scandals of this Administration this one is basically small potatoes. Perhaps I am just too voyeuristic but I really would like to know what this is all about.
Aren't you relieved to know that President Bush leaked classified information because it was in the public interest to know that something that was not true was true? This is surely the most dishonest, corrupt, incompetent, disgusting Administration in American History. But they certainly have chutzpa (in fact, I think they only pretend to have it as nothing about them is genuine or honest in any way).
I have always found advertising of any kind to be unutterably stupid, and those who make their living at it the scum of the business world. But they have now found an ad that pushes their contempt for consumers about as far as even theoretically possible. This is an ad for mortgage loans. A young woman says she has taken out a mortgage on her house to pay off her credit cards - and now she is pleased that she is "out of debt."
Aren't you relieved to know that President Bush leaked classified information because it was in the public interest to know that something that was not true was true? This is surely the most dishonest, corrupt, incompetent, disgusting Administration in American History. But they certainly have chutzpa (in fact, I think they only pretend to have it as nothing about them is genuine or honest in any way).
I have always found advertising of any kind to be unutterably stupid, and those who make their living at it the scum of the business world. But they have now found an ad that pushes their contempt for consumers about as far as even theoretically possible. This is an ad for mortgage loans. A young woman says she has taken out a mortgage on her house to pay off her credit cards - and now she is pleased that she is "out of debt."
Sunday, April 09, 2006
The ultimate insanity
In an interview today with Wolf Blitzer, Seymour Hersh reported some of the most disturbing things I have ever heard about the Bush/Cheney Administration. According to Hersh, who is usually pretty honest about such things, among the options on the table for Iran is the use of nuclear (bunker buster) bombs. Apparently many military people have insisted this option be taken off the table. Bush/Cheney have refused. Hersh claims that senior military people have said they will resign if this option is not abandoned. If this is true, and I suspect it is true, the only conclusion one can come to is that Bush/Cheney are insane. Indeed, this is insanity carried so far as to make ordinary insanity look normal. Have they no idea of what would happen if the U.S. were to drop nuclear bombs on a country that would be defenseless against them? As the U.S. is the only country ever to use nuclear bombs, to do so again would pit the entire world against us. No one, not even the British, would be able to justify such an outrageous attack on a sovereign country that is, in fact, no real threat to the U.S., and most certainly not enough of a threat to justify such an absurd action. When you consider that Bush apparently believes that (1) Iran is a threat to the entire world, and (2) that only he, George W. Bush, can stop them, and (3) he has to do this before his term in office is up, IT IS TIME TO REMOVE HIM FROM OFFICE NOW! IMMEDIATELY! There must be some provision for removing people from office when they are known to be absolutely insane. And as Dick the Slimy is behind this it is obvious that he is even more insane than Bush. Not only are they insane, they are violently insane and are bent on attacking the entire world. I have lived for quite a long time. I have never been so frightened. I don't believe there is even time for impeachment. Bush/Cheney should be arrested for war crimes and put away where they can do no further harm to our nation. Then they should be tried for their war crimes, preferrably by an international court. If this means Hastert would become President, okay. He is so bumbling without DeLay to tell him what to do he could not do much damage, and DeLay is not going to be in much of a position to run things. What ought to happen, of course, if there is truly any justice in the world, would be for Al Gore, who actually won the Presidency in 2000, to be installed as interim President until there could be another election. At the moment, and under the circumstances, it would be insane to attack Iran at all. To attack them with nuclear weapons is an idea so insane it needs to be stopped immediately. Iran is not an imminent threat to the world and certainly not to the U.S. Iranians are not suicidal or stupid. Even if they had a nuclear bomb they would hardly run out and drop it immediately on Israel or the U.S., knowing the retaliation would mean the end of times for them. I suspect it is Israeli hysteria that is behind this business. Is the U.S. military simply to be employed at the will of Israel? Are we just an extension of the Israeli military? Iran is said to be years away from a nuclear bomb. There is absolutely no reason to be attacking them or dropping nuclear bombs on them, any more than there were genuine reasons to attack Iraq. If the U.S. Congress doesn't stop this NOW it means World War III. And this time no one will win. Bush/Cheney, the neocons, and the religious nutcakes that foment this will get their wish - Armagedon. Bush/Cheney and the neocons will not, I am certain, experience the Rapture.
Somewhere today I saw a heading to the effect that the leak would strain Bush's remaining credibility. What remaining credibility?
Somewhere today I saw a heading to the effect that the leak would strain Bush's remaining credibility. What remaining credibility?
Saturday, April 08, 2006
Paralyzed
Despite overwhelming evidence that the current Bush/Cheney Administration is guilty of multiple impeachable offenses and war crimes, to say nothing of gross incompetence when it comes to governing, virtually nothing happens to do anything about it. This does not seem to me to be a case of the wheels of justice moving too slowly but, rather, that the wheels of justice no longer move at all in the United States. This is the direct result of one party control and reveals a terrible flaw in our two party system. When the founding fathers created our remarkable three part political system, where the three different branches would serve as checks and balances on each other, it apparently never occurred to them that it would be possible for one political party to control all three branches and thus hold absolute power. As at the moment the Democrats have no effective power, no supoena powers, etc., they are rendered helpless. Nor, I think, did the founding fathers imagine a situation in which American politicians would place party above national interest. But that is what has happened. Republicans alone have the power to change this nightmarish situation and refuse to act. The only solution (if in fact it even remains possible) is to vote them out of office entirely. As many of our leading Democrats seem to be aiding and abetting these Republican criminals the rule of thumb ought to be INCUMBENTS OUT, NEW BLOOD IN. It basically comes down to a battle between corporate power (and naked greed) versus democracy and human rights. If we continue to allow labor and land to be treated as commodities no better than pork bellies and chicken fat we are surely doomed.
Friday, April 07, 2006
Enough is enough?
Our local Democrats at their monthly meeting last night decided to sponsor a billboard that will say "Enough is enough, vote Democratic." This is an okay idea and I have no doubt they will do it when the time is ripe. But I question the claim that enough is enough in this particular situation. I think it should say "Enough is more than enough." If Bush has committed an impeachable offense, that is enough. But he has committed many impeachable offenses: lying to Congress and the American people, starting a premptive "war" (the absolutely premier war crime), torture, war profiteering, hiding captives from the Red Cross, using cluster bombs and phosphorous on civilians, illegal wiretapping, leaking classified information, gross incompetence, and I don't know what all else. You may want to argue that technically some of these are not impeachable offenses. It doesn't matter, they are war crimes and that should certainly be impeachable. Thus, enough in this context is far more than enough and he and his sidekick, Dick the Slimy, should either resign forthwith or be impeached. It is not going to happen because the Republican party continues to protect him. This means to me that the Republican party itself is guilty of war crimes. They alone at the moment have the power to do something about this terrible situation and refuse to do anything.
Bush's poll numbers continue to decline day by day. They have now apparently reached 36%. I cannot understand how he could have such high ratings. I think I have figured it out. Trying to come to terms with this strange statistic I have created the Lew Langness insanity/idiocy/oblivious/popularity index. The basic problem is that it is seemingly impossible for Bush to ever attain a zero rating. He will always have some supporters no matter what (even, I gather, if he was filmed strangling children on the White House steps). How do you then account for the 36%. Simple. We know that some percentage of the population is insane (I don't know offhand just what this percentage is but it probably approaches maybe 10%. We also know that probably a similar percentage of people are idiots. Then there is a substantial number of people who are simply oblivious (I would put my mother-in-law in this category, for example). I suspect that if you added these people up it might come close to 36%. There is every reason to believe that insanity and idiocy are more prevalent among Republicans than Democrats so this would result in a relatively higher figure than for the public at large. I guess you couldn't argue that Republicans are more oblivious than others because frothing at the mouth and yelling inanities would seem to indicate they are not (completely oblivious, that is). Anyway, I'm pretty sure that you could count on a 36% popularity rating for Bush no matter what. This is his "base." What this also means is that among other more normal ordinary citizens his popularity rating must be close to zero. You see how it works. Simple if you know how to do it. I am a genius. My wife thinks I am a nut. Well, obviously people don't always agree. If they did Bush could not possible have any popularity rating whatsoever.
