The desperation of a long time campaigner. Hillary Clinton must be getting desperate indeed to try to pin Obama with plagiarism. Because a phrase or two of Obama’s were identical to those of one of his close political friends (who he consults with all the time) they want to accuse him of plagiarism. Unfortunately this will be seen by virtually everyone as an act of political desperation. It will be much ado about nothing. But the fact that they would even attempt it shows just how shaky the Clinton campaign really is. Similarly, they are trying to label him as a flip-flopper on campaign financing by distorting what he has said in the past about it. This, too, is too transparent to work. You can see in this, however, that they have their minions working overtime trying to find something, anything, that will slow down the Obama momentum. Now the polls show Obama ahead in Wisconsin and Texas a dead heat. If this turns out this way Clinton might as well pack up and go back to New York. She may want to stay and fight to win by enlisting the superdelegates but it appears to me that some senior members of the Democratic party have already decided that is not going to happen.
Bush the Dumb has now announced that the “war” in Iraq, costing billions a month, has nothing to do with the U.S. economy. I guess you might find somewhere in history a claim more ridiculous than that but I don’t know where it would be. This is a claim even more absurd than Giuliani’s famous claim that there is no relationship, none at all, between American foreign policy and what is transpiring in the Middle East. Where does the Brafia even find these people, let alone tolerate and support them?
It appears that the powerful Israeli lobby probably made a mistake by jumping on the Clinton bandwagon too soon. They did not regard Obama as being sufficiently friendly to Israel, misjudged how the campaign would play out, and now are finding it a bit too late to switch their allegiance. Remember, Obama was raised at least in part in a Muslim environment, and he has also said in the past that the Palestinians are among the most downtrodden people on earth (or words to that effect). Does that mean we might have some hope that finally, at long last, we may have a President who does not cave in to every Israeli desire, and might in fact actually do something to help the Palestinian cause? Someone who might curb Israeli’s ongoing racist colonialism? I sincerely hope so, but of course it remains to be seen. Look for more false claims that he is a Muslim and worse. Obviously we cannot know for certain what Obama will do if he attains the Presidency. But in my case the will to believe in him is so strong I don’t care what they try to paint him as, he’s by far our best hope for meaningful change.
As a brief respite today from the gloom and doom of the current world situation I watched an ant. In the bathroom. It was fascinating, especially as my mind began to run away in a whirlwind of fantasy. This time of year, when it is cold and dry and icy, ants sometimes try to come into our house. We spray them and they give up for a time, but then they try again. I guess they want both water and food. Anyway, this ant was a loner. It was in the middle of our bathroom floor. It is a good sized room with an all tile floor. This lone ant must have been, in ant miles, a good hundred miles, maybe much more, from any other ant and certainly from any ant colony. To the ant the floor must have resembled a gigantic almost endless desert. There is nothing but tile, one after another, separated by caulking. The ant wandered here and there, in and out of the valleys of caulk, seemingly lost, or at least not doing anything purposeful that I could see. But that is what was so fascinating. Why was it there? How did it get there? Did it have a purpose? Was it merely lost? Perhaps it was a spy, sent out to find another ant colony that his compatriots could attack? Maybe it was a messenger, looking desperately for a general, like in “A Message for Garcia?” I thought maybe it was a scout, sent out to locate some food and water. Perhaps it was an outcast, having violated some ant law and been banished to wander forever on bathroom floors, something like the Flying Dutchman? Then it could have been a romantic ant looking for love, or even for a lost love. It trudged on doggedly over seemingly endless terrain. Finally it began climbing the waste basket, a task for it roughly one hundred times more difficult than Tensing conquering Everest. Poor little ant tyke. I wished it well as it disappeared into a miasma of used tissues and assorted bric-a-brac. I am an incurable romantic.
LKBIQ:
“Hegel was right when he said that we learn from history that man can never learn anything from history.”
George Bernard Shaw
Monday, February 18, 2008
Sunday, February 17, 2008
Imperial Reckoning
I have just read one of the most incredible books I have seen in a very long time, Imperial Reckoning, by Caroline Elkins, 2005, Henry Holt, N.Y.