WAR CRIMINALS BELONG IN JAIL, NOT THE WHITE HOUSE!
Bush's poll numbers continue to decline day by day. They have now apparently reached 36%. I cannot understand how he could have such high ratings. I think I have figured it out. Trying to come to terms with this strange statistic I have created the Lew Langness insanity/idiocy/oblivious/popularity index. The basic problem is that it is seemingly impossible for Bush to ever attain a zero rating. He will always have some supporters no matter what (even, I gather, if he was filmed strangling children on the White House steps). How do you then account for the 36%. Simple. We know that some percentage of the population is insane (I don't know offhand just what this percentage is but it probably approaches maybe 10%. We also know that probably a similar percentage of people are idiots. Then there is a substantial number of people who are simply oblivious (I would put my mother-in-law in this category, for example). I suspect that if you added these people up it might come close to 36%. There is every reason to believe that insanity and idiocy are more prevalent among Republicans than Democrats so this would result in a relatively higher figure than for the public at large. I guess you couldn't argue that Republicans are more oblivious than others because frothing at the mouth and yelling inanities would seem to indicate they are not (completely oblivious, that is). Anyway, I'm pretty sure that you could count on a 36% popularity rating for Bush no matter what. This is his "base." What this also means is that among other more normal ordinary citizens his popularity rating must be close to zero. You see how it works. Simple if you know how to do it. I am a genius. My wife thinks I am a nut. Well, obviously people don't always agree. If they did Bush could not possible have any popularity rating whatsoever.
WAR CRIMINALS BELONG IN JAIL, NOT THE WHITE HOUSE!
Thursday, April 06, 2006
How much more?
How much more do we need to know about the criminal, immoral, dishonest enterprise that is the Bush/Cheney administration? Now we learn that Bush deliberately leaked classified information for purely political reasons. I guess we can add that to the long list of impeachable offenses of which he and Cheney are obviously guilty. Does anyone care? Doesn't seem like it. Patrick Fitzgerald is said to have evidence of a conspiracy in the White House to out Valerie Plame. If he has he doesn't seem to be very interested in doing anything about it (I keep hoping that he is going to strike big time but so far nothing other than Libby). How many impeachable offenses does it take to get the Republicans to screw in a light bulb (in their small, smooth brains)?
And oh, yes, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, things continue to go well in Iraq. We are making "progress," and if things aren't going too well it is all the fault of the Iraqis themselves. They just can't get their act together. What would you expect from a bunch of dumb Arabs who had a high civilization when we were still trying to invent fire? If they were so smart why didn't they invent pants? I just don't understand why a nation that was never really a nation in the first place, and has now been completely destroyed and occupied against its will, has no viable infrastructure, rampant unemployment, few medical facilities, a serious brain drain, and who knows what all else, can't just snap to when told to do so by someone as important as Condi Rice? What's with these losers anyway?
Condi admitted that we have made tactical mistakes, perhaps thousands of them, in Iraq. Rumsfeld, befuddled as usual, doesn't know what she is talking about. He doesn't know of any mistakes. The fact that many, if not all of our major generals consider him an abject failure (although for obvious reasons most of them can't really speak out publicly) doesn't faze either him or the dimwit so-called Commander in Chief. As Rummy's close friend, Dick the Slimy, lives in a galaxy far away, he doesn't seem to be very interested (after all, it takes a hell of lot of time just counting all your money when you've got a sweet racket like his).
The House and Senate are said to be close to agreeing on a new Immigration Bill. All of this after just a few hours of discussion (just pass something, for god's sake, and get this monkey off our backs). This bill, if it actually does get passed, will almost certainly be virtually useless, unenforceable, and a complete travesty. But as that is what will be intended I guess from their point of view it will be a success (after all, the only point of this whole effort is to insure cheap labor for the corporations that control both our country and the world).
Yes, things are going just swimmingly here in the good old U. S. of A. Only if you are a multi billionaire, that is. The American dream is not only dead, it is putrefying. Five dollars and fifteen cents an hour is a generous wage. Think of all those starving Africans and others that would be happy to get such luxury. People here just never seem to be satisfied. Our local Democrats want a billboard that will say "Enough is Enough, vote Democratic." I'm holding out for "Die Republican Scum."
Cheers and best wishes. Spring is about to be sprung.
And oh, yes, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, things continue to go well in Iraq. We are making "progress," and if things aren't going too well it is all the fault of the Iraqis themselves. They just can't get their act together. What would you expect from a bunch of dumb Arabs who had a high civilization when we were still trying to invent fire? If they were so smart why didn't they invent pants? I just don't understand why a nation that was never really a nation in the first place, and has now been completely destroyed and occupied against its will, has no viable infrastructure, rampant unemployment, few medical facilities, a serious brain drain, and who knows what all else, can't just snap to when told to do so by someone as important as Condi Rice? What's with these losers anyway?
Condi admitted that we have made tactical mistakes, perhaps thousands of them, in Iraq. Rumsfeld, befuddled as usual, doesn't know what she is talking about. He doesn't know of any mistakes. The fact that many, if not all of our major generals consider him an abject failure (although for obvious reasons most of them can't really speak out publicly) doesn't faze either him or the dimwit so-called Commander in Chief. As Rummy's close friend, Dick the Slimy, lives in a galaxy far away, he doesn't seem to be very interested (after all, it takes a hell of lot of time just counting all your money when you've got a sweet racket like his).
The House and Senate are said to be close to agreeing on a new Immigration Bill. All of this after just a few hours of discussion (just pass something, for god's sake, and get this monkey off our backs). This bill, if it actually does get passed, will almost certainly be virtually useless, unenforceable, and a complete travesty. But as that is what will be intended I guess from their point of view it will be a success (after all, the only point of this whole effort is to insure cheap labor for the corporations that control both our country and the world).
Yes, things are going just swimmingly here in the good old U. S. of A. Only if you are a multi billionaire, that is. The American dream is not only dead, it is putrefying. Five dollars and fifteen cents an hour is a generous wage. Think of all those starving Africans and others that would be happy to get such luxury. People here just never seem to be satisfied. Our local Democrats want a billboard that will say "Enough is Enough, vote Democratic." I'm holding out for "Die Republican Scum."
Cheers and best wishes. Spring is about to be sprung.
Wednesday, April 05, 2006
Cynthia the Brutal
I hate commentators who pontificate about things they really know little about. But tonight I have decided to join them and speculate about something I know little about, Cynthia McKinney and her apparently dastardly attack on a Capitol Policeman.
Let us begin from what I understand is the beginning. Congress/man/person/woman McKinney is a Black woman duly elected to the House of Representatives. There are only 12 black women in the House. As I understand it, she was hurrying to some business or other and bypassed a metal detector (Congresspersons routinely are allowed to do this). However, in this case, a Capitol Policeman did not recognize her and tried to stop her, apparently by touching her (grabbing her? restraining her? pinching her?) in what she describes as inappropriately. How do we understand this: a) he didn't recognize her as a Congressperson, b) all black women look alike to him, c) he was confused by her new hair style, d) he doesn't realize there are any Black Congresswomen, e) she was probably carrying a briefcase, not something a Black woman ought to be doing, f) he actually knew who she was but decided to harrass her anyway for some reason.
Now, why did he not recognize her? Capitol Policeman are supposedly trained to recognize all Congresspersons not only by name but by face. So, was he too new to have done his homework? Was it, as she claims, an act of racial profiling (she along with other Black Congresspersons have been stopped like this before)? In any case, if he stopped her, and if she explained who she was (which she should not have had to do) why did he not simply apologize and let her go? I guess he did let her go, but only after she hit him in the chest with her cell phone. Apparently he did not arrest her.
What I want to know, and what we do not now know, is: a) was the Policeman hurt in any way? b) was there any bleeding? c) was he knocked down? d) did he require medical attention? e) was he taken to a hospital? f) is he in critical condition? g) is he expected to live? h) was he mistaken by Congressperson McKinney for a marshmallow?
I only ask these ridiculous questions because (hold your breath) Republicans have requested this episode be taken to a Grand Jury! Think of this. A Black Congresswoman, one of only twelve such women, with a very distinctive appearance, who has been stopped before (because apparently Capital Policeman cannot believe she is actually a Congressperson), in a moment of anger, actually hit a Policeman in the chest with her cell phone. My god! What a crime! It makes the umpteen zillion scandals of the Republicans pale into insignificance. What illegal war? What DeLay resignation? What Abramoff scandal? What Plame outing? What illegal torture? What idiotic President? What evil Vice President? What incompetent Secretary of Defense (State)? What war profiteering? What Iraqi Civil War? What complete disaster? A Black Congresswoman had the temerity in a fit of anger to actually strike a Policeman who apparently was unable or too inept or unwilling either to defend himself or apologize for an obvious simple mistake (if, indeed, it was simply a mistake).
If Republicans are so desperate this is the best they can do to distract attention from their dismal record they have obviously hit bottom. But what a marvelous opportunity for them. They can now insist we consider the death penaly for striking a Policeman. On to the gallows! Maybe the electric chair. Even better, they can attempt to reintroduce the guillotine. Maybe they can suggest the creation of still another secret prison for uppity Black Congresspersons. I see the brilliance of Karl Rove shining over this like a benevolent Buddha looking after his flock. Hey, its almost as good as bombing Iran.
Please Cynthia, do something about that hair. Maybe if you dye it blond? Maybe if you stop trying to tell the truth, stay in the back of the bus?
I notice you aren't getting much help from your fellow Democrats. What a fine bunch
Let us begin from what I understand is the beginning. Congress/man/person/woman McKinney is a Black woman duly elected to the House of Representatives. There are only 12 black women in the House. As I understand it, she was hurrying to some business or other and bypassed a metal detector (Congresspersons routinely are allowed to do this). However, in this case, a Capitol Policeman did not recognize her and tried to stop her, apparently by touching her (grabbing her? restraining her? pinching her?) in what she describes as inappropriately. How do we understand this: a) he didn't recognize her as a Congressperson, b) all black women look alike to him, c) he was confused by her new hair style, d) he doesn't realize there are any Black Congresswomen, e) she was probably carrying a briefcase, not something a Black woman ought to be doing, f) he actually knew who she was but decided to harrass her anyway for some reason.
Now, why did he not recognize her? Capitol Policeman are supposedly trained to recognize all Congresspersons not only by name but by face. So, was he too new to have done his homework? Was it, as she claims, an act of racial profiling (she along with other Black Congresspersons have been stopped like this before)? In any case, if he stopped her, and if she explained who she was (which she should not have had to do) why did he not simply apologize and let her go? I guess he did let her go, but only after she hit him in the chest with her cell phone. Apparently he did not arrest her.
What I want to know, and what we do not now know, is: a) was the Policeman hurt in any way? b) was there any bleeding? c) was he knocked down? d) did he require medical attention? e) was he taken to a hospital? f) is he in critical condition? g) is he expected to live? h) was he mistaken by Congressperson McKinney for a marshmallow?
I only ask these ridiculous questions because (hold your breath) Republicans have requested this episode be taken to a Grand Jury! Think of this. A Black Congresswoman, one of only twelve such women, with a very distinctive appearance, who has been stopped before (because apparently Capital Policeman cannot believe she is actually a Congressperson), in a moment of anger, actually hit a Policeman in the chest with her cell phone. My god! What a crime! It makes the umpteen zillion scandals of the Republicans pale into insignificance. What illegal war? What DeLay resignation? What Abramoff scandal? What Plame outing? What illegal torture? What idiotic President? What evil Vice President? What incompetent Secretary of Defense (State)? What war profiteering? What Iraqi Civil War? What complete disaster? A Black Congresswoman had the temerity in a fit of anger to actually strike a Policeman who apparently was unable or too inept or unwilling either to defend himself or apologize for an obvious simple mistake (if, indeed, it was simply a mistake).
If Republicans are so desperate this is the best they can do to distract attention from their dismal record they have obviously hit bottom. But what a marvelous opportunity for them. They can now insist we consider the death penaly for striking a Policeman. On to the gallows! Maybe the electric chair. Even better, they can attempt to reintroduce the guillotine. Maybe they can suggest the creation of still another secret prison for uppity Black Congresspersons. I see the brilliance of Karl Rove shining over this like a benevolent Buddha looking after his flock. Hey, its almost as good as bombing Iran.
Please Cynthia, do something about that hair. Maybe if you dye it blond? Maybe if you stop trying to tell the truth, stay in the back of the bus?
I notice you aren't getting much help from your fellow Democrats. What a fine bunch
Tuesday, April 04, 2006
Whee!
Hooray, hooray,
its almost May,
we'll soon be rid
of Tom DeLay.
Out of the Congress,
back to work,
killing bugs,
what a jerk.
I rarely pray,
but I'm happy to say,
goodbye Tom,
don't delay.
Corny? Yeah, I know. But count your blessings. I could have gone on and on.
Can you believe it? Does justice still exist in Bush/Cheney's America? Is it true that the most dishonest, corrupt, vile Congressperson that ever existed is actually being brought down? Please don't tell me this is just another April Fool's joke. Of course he is only resigning because he doesn't want some liberal Democrat to take over his position. How does he know his resignation will bring about such a result? Is the fix still in? DeLay is such a sweet guy. How could anyone wish him ill? Too bad, Tom, it couldn't happen to a nicer guy.
In order to take away some of the attention to the sad case of Tom DeLay the Republicans have decided to go after a Black Congresswoman who, apparently, is about to be charged with attacking a Congress Policeman. ATTACKING A POLICEMAN! My god, what these Black Congresswomen won't do. She is said to have stabbed him with her cell phone. STABBED HIM WITH A CELL PHONE! Besides that, she has bad hair. Is this not a wonderful whacky world we live in?
Now we have the sad case of John McCain, war hero, turned bootlicker. McCain, who opposed Bush for the Republican nomination and was absolutely villified by the Republicans (he has a black baby, his mind is gone because of his torture, etc.), has since then become a devotee of Bush, hugging him, supporting him, promoting his policies, and so on. The same McCain who criticized Fallwell and other right-wing Evangelists in the past is now openly courting them. There is just nothing a girl won't do for diamonds (or the nomination). This is so pathetic it makes one want to vomit.
Iraq is engaged in a Civil War. I know, I know, Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Rice deny it, but its true. Of course you might want to argue the definition of civil war - that is really helpful. Just trust me, Iraq is engaged in a Civil War and it is going to become worse and worse. Whose side are we on? No one seems to know. I guess we will just retreat to our six permanent (oh, excuse me, "enduring" bases) and wait it out, protecting our stolen oil in the meanwhile.