Caroline Elkins is an Assistant Professor of History at Harvard University. She spent years researching the Mau Mau rebellion in Kenya for her dissertation. She not only employed all the resources of the archives, but interviewed dozens of people who lived through those dreadful years, both natives and colonials. There is no reason to suppose that what she has written is not the truth, or an exceedingly close approximation of the truth. It is a horrible story. I confess that while reading it I truly resisted believing it, even though I know it is true. It’s a sad and depressing account of the Mau Mau rebellion and how the British dealt with it. The Mau Mau were cruel, and in their attempt to win back their homeland and overcome the years of abuse they experienced at the hands of the British, they spared no one. Their grisly attacks on settlers and on the natives that were collaborating with the British caused the latter to panic. An Emergency was declared, and an attempt was made to eliminate the Mau Mau completely. British propaganda immediately branded the Mau Mau fighters as bestial, evil, primitive savages, obsessed with blood lust and the desire to just kill, kill, kill. They were presented as creatures no better than animals. At the same time British colonial society was presented as a peaceful, noble enterprise attempting only to bring “civilization” to the natives of Kenya.
The first attempt to eliminate the Mau Mau consisted of what were termed “screenings.” Hundreds, perhaps thousands of natives were made to undergo a screening. The purpose of these screenings were to determine who had taken the Mau Mau oaths and were therefore Mau Mau, or at least to learn if they knew any Mau Mau. The nature of these screenings can be seen in the following quotes from some who had experienced them.
An account from Ndirita Kibira, a gardener:
“we were taken to a camp in a farm {Bhati} owned by a settler whom we had nicknamed Nyangweso. That was where we were screened. We would be asked whether we had taken the oath, and those who denied having taken it were beaten badly until they were forced to confess or at least gave them some information. Many died from the beatings…The black askaris {guards} were the ones who were doing most of the beating, but the white settlers and policemen were there as well, directing it and also beating us. (Elkins, 12005:65).
“Margaret Nyaruai, a young woman at the time of Mau Mau, was taken to the screening hut on the estate of her settler employer near Kabaru not long after the start of the Emergency. There she was beaten by a white man whom the Kikuyu had nicknamed Koroki, or He Who Comes at Dawn, by the young settler turned British colonial officer nicknamed YY. While being screened, Margaret was asked:
‘Questions like the number of oaths I had taken, where my husband went, where two of my stepbrothers had gone (they had gone into the forest). I was badly whipped while naked. They didn’t care that I had just given birth. In fact, I think my baby was lucky it was not killed like the rest...Apart from the beatings, women used to have banana leaves and flowers inserted into their vaginas and rectums, as well as have their breasts squeezed with pliers; after which a woman would say everything because of the pain...even the men had their testicles squeezed with pliers to make them confess! After such things were done to me, I told them everything. I survived after the torture, but I still have a lot of pain in my body even today from it.’” (Elkins 2005:68).
These are not the only accounts given in the book. There are dozens of them. This was mild, however, compared to what was to come for the Mau Mau. As it was basically a nationalistic movement with the goal of recapturing their lands that had been taken from them, as well as their dignity that had also been taken, it had an extremely broad membership and a great deal of popular support. It became impossible to deal with in this way. Eventually most of the Kikuyu were rounded up and put in camps. These camps were easily a match for, if not worse than the German concentration camps and the Russian gulags. Indeed, Elkins terms them just that – gulags. The accounts from those who survived these camps are worse that the ones quoted above, and, again, there are many of them which I will not quote here. The fact is, these British gulags existed, the inmates were subjected to horrible tortures and, yes, savagery beyond belief. The British government naturally tried to cover this up but eventually the truth came out, the camps were disbanded, and Kenya was given its independence with Jomo Kenyatta as its first President.