Tucker Carlson says the idea of censuring or impeaching Bush is absurd. Tucker Carlson is the most incompetent, stupid, useless, mindless, partisan, dishonest, bow-tying dressed jerk who ever managed to get on television. Thank god I never have to watch him. I don't even like to hear about him except that sometimes it is impossible to avoid it. Having flunked out on Crossfire he somehow managed to get a gig somewhere else (Fox?). The Lord works in mysterious ways.
So long Tom. Try to avoid the slammer. But let's hope you will have a lot of company.
its almost May,
we'll soon be rid
of Tom DeLay.
Out of the Congress,
back to work,
killing bugs,
what a jerk.
I rarely pray,
but I'm happy to say,
goodbye Tom,
don't delay.
Corny? Yeah, I know. But count your blessings. I could have gone on and on.
Can you believe it? Does justice still exist in Bush/Cheney's America? Is it true that the most dishonest, corrupt, vile Congressperson that ever existed is actually being brought down? Please don't tell me this is just another April Fool's joke. Of course he is only resigning because he doesn't want some liberal Democrat to take over his position. How does he know his resignation will bring about such a result? Is the fix still in? DeLay is such a sweet guy. How could anyone wish him ill? Too bad, Tom, it couldn't happen to a nicer guy.
In order to take away some of the attention to the sad case of Tom DeLay the Republicans have decided to go after a Black Congresswoman who, apparently, is about to be charged with attacking a Congress Policeman. ATTACKING A POLICEMAN! My god, what these Black Congresswomen won't do. She is said to have stabbed him with her cell phone. STABBED HIM WITH A CELL PHONE! Besides that, she has bad hair. Is this not a wonderful whacky world we live in?
Now we have the sad case of John McCain, war hero, turned bootlicker. McCain, who opposed Bush for the Republican nomination and was absolutely villified by the Republicans (he has a black baby, his mind is gone because of his torture, etc.), has since then become a devotee of Bush, hugging him, supporting him, promoting his policies, and so on. The same McCain who criticized Fallwell and other right-wing Evangelists in the past is now openly courting them. There is just nothing a girl won't do for diamonds (or the nomination). This is so pathetic it makes one want to vomit.
Iraq is engaged in a Civil War. I know, I know, Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Rice deny it, but its true. Of course you might want to argue the definition of civil war - that is really helpful. Just trust me, Iraq is engaged in a Civil War and it is going to become worse and worse. Whose side are we on? No one seems to know. I guess we will just retreat to our six permanent (oh, excuse me, "enduring" bases) and wait it out, protecting our stolen oil in the meanwhile.
Tucker Carlson says the idea of censuring or impeaching Bush is absurd. Tucker Carlson is the most incompetent, stupid, useless, mindless, partisan, dishonest, bow-tying dressed jerk who ever managed to get on television. Thank god I never have to watch him. I don't even like to hear about him except that sometimes it is impossible to avoid it. Having flunked out on Crossfire he somehow managed to get a gig somewhere else (Fox?). The Lord works in mysterious ways.
So long Tom. Try to avoid the slammer. But let's hope you will have a lot of company.
Monday, April 03, 2006
More flotsam
MommyDi: thanks for the tip. It was most interesting.
I confess to being confused about the Jill Carroll situation. I apparently thought the first tv interview I saw was being conducted by an independent interviewer, and when she said she had not been hit, or even threatened with being hit, she was telling the truth. Now I guess she was being interviewed by one of her captors and was under duress. She has now claimed she has no sympathy for her captors and only said what she did under duress. What I would like to know, first of all, is was she in fact ever hit or threatened with being hit? Was she lying in that interview? I would also like to know if in her previous interview she was also lying. That is, when she said there were lots of lies involved in the Iraqi situation, was she lying? This, I think, is important, because in fact there were lies. Many lies. And they continue to this day. She says she has nothing but contempt for her captors as they killed her interpreter and kidnapped her. I believe her. But does she have any similar contempt for Iraqis in general (I hope not). I assume that anyone concerned enough to get both sides of the story to study Arabic must have had at least an open mind. Don't misunderstand what I am questioning. I have only admiration for her. I believe she truly wanted to get an objective account of what was going on in that unfortunate country. I believe she does have some empathy for Iraqis in general. I believe she doesn't like those who kidnapped and threatened her. I also think she has been put into an impossible position. She doesn't dare claim to have any sympathy for Iraqis as if she does so the right wing nuts will crucify her. And if she doesn't she will probably feel somewhat hypocritical. Isn't it just great that our infallible "leader" has placed everyone in the position of either being for us or against us - no gray areas allowed. No intelligent analysis allowed. No common sense allowed. No truth allowed. Jill Carroll, don't you even suggest that Iraqis may in fact just be human beings like the rest of us - they are all vile terrorists with no human qualities whatsoever.
Still another major general has called Rumsfeld incompetent. Bush still thinks he is great. Sigh.
Rush Limbaugh, fat druggie, has stated publicly that the two black dancers who were apparently raped at a frat party were (are) "hos." Do you think he knows this from experience or is it just another example of his usual diarreah of the mouth (which, of course, it is). You are not allowed to yell "fire" in a crowded theatre. Why is Limbaugh allowed to cry absoluely outrageous harmful "horseshit" every hour of every day? Free speech has some limits. Too bad they don't apply to know-nothing warmongering liars like fatso the druggie.
How can one do anything but laugh out loud at our attempts to cut energy use? First of all, no one seems willing to curb the auto industry from building and selling the damndest fleet of gas guzzling monsters ever created. Second, they oppose any forms of public transportation suggested. They don't even want to support Amtrak. Perhaps the biggest laugh of all: in every big city of the U.S., every night of the week, every huge building is fully lit up. I'm not sure but I think this is called "vanity lighting." Can you imagine how much energy could be conserved if all these companies could be convinced to give up their vanity?
Whoever said the U.S. had even half a brain?
I confess to being confused about the Jill Carroll situation. I apparently thought the first tv interview I saw was being conducted by an independent interviewer, and when she said she had not been hit, or even threatened with being hit, she was telling the truth. Now I guess she was being interviewed by one of her captors and was under duress. She has now claimed she has no sympathy for her captors and only said what she did under duress. What I would like to know, first of all, is was she in fact ever hit or threatened with being hit? Was she lying in that interview? I would also like to know if in her previous interview she was also lying. That is, when she said there were lots of lies involved in the Iraqi situation, was she lying? This, I think, is important, because in fact there were lies. Many lies. And they continue to this day. She says she has nothing but contempt for her captors as they killed her interpreter and kidnapped her. I believe her. But does she have any similar contempt for Iraqis in general (I hope not). I assume that anyone concerned enough to get both sides of the story to study Arabic must have had at least an open mind. Don't misunderstand what I am questioning. I have only admiration for her. I believe she truly wanted to get an objective account of what was going on in that unfortunate country. I believe she does have some empathy for Iraqis in general. I believe she doesn't like those who kidnapped and threatened her. I also think she has been put into an impossible position. She doesn't dare claim to have any sympathy for Iraqis as if she does so the right wing nuts will crucify her. And if she doesn't she will probably feel somewhat hypocritical. Isn't it just great that our infallible "leader" has placed everyone in the position of either being for us or against us - no gray areas allowed. No intelligent analysis allowed. No common sense allowed. No truth allowed. Jill Carroll, don't you even suggest that Iraqis may in fact just be human beings like the rest of us - they are all vile terrorists with no human qualities whatsoever.
Still another major general has called Rumsfeld incompetent. Bush still thinks he is great. Sigh.
Rush Limbaugh, fat druggie, has stated publicly that the two black dancers who were apparently raped at a frat party were (are) "hos." Do you think he knows this from experience or is it just another example of his usual diarreah of the mouth (which, of course, it is). You are not allowed to yell "fire" in a crowded theatre. Why is Limbaugh allowed to cry absoluely outrageous harmful "horseshit" every hour of every day? Free speech has some limits. Too bad they don't apply to know-nothing warmongering liars like fatso the druggie.
How can one do anything but laugh out loud at our attempts to cut energy use? First of all, no one seems willing to curb the auto industry from building and selling the damndest fleet of gas guzzling monsters ever created. Second, they oppose any forms of public transportation suggested. They don't even want to support Amtrak. Perhaps the biggest laugh of all: in every big city of the U.S., every night of the week, every huge building is fully lit up. I'm not sure but I think this is called "vanity lighting." Can you imagine how much energy could be conserved if all these companies could be convinced to give up their vanity?
Whoever said the U.S. had even half a brain?
Sunday, April 02, 2006
What's what?
I confess that I no longer know what's what. Libby's lawyers are now trying to get Fitzgerald disqualified and everything he has done simply dropped (at least as I understand it). What I do not understand about this is why they waited until now to bring up this particular attempt. If it is true that Fitzgerald somehow exceeded his mandate surely they should have argued this previously? I think he has gotten too uncomfortably close to President Dick the Slimy.
And speaking of Dick the Slimy, one of the most evil, greedy, disgusting creatures ever to walk the earth, I do not believe that even he is insane enough to attack Iran. At least not at the moment. God, I hope I am right about this. If not, we are in for another World War, if not nuclear annihilation. Iran, even if it had nuclear weapons, is not a threat to anyone, anymore than any other country who has such weapons. A nuclear armed Iran would surely not attack Israel, knowing they would be immediately blown off the face of the planet if they did so. And apparently they are a very long way from having such weapons anyway. So, if we were to attack Iran it would not be because they were a threat, but, as in the case of Iraq, because they have so much oil (Cheney and his criminal band apparently can never have enough oil). I wonder if he bathes in it every night, or just anoints himself with it like his dimwit friend Ashcroft (you know, the eagle that flies to cover up the titties).
I guess the real question is, are Bush/Cheney and the neocons going to be allowed to continue their absolutely unconstitutional, illegal, power-grabbing ways or will someone at last stand up and stop them? Doesn't look too promising at the moment. But what the hell, it's only our nation and democracy at risk. Survivors and Lost are a lot more interesting, to say nothing of celebrities.
I also don't know exactly what's what with Jill Carroll. The interview I saw on TV where she said she had not been hit and had been treated well was not conducted under duress (at least I don't think it was). This is not to say she was not threatened previously and forced to say things she might not have believed. What I am pretty certain of is that she is not pregnant with an Arab child, and did not arrange her own kidnapping out of sympathy for the insurgents. She is no "Taliban Jill" and the attempts by ultra-right commentators to portray her as such is just plain sick (apparently you have to pass a "sicko test" in order to become a right wing commentator or an employee of Fox News).
Oh, yeah, Jack Straw apparently made a slip of the tongue and introduced Condi as Condom Rice. Honest.
And speaking of Dick the Slimy, one of the most evil, greedy, disgusting creatures ever to walk the earth, I do not believe that even he is insane enough to attack Iran. At least not at the moment. God, I hope I am right about this. If not, we are in for another World War, if not nuclear annihilation. Iran, even if it had nuclear weapons, is not a threat to anyone, anymore than any other country who has such weapons. A nuclear armed Iran would surely not attack Israel, knowing they would be immediately blown off the face of the planet if they did so. And apparently they are a very long way from having such weapons anyway. So, if we were to attack Iran it would not be because they were a threat, but, as in the case of Iraq, because they have so much oil (Cheney and his criminal band apparently can never have enough oil). I wonder if he bathes in it every night, or just anoints himself with it like his dimwit friend Ashcroft (you know, the eagle that flies to cover up the titties).
I guess the real question is, are Bush/Cheney and the neocons going to be allowed to continue their absolutely unconstitutional, illegal, power-grabbing ways or will someone at last stand up and stop them? Doesn't look too promising at the moment. But what the hell, it's only our nation and democracy at risk. Survivors and Lost are a lot more interesting, to say nothing of celebrities.
I also don't know exactly what's what with Jill Carroll. The interview I saw on TV where she said she had not been hit and had been treated well was not conducted under duress (at least I don't think it was). This is not to say she was not threatened previously and forced to say things she might not have believed. What I am pretty certain of is that she is not pregnant with an Arab child, and did not arrange her own kidnapping out of sympathy for the insurgents. She is no "Taliban Jill" and the attempts by ultra-right commentators to portray her as such is just plain sick (apparently you have to pass a "sicko test" in order to become a right wing commentator or an employee of Fox News).
Oh, yeah, Jack Straw apparently made a slip of the tongue and introduced Condi as Condom Rice. Honest.
Saturday, April 01, 2006
"enduring bases"
Watch 'n Wait: I believe you are right, at least I sincerely hope so. Perhaps someday we shall meet in Washington D.C.
All this time I have been insisting the U.S. has been building four permanent bases in Iraq and now, according to the Independent, we are actually constructing six "enduring bases." It is not at all clear to me what the difference is between enduring and permanent. There can be no doubt, none whatsoever, that the Bush/Cheney criminals have never had any intention of leaving Iraq. Enduring bases (if that's what you want to call them) have always been part of the plan. We need a Puppet Government to ask us to stay and while that seems a bit harder to accomplish than we thought, it is still clearly the goal.
What is it with these right-wing conservatives? One of them suggested to me that Rachel Corrie "lived like a terrorist and died like a terrorist." This absurd claim is now being outdone by right wingers who say Jill Carroll is pregnant with an Arab baby, that she deliberately had herself kidnapped to raise sympathy for the insurgents, that she should never have said her captors treated her well, and etc., etc. Apparently these nitwits can't believe that her captors actually did treat her well, at least in terms of feeding her and giving her clothes and such. If this is true, and I have no reason to suspect it is not true, what would they expect her to do - lie? Remember she said they treated her well after she was released, not at the point of a gun. And if she said at the point of a gun that Bush lied about Iraq, even that is true. He did lie. And he continues to lie. In any case, it ought to be obvious that if they forced her to say certain things as a condition of her release, she would under the circumstances say such things. Commentators like Jonah Goldberg and Howard Kurtz, and others, who make such claims on the basis of no knowledge of the circumstances whatsoever, are vile beyond belief. They are even worse than vile, they are sick in their tiny little Republican minds. They apparently cannot even conceive of the possibility that these young women might actually have acted out of noble and idealistic motives, as such behavior is totally foreign to them.
GO UCLA!
All this time I have been insisting the U.S. has been building four permanent bases in Iraq and now, according to the Independent, we are actually constructing six "enduring bases." It is not at all clear to me what the difference is between enduring and permanent. There can be no doubt, none whatsoever, that the Bush/Cheney criminals have never had any intention of leaving Iraq. Enduring bases (if that's what you want to call them) have always been part of the plan. We need a Puppet Government to ask us to stay and while that seems a bit harder to accomplish than we thought, it is still clearly the goal.
What is it with these right-wing conservatives? One of them suggested to me that Rachel Corrie "lived like a terrorist and died like a terrorist." This absurd claim is now being outdone by right wingers who say Jill Carroll is pregnant with an Arab baby, that she deliberately had herself kidnapped to raise sympathy for the insurgents, that she should never have said her captors treated her well, and etc., etc. Apparently these nitwits can't believe that her captors actually did treat her well, at least in terms of feeding her and giving her clothes and such. If this is true, and I have no reason to suspect it is not true, what would they expect her to do - lie? Remember she said they treated her well after she was released, not at the point of a gun. And if she said at the point of a gun that Bush lied about Iraq, even that is true. He did lie. And he continues to lie. In any case, it ought to be obvious that if they forced her to say certain things as a condition of her release, she would under the circumstances say such things. Commentators like Jonah Goldberg and Howard Kurtz, and others, who make such claims on the basis of no knowledge of the circumstances whatsoever, are vile beyond belief. They are even worse than vile, they are sick in their tiny little Republican minds. They apparently cannot even conceive of the possibility that these young women might actually have acted out of noble and idealistic motives, as such behavior is totally foreign to them.