To me this story seems almost unbelievable. Remember, we’re not talking about 1750, or 1850, we’re talking about 1950. The British and the rest of the world were well acquainted with the German camps as well as the Russian gulags. That the British would have behaved in this way in 1950 tells us something about human nature, something most unpleasant. It is true that such institutionalized brutality seems to attract the scum of the earth, and much of the torture was conducted by natives recruited for the purpose (some from other countries), but it is also true that white settlers and British military personnel were involved as well. Not only did they order it and condone it they also at times participated in it. Many of these British officers were educated in fine schools in England before finding themselves in Kenya in positions of power. This kind of thing is occurring at the present time in places like Darfur, Liberia, Sierra Leone, the Ivory Coast, West New Guinea, Timor, and yes, unfortunately, even closer to home. I recommend this book highly, but you will need a strong stomach.
Do not speak to me of Intelligent Design. If there was any such creator involved in the creation of the human species, it must have been a vicious, malevolent, sadistic, perverted, inhuman creature or thing at best. There is a terrible flaw built into our species, a flaw not shared by any other living thing.
LKBIQ:
"It has been said that man is a rational animal. All my life I have been searching for evidence which could support this."
Bertrand Russell
Caroline Elkins is an Assistant Professor of History at Harvard University. She spent years researching the Mau Mau rebellion in Kenya for her dissertation. She not only employed all the resources of the archives, but interviewed dozens of people who lived through those dreadful years, both natives and colonials. There is no reason to suppose that what she has written is not the truth, or an exceedingly close approximation of the truth. It is a horrible story. I confess that while reading it I truly resisted believing it, even though I know it is true. It’s a sad and depressing account of the Mau Mau rebellion and how the British dealt with it. The Mau Mau were cruel, and in their attempt to win back their homeland and overcome the years of abuse they experienced at the hands of the British, they spared no one. Their grisly attacks on settlers and on the natives that were collaborating with the British caused the latter to panic. An Emergency was declared, and an attempt was made to eliminate the Mau Mau completely. British propaganda immediately branded the Mau Mau fighters as bestial, evil, primitive savages, obsessed with blood lust and the desire to just kill, kill, kill. They were presented as creatures no better than animals. At the same time British colonial society was presented as a peaceful, noble enterprise attempting only to bring “civilization” to the natives of Kenya.
The first attempt to eliminate the Mau Mau consisted of what were termed “screenings.” Hundreds, perhaps thousands of natives were made to undergo a screening. The purpose of these screenings were to determine who had taken the Mau Mau oaths and were therefore Mau Mau, or at least to learn if they knew any Mau Mau. The nature of these screenings can be seen in the following quotes from some who had experienced them.
An account from Ndirita Kibira, a gardener:
“we were taken to a camp in a farm {Bhati} owned by a settler whom we had nicknamed Nyangweso. That was where we were screened. We would be asked whether we had taken the oath, and those who denied having taken it were beaten badly until they were forced to confess or at least gave them some information. Many died from the beatings…The black askaris {guards} were the ones who were doing most of the beating, but the white settlers and policemen were there as well, directing it and also beating us. (Elkins, 12005:65).
“Margaret Nyaruai, a young woman at the time of Mau Mau, was taken to the screening hut on the estate of her settler employer near Kabaru not long after the start of the Emergency. There she was beaten by a white man whom the Kikuyu had nicknamed Koroki, or He Who Comes at Dawn, by the young settler turned British colonial officer nicknamed YY. While being screened, Margaret was asked:
‘Questions like the number of oaths I had taken, where my husband went, where two of my stepbrothers had gone (they had gone into the forest). I was badly whipped while naked. They didn’t care that I had just given birth. In fact, I think my baby was lucky it was not killed like the rest...Apart from the beatings, women used to have banana leaves and flowers inserted into their vaginas and rectums, as well as have their breasts squeezed with pliers; after which a woman would say everything because of the pain...even the men had their testicles squeezed with pliers to make them confess! After such things were done to me, I told them everything. I survived after the torture, but I still have a lot of pain in my body even today from it.’” (Elkins 2005:68).