GO UCLA!
Friday, March 31, 2006
What's Up?
There was no morialekafa last night because there was a meeting of the Boundary Country Democrats featuring the appearance of Larry Grant, running for the Congressional position being vacated by "Butch" Otter. Otter wants to run for Governor of Idaho. One person remarked lately that "If Otter gets elected we'll have a pair of tight jeans and a hangover in the State House" (which I think is a pretty good summary of Otter's qualifications). Larry Grant is smart, personable, and eminently electable. If we can't get a Democratic Governor this time it will probably be impossible to ever get one. There is a Democratic fundraiser tonight down the road in Bonner County (Sandpoint), again featuring Grant.
It appears to me that most everyone at the moment is standing by for shoes to start dropping all over the place. A second one of DeLay's aides pleaded guilty to bribery charges today (getting closer to DeLay all the time). Abramoff sentenced to almost six years in prison is being allowed to stay free for another 90 days in order to cooperate with officials interested in Congressional leaders and others who might be guilty of bribery and other offenses. Fitzgerald is said to be readying at least one further indictment and possibly two. Although Feingold's attempt to censure Bush has no chance of passing it is stimulating more and more talk of impeachment. Very suspensful times. Better than going to the circus (except there are more clowns involved - otherwise known as Republicans).
Given the extremely low poll numbers for Bush/Cheney and the Congress, and also given the problems with electronic voting, what will happen during the 2006 elections? No matter who wins, will anyone believe it? Especially if Republicans win substantially? What happens if it becomes apparent that Republicans have blatantly stolen further elections? Will the Democrats once again just give up and ignore it as they have up to now?
Are Bush/Cheney actually crazy enough to try to attack Iran? To drop nuclear bunker-buster bombs (and start World War III)?
Just think, we have all these things to look forward to, and fastening your seat belts may not be much help. We are mired deep in the "Nightmare Years."
It appears to me that most everyone at the moment is standing by for shoes to start dropping all over the place. A second one of DeLay's aides pleaded guilty to bribery charges today (getting closer to DeLay all the time). Abramoff sentenced to almost six years in prison is being allowed to stay free for another 90 days in order to cooperate with officials interested in Congressional leaders and others who might be guilty of bribery and other offenses. Fitzgerald is said to be readying at least one further indictment and possibly two. Although Feingold's attempt to censure Bush has no chance of passing it is stimulating more and more talk of impeachment. Very suspensful times. Better than going to the circus (except there are more clowns involved - otherwise known as Republicans).
Given the extremely low poll numbers for Bush/Cheney and the Congress, and also given the problems with electronic voting, what will happen during the 2006 elections? No matter who wins, will anyone believe it? Especially if Republicans win substantially? What happens if it becomes apparent that Republicans have blatantly stolen further elections? Will the Democrats once again just give up and ignore it as they have up to now?
Are Bush/Cheney actually crazy enough to try to attack Iran? To drop nuclear bunker-buster bombs (and start World War III)?
Just think, we have all these things to look forward to, and fastening your seat belts may not be much help. We are mired deep in the "Nightmare Years."
Wednesday, March 29, 2006
GET OUT NOW, YOU GODAMN FOOLS!
We need to get out of Iraq now, as fast as possible. The alternative is to begin World War III (or IV if you listen to idiot neocons). Shiites are murdering Sunnis. Sunnis are murdering Shiites. The Kurds are cleansing themselves of the Arabs that Hussein forced on them, and just waiting to declare independence. When they do so this will bring Turkey into the picture. Iran is already involved in Iraq. The Saudis are now said to be trying to develop nuclear capabilities. Syria and Lebanon are going to be dragged into the disaster in the Middle East. Israel remains the biggest single problem. Egypt is barely hanging on. The U.S. was supporting the Shiites but now are demanding they do as we say. The Sunnis have refused to cooperate with the existing "government" (chosen by the U.S.), and now the Shiites themselves have shut down the process of governing because of U.S. complicity in a Mosque attack that left a number of innocents dead (murdered). It is a fine mess, indeed.
I fear (actually I don't fear at all) the neocons are just going to have to give up their insane aspirations to empire, write off their multibillion dollar waste of money (although most of it is already safely in the hands of our Corporate masters) and also write off the deaths and injuries to thousands of our troops. Oops, I guess attacking Iraq for no reason other than greed was a bad idea. Well, you can't win 'em all. We're really sorry we were so abysmally ignorant about what we were doing and refused to listen to virtually the entire world that warned us not to do it. But what the hell, a few lives here and there, thousands of lives ruined, a Sovereign country destroyed, the respect of the entire world lost, a national debt that will quite likely never be paid off, at least for several generations, a Constitution junked, the rule of law subverted, an economic disaster, no end in sight, but we are "winning" in Iraq, "victory" is going to be ours, the "job" will be "done," on earth as it is in heaven (some of us will be lifted up there soon when the rapture comes). God, these are really marvelous times. Think we'll have to fight over all them virgins when we all get there?
I have never been a conspiracy buff. Although I was mildly skeptical of the lone Oswalt theory I was not concerned enough to worry about it. Similarly, I didn't get too concerned about Iran-Contra, the CIA being involved in drugs, the assassinations of the Kennedy brothers, or the death of Marilyn Monroe. Now, after 9/11 and the failure to capture Osama bin Laden, the mysterious collapse of the towers, the flight of the Saudis, and etc., etc., I now envisage a conspiracy so immense as to probably be untouchable as well as virtually inconceivable. I believe Sibel Edmonds caught a glimpse of this. That is why she has been silenced. What if Osama bin Laden is still a CIA "asset," sitting comfortably between the poppy fields of Afghanistan, the CIA, and the world drug market? I hate to think like this but what is one to do after five years of Bush/Cheney? I now put nothing past them.
I fear (actually I don't fear at all) the neocons are just going to have to give up their insane aspirations to empire, write off their multibillion dollar waste of money (although most of it is already safely in the hands of our Corporate masters) and also write off the deaths and injuries to thousands of our troops. Oops, I guess attacking Iraq for no reason other than greed was a bad idea. Well, you can't win 'em all. We're really sorry we were so abysmally ignorant about what we were doing and refused to listen to virtually the entire world that warned us not to do it. But what the hell, a few lives here and there, thousands of lives ruined, a Sovereign country destroyed, the respect of the entire world lost, a national debt that will quite likely never be paid off, at least for several generations, a Constitution junked, the rule of law subverted, an economic disaster, no end in sight, but we are "winning" in Iraq, "victory" is going to be ours, the "job" will be "done," on earth as it is in heaven (some of us will be lifted up there soon when the rapture comes). God, these are really marvelous times. Think we'll have to fight over all them virgins when we all get there?
I have never been a conspiracy buff. Although I was mildly skeptical of the lone Oswalt theory I was not concerned enough to worry about it. Similarly, I didn't get too concerned about Iran-Contra, the CIA being involved in drugs, the assassinations of the Kennedy brothers, or the death of Marilyn Monroe. Now, after 9/11 and the failure to capture Osama bin Laden, the mysterious collapse of the towers, the flight of the Saudis, and etc., etc., I now envisage a conspiracy so immense as to probably be untouchable as well as virtually inconceivable. I believe Sibel Edmonds caught a glimpse of this. That is why she has been silenced. What if Osama bin Laden is still a CIA "asset," sitting comfortably between the poppy fields of Afghanistan, the CIA, and the world drug market? I hate to think like this but what is one to do after five years of Bush/Cheney? I now put nothing past them.