These are not the only accounts given in the book. There are dozens of them. This was mild, however, compared to what was to come for the Mau Mau. As it was basically a nationalistic movement with the goal of recapturing their lands that had been taken from them, as well as their dignity that had also been taken, it had an extremely broad membership and a great deal of popular support. It became impossible to deal with in this way. Eventually most of the Kikuyu were rounded up and put in camps. These camps were easily a match for, if not worse than the German concentration camps and the Russian gulags. Indeed, Elkins terms them just that – gulags. The accounts from those who survived these camps are worse that the ones quoted above, and, again, there are many of them which I will not quote here. The fact is, these British gulags existed, the inmates were subjected to horrible tortures and, yes, savagery beyond belief. The British government naturally tried to cover this up but eventually the truth came out, the camps were disbanded, and Kenya was given its independence with Jomo Kenyatta as its first President.
To me this story seems almost unbelievable. Remember, we’re not talking about 1750, or 1850, we’re talking about 1950. The British and the rest of the world were well acquainted with the German camps as well as the Russian gulags. That the British would have behaved in this way in 1950 tells us something about human nature, something most unpleasant. It is true that such institutionalized brutality seems to attract the scum of the earth, and much of the torture was conducted by natives recruited for the purpose (some from other countries), but it is also true that white settlers and British military personnel were involved as well. Not only did they order it and condone it they also at times participated in it. Many of these British officers were educated in fine schools in England before finding themselves in Kenya in positions of power. This kind of thing is occurring at the present time in places like Darfur, Liberia, Sierra Leone, the Ivory Coast, West New Guinea, Timor, and yes, unfortunately, even closer to home. I recommend this book highly, but you will need a strong stomach.
Do not speak to me of Intelligent Design. If there was any such creator involved in the creation of the human species, it must have been a vicious, malevolent, sadistic, perverted, inhuman creature or thing at best. There is a terrible flaw built into our species, a flaw not shared by any other living thing.
LKBIQ:
"It has been said that man is a rational animal. All my life I have been searching for evidence which could support this."
Bertrand Russell
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Limerence
Limerence. Ever hear of it? It could conceivably become a new Psychiatric term for a new psychiatric "illness." As I understand it, limerence refers to the state of initially falling in love. In order to suffer from limerence you must be totally wrapped up in your newfound love to the point where it can be seen as obsessional. You know, you can't bear to be away from your love, you think of nothing else, can't sleep properly, or eat properly, and so on. Frankly, this sounds to me like pretty much par for the course when it comes to falling in love. But some psychologists seem to think it is a special state of mind that could be a form of mental illness. But don't worry, if the pharmaceutical industry can't come up with a pill for it, it will probably just disappear (as I suspect it ought to). I think manufacturing health problems (where they probably don't exist) is becoming big business. All you have to do is find some plausible excuse for a new pill and you're in business. Take Restless Leg Syndrome, for example. It seems there are a few people who legitimately have something like restless leg syndrome, serious enough that they really need help for it. But the vast majority of people who think they have it, don't really have it, at least not seriously enough to warrant taking pills for it. But with a bit of advertising the drug companies can make you believe you have all sorts of problems, hence the non-stop ads these days for every pill known to man. And when you add the Cosmetic Industry there is literally no problem you can't find a pill or a salve or a lotion for. Wrinkles, no problem. Age spots, no problem, gray hair, no problem, unsightly toenails, no problem, and so on and so forth. God, this is a great counry we live in. Think of trying to live in a country where people just grow old gracefully and accept their minor little problems philosophically. I bet there will be a pill soon for lefthandedness, probably one for making your face perfectly symmetrical, as well as one for your posture. And there will surely be pills to make you live longer (actually, I guess there already are). My mother-in-law (who is younger than I am) often suggests I should do something to look younger. I tell her I don't care if I look younger, I want to be younger. There's no pill for that - yet.
Harry Reid really is a kind of wimp. He seems to make his living providing for Bush's every need. You need more money for the "war?" Call Harry. You want immunity for the telecom companies? Call Harry. You don't want to be impeached? Call Harry. He's supposed to be a Democrat and a leader. He fails on both scores as near as I can tell.