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
Democracy in Iraq
Ibrahim al-Jaafari, the duly elected Prime Minister of Iraq is not the choice of George W. Bush. Bush has apparently sent word to the Iraqis that he (George W. Bush, Emperor of Emporers, King of the World, God's Representative on Earth, Lion of Lions, George the Infallible, Mental Midget of Mental Midgets, etc., etc.) does not want al-Jaafari to serve a second term. Sooo...so much for democracy in Iraq. Democracy seems to be fine as long as the democratic process produces precisely the outcome that Bush desires. Otherwise, not. The recent elections in Gaza are a similar case in point. Actually, all this does is make public what has been obvious all along. The U.S. wants a puppet government in Iraq, a government that will do as they are told by the U.S. If that goal cannot be achieved (or probably even if it can) the U.S. will have to maintain a presence in Iraq. As there was never any plan not to maintain a presence in Iraq this should not come as a surprise. We are, definitely, positively, without doubt, building permanent bases in Iraq, along with the most heavily guarded Embassy ever conceived. This is not to say that someday, somehow, we will be forcibly pushed out. But that is certainly not the plan.
We have now announced that we are economically abandoning Iraq. They will have to do reconstruction on their own. How they might do this under the circumstances is not at all clear. Remember all the talk about how Iraqi oil would pay for the reconstruction, we were committed to reconstructing Iraq, and blah, blah, blah? Well, we aren't going to do it. They will be on their own. Oh, yeah, we were going to rebuild Afghanistan too. It must have just slipped our minds. The extent of our aid it appears will only be earmarked for more prisons. Whee! Just what they need in Iraq. More prisons. After all, if you insist on incarcerating everyone, guilty of anything or not, you need a lot of prison space. In Iraq you don't even have to smoke pot to go to jail. You only need to exist at all. American justice is a wonderful thing. Just ask the detainees at Guantanamo. But don't ask Justice Scalia. He has already decided they have no rights as they were caught on battlefields during a "war." The fact is, there is no "war." Thus they cannot be prisoners of war. If they were truly prisoners of war they would be entitled to rights under the Geneva Convention. So, if they are not prisoners of "war," what are they. I guess they must be criminals of some kind. But if they are criminals they should be entitled to a fair trial. Actually, most of them are neither soldiers or criminals, merely poor unfortunates that happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
But not to worry, General Peter Pace has spoken again. As the Turks and the Saudis, along with others in the neighborhood are concerned about U.S. intentions in Iraq, General Pace on a trip to the area, has assured them we are staying until "we get the job done." I, for one, have no idea what the "job" is, nor do I have any idea as to how we will tell if it gets "done." If he means bringing democracy to Iraq and the Middle East the job will never be done. NEVER! As bringing democracy there is not really the intention anyway, perhaps he means once we have established Iraq as a 51st state, with all the oil secured, we will be done. I suspect we will be done when we slink away with our tails between our legs as we were forced to do in Vietnam. If there are any people left at all in another 50 or 100 years they can explain to their children that for the want of oil the earth was lost.
I guess it must be obvious I am not in a happy mood. Please Great Mystery, let truth and beauty and justice prevail. We promise to do better. Honest. Scout's honor.
We have now announced that we are economically abandoning Iraq. They will have to do reconstruction on their own. How they might do this under the circumstances is not at all clear. Remember all the talk about how Iraqi oil would pay for the reconstruction, we were committed to reconstructing Iraq, and blah, blah, blah? Well, we aren't going to do it. They will be on their own. Oh, yeah, we were going to rebuild Afghanistan too. It must have just slipped our minds. The extent of our aid it appears will only be earmarked for more prisons. Whee! Just what they need in Iraq. More prisons. After all, if you insist on incarcerating everyone, guilty of anything or not, you need a lot of prison space. In Iraq you don't even have to smoke pot to go to jail. You only need to exist at all. American justice is a wonderful thing. Just ask the detainees at Guantanamo. But don't ask Justice Scalia. He has already decided they have no rights as they were caught on battlefields during a "war." The fact is, there is no "war." Thus they cannot be prisoners of war. If they were truly prisoners of war they would be entitled to rights under the Geneva Convention. So, if they are not prisoners of "war," what are they. I guess they must be criminals of some kind. But if they are criminals they should be entitled to a fair trial. Actually, most of them are neither soldiers or criminals, merely poor unfortunates that happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
But not to worry, General Peter Pace has spoken again. As the Turks and the Saudis, along with others in the neighborhood are concerned about U.S. intentions in Iraq, General Pace on a trip to the area, has assured them we are staying until "we get the job done." I, for one, have no idea what the "job" is, nor do I have any idea as to how we will tell if it gets "done." If he means bringing democracy to Iraq and the Middle East the job will never be done. NEVER! As bringing democracy there is not really the intention anyway, perhaps he means once we have established Iraq as a 51st state, with all the oil secured, we will be done. I suspect we will be done when we slink away with our tails between our legs as we were forced to do in Vietnam. If there are any people left at all in another 50 or 100 years they can explain to their children that for the want of oil the earth was lost.
I guess it must be obvious I am not in a happy mood. Please Great Mystery, let truth and beauty and justice prevail. We promise to do better. Honest. Scout's honor.
Monday, March 27, 2006
Rove vs Cheney?
A delightful tidbit on Buzzflash today. It appears that Karl Rove is cooperating with Patrick Fitzgerald (remember him, the prosecutor, presumably investigating the Plame affair?) Now, if this is true, and who knows what might or might not be true during these nightmare days, the only conceivable target of their cooperation has to be - you guessed it - Dick the Slimy!
The story, as I understand it, has to do with Rove's attempt to replace Cheney on the Republican ticket. Cheney's ratings are so low Rove apparently thought (thinks) they will be detrimental to Republican chances for winning (the 2004 elections as well as the 2006 elections). He might well be right. In any case, apparently Cheney got wind of Rove's inquiries and was, naturally enough, upset. So there is this obvious animosity between Rove and Cheney.
If Rove is cooperating with Fitzgerald he is doing so to save his own ass. And he is doing so by fingering Cheney as the main culprit in the outing of Valerie Plame.Fitzgerald has a reputation for not giving up until he gets to the top of the problem. I knew, and said from the beginning of the Plame affair, that it would lead to Dick the Slimy (so obvious one could hardly claim even insight). Libby would never have leaked her name and occupation without Cheney's approval.
Donald Rumsfeld continues to be the most egomaniacal, bumbling, and incompetent Secretary of State ever. George W. Bush makes even the most incompetent Presidents ever look like shining lights compared to him. Cheney continues to be probably the most evil person ever to hold office in the United States. Things continue to go well in Iraq. There were further car bombings and murders today and it appears that our troops may have committed further atrocities. But someday, somehow, some future President may see an end to this abominable, obscene, unnecessary, illegal, unconstitutional, unprovoked "war." Even so, the United States will remain an international pariah probably forever. Great job, Bushie!
The story, as I understand it, has to do with Rove's attempt to replace Cheney on the Republican ticket. Cheney's ratings are so low Rove apparently thought (thinks) they will be detrimental to Republican chances for winning (the 2004 elections as well as the 2006 elections). He might well be right. In any case, apparently Cheney got wind of Rove's inquiries and was, naturally enough, upset. So there is this obvious animosity between Rove and Cheney.
If Rove is cooperating with Fitzgerald he is doing so to save his own ass. And he is doing so by fingering Cheney as the main culprit in the outing of Valerie Plame.Fitzgerald has a reputation for not giving up until he gets to the top of the problem. I knew, and said from the beginning of the Plame affair, that it would lead to Dick the Slimy (so obvious one could hardly claim even insight). Libby would never have leaked her name and occupation without Cheney's approval.