There is an interesting exchange going on, on Red State Rebels, having to do with Walt Minnick. Those who defend him do so mostly on the grounds that he's such a great guy. He probably is a great guy. He is also said to have run a successful forest products company while being an environmentalist at the same time. Someone also claims that he has forgotten more about nuclear energy and waste than most people have ever known. If this is so, I can't help but question why he supports nuclear energy. He must know there is no way to dispose of nuclear waste (the claim that France does is nonsense). He must also know that nuclear energy is fantastically expensive and costs the taxpayers really big bucks. As far as biofuels. which he also supports, there are serious questions about what producing them does to the environment. The most interesting question about Minnick, however, which goes unanswered, is why is he running at all? There is a perfectly good, indeed, outstanding candidate, in Larry Grant who ran against Sali in the last election. He did pretty well for a Democratic candidate in an entirely Republican state and I believe would almost certainly win this time. I would like a straightforward answer to the question: what is wrong with Larry Grant as a candidate for Congress? So far I have heard only two items: first, he ran a lackluster campaign (which I believe is false), and second, he ran an entirely grassroots campaign to avoid taking outside money (some apparently think this was bad). He worked hard in his last campaign. He knocked on doors, marched in parades, met and talked with people around the state, and so forth. He is honest, intelligent, willing to listen, and an outstanding person in every way. Minnick did not run in the last election. He seems to be taking advantage of Grant's previous efforts on behalf of Democrats. I am told he is presumably a better candidate because he's a really nice guy and he has money. I believe Larry Grant is just as good or better as a candidate, and because of the time and effort he has already invested, he is probably quite a lot better. Bill Sali, having proven himself to be an utter nitwit, is extremely vulnerable this time. I think Grant would win easily. He deserves it (and he's not for nuclear energy, which is far more important than money). Vote for Larry Grant!
LKBIQ:
“In our civilization, and under our republican form of government, intelligence is so highly honored that it is rewarded by exemption from the cares of office.”
Ambrose Bierce
Harry Reid really is a kind of wimp. He seems to make his living providing for Bush's every need. You need more money for the "war?" Call Harry. You want immunity for the telecom companies? Call Harry. You don't want to be impeached? Call Harry. He's supposed to be a Democrat and a leader. He fails on both scores as near as I can tell.
There is an interesting exchange going on, on Red State Rebels, having to do with Walt Minnick. Those who defend him do so mostly on the grounds that he's such a great guy. He probably is a great guy. He is also said to have run a successful forest products company while being an environmentalist at the same time. Someone also claims that he has forgotten more about nuclear energy and waste than most people have ever known. If this is so, I can't help but question why he supports nuclear energy. He must know there is no way to dispose of nuclear waste (the claim that France does is nonsense). He must also know that nuclear energy is fantastically expensive and costs the taxpayers really big bucks. As far as biofuels. which he also supports, there are serious questions about what producing them does to the environment. The most interesting question about Minnick, however, which goes unanswered, is why is he running at all? There is a perfectly good, indeed, outstanding candidate, in Larry Grant who ran against Sali in the last election. He did pretty well for a Democratic candidate in an entirely Republican state and I believe would almost certainly win this time. I would like a straightforward answer to the question: what is wrong with Larry Grant as a candidate for Congress? So far I have heard only two items: first, he ran a lackluster campaign (which I believe is false), and second, he ran an entirely grassroots campaign to avoid taking outside money (some apparently think this was bad). He worked hard in his last campaign. He knocked on doors, marched in parades, met and talked with people around the state, and so forth. He is honest, intelligent, willing to listen, and an outstanding person in every way. Minnick did not run in the last election. He seems to be taking advantage of Grant's previous efforts on behalf of Democrats. I am told he is presumably a better candidate because he's a really nice guy and he has money. I believe Larry Grant is just as good or better as a candidate, and because of the time and effort he has already invested, he is probably quite a lot better. Bill Sali, having