Donald Rumsfeld continues to be the most egomaniacal, bumbling, and incompetent Secretary of State ever. George W. Bush makes even the most incompetent Presidents ever look like shining lights compared to him. Cheney continues to be probably the most evil person ever to hold office in the United States. Things continue to go well in Iraq. There were further car bombings and murders today and it appears that our troops may have committed further atrocities. But someday, somehow, some future President may see an end to this abominable, obscene, unnecessary, illegal, unconstitutional, unprovoked "war." Even so, the United States will remain an international pariah probably forever. Great job, Bushie!
Sunday, March 26, 2006
"We" are losing patience?
Two Senators, Russ Feingold and John McCain, on opposite sides of the fence with respect to Iraq, visiting there have both reported that we (the U.S.) are losing patience with Iraq. They are supposed to agree on a unity government as quickly as possible (because the American public is turning against the "war"). Can anyone appreciate the hypocrisy, the arrogance, the ignorance, the paternalism, the unreality, the stupidity, the absurdity of this position. WE are losing patience? What in the hell do they think the Iraqis are losing? First of all it is a totally artificial "nation" created by the British out of three separate groups of people who were never a nation in the first place. Now we are trying to insist they become a unified nation just because we say so. The fact that we illegally and immorally invaded them, opened up animosities that had been dormant for years, failed to restore electricity and water, imposed our own candidates for their government, treat them like less than human, invade and beat them in their own homes, humiliate them daily, try to steal their oil, desecrate their marvelous history, museums and archaeological sites, keep them unemployed and in poverty, and maintain an occupancy of their country, AND WE ARE LOSING PATIENCE! American arrogance and stupidity simply knows no bounds.
Well, predictably, a judge has now ordered Abramoff and his partner must be questioned about the murder of the man from whom they fraudulently bought casino river boats. Gee, why should they be questioned? After all, we know who committed the murders (they have already confessed) but we don't really know why. Like who, besides Abramoff, might have benefitted from this? But, as Abramoff is apparently an orthodox Jew, of course he could not be involved. Just as he could not have involved with DeLay. Seemingly religious people never do anything wrong.
In Afghanistan there is the case of a man who converted to Christianity. Converting to Christianity is a crime punishable by death in that culture. While I think this is utterly stupid and mindless beyond belief, and I sincerely hope he will not be executed for it, I am happy in the knowledge that Christians have never killed anyone because of their religious beliefs, especially not Jews, atheists, or Muslims. Oh, yeah, and witches. Those witches were really bad.
The Seattle Repertory Theatre has decided to put on "My Name is Rachel Corrie." This will be the first major theatre company to do it as the New York people have capitulated to the Israelis. Hooray for Seattle!
A couple of nights ago someone commented on this blog to the effect that Rachel Corrie "lived like a terrorist and died like a terrorist." As I know of no evidence for this whatsoever I said so the following day. I also said that the claim she was "accidentally" run over by a bulldozer was absurd. I have been giving some thought to this and looking into it more carefully. I now think maybe she could have been a terrorist involved in smuggling guns into Gaza. Look at her background. She attended Evergreen College, a progressive, experimental College near Olympia, Washington, known to be a serious liberal arts college (that's pretty bad on the face of it). I guess they must be notorious for training terrorists. Then she went to Palestine because of her idealistic beliefs about truth and justice. As she stood in front of that Israeli bulldozer that was about to raze a house full of children I'm certain she was thinking about protecting the smugglers. Why else would she have done such a stupid thing? And of course the bulldozer, armored by Caterpillar for just such a purpose, just "accidentally ran over her."
Oh, by the way, the agressive terrorists in training at Evergreen College picked as their College Mascot, the Geoduck (look it up).
One final observation (my wife gave me this):
WOMAN IN AUDIENCE: 'I don't really understand. How is the new plan going to fix the problem?'
Verbatim response: PRESIDENT BUSH:
'Because the -- all which is on the table begins to address the big cost drivers. For example, how benefits are calculated, for example, is on the table. Whether or not benefits rise based upon wage increases or price increases. There's a series of parts of the formula that are being considered. And when you couple that, those different cost drivers, affecting those -- changing those with personal accounts, the idea is to get what has been promised more likely to be -- or closer delivered to that has been promised. Does that make any sense to you? It's kind of muddled. Look, there's a series of things that cause the -- like, for example, benefits are calculated based upon the increase of wages, as opposed to the increase of prices. Some have suggested that we calculate -- the benefits will rise based upon inflation, supposed to wage increases. There is a reform that would help solve the red if that were put into effect. In other words, how fast benefits grow, how fast the promised benefits grow, if those -- if that growth is affected, it will help on the red.'
Do I really need to comment on this?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, predictably, a judge has now ordered Abramoff and his partner must be questioned about the murder of the man from whom they fraudulently bought casino river boats. Gee, why should they be questioned? After all, we know who committed the murders (they have already confessed) but we don't really know why. Like who, besides Abramoff, might have benefitted from this? But, as Abramoff is apparently an orthodox Jew, of course he could not be involved. Just as he could not have involved with DeLay. Seemingly religious people never do anything wrong.
In Afghanistan there is the case of a man who converted to Christianity. Converting to Christianity is a crime punishable by death in that culture. While I think this is utterly stupid and mindless beyond belief, and I sincerely hope he will not be executed for it, I am happy in the knowledge that Christians have never killed anyone because of their religious beliefs, especially not Jews, atheists, or Muslims. Oh, yeah, and witches. Those witches were really bad.
The Seattle Repertory Theatre has decided to put on "My Name is Rachel Corrie." This will be the first major theatre company to do it as the New York people have capitulated to the Israelis. Hooray for Seattle!
A couple of nights ago someone commented on this blog to the effect that Rachel Corrie "lived like a terrorist and died like a terrorist." As I know of no evidence for this whatsoever I said so the following day. I also said that the claim she was "accidentally" run over by a bulldozer was absurd. I have been giving some thought to this and looking into it more carefully. I now think maybe she could have been a terrorist involved in smuggling guns into Gaza. Look at her background. She attended Evergreen College, a progressive, experimental College near Olympia, Washington, known to be a serious liberal arts college (that's pretty bad on the face of it). I guess they must be notorious for training terrorists. Then she went to Palestine because of her idealistic beliefs about truth and justice. As she stood in front of that Israeli bulldozer that was about to raze a house full of children I'm certain she was thinking about protecting the smugglers. Why else would she have done such a stupid thing? And of course the bulldozer, armored by Caterpillar for just such a purpose, just "accidentally ran over her."
Oh, by the way, the agressive terrorists in training at Evergreen College picked as their College Mascot, the Geoduck (look it up).
One final observation (my wife gave me this):
WOMAN IN AUDIENCE: 'I don't really understand. How is the new plan going to fix the problem?'
Verbatim response: PRESIDENT BUSH:
'Because the -- all which is on the table begins to address the big cost drivers. For example, how benefits are calculated, for example, is on the table. Whether or not benefits rise based upon wage increases or price increases. There's a series of parts of the formula that are being considered. And when you couple that, those different cost drivers, affecting those -- changing those with personal accounts, the idea is to get what has been promised more likely to be -- or closer delivered to that has been promised. Does that make any sense to you? It's kind of muddled. Look, there's a series of things that cause the -- like, for example, benefits are calculated based upon the increase of wages, as opposed to the increase of prices. Some have suggested that we calculate -- the benefits will rise based upon inflation, supposed to wage increases. There is a reform that would help solve the red if that were put into effect. In other words, how fast benefits grow, how fast the promised benefits grow, if those -- if that growth is affected, it will help on the red.'
Do I really need to comment on this?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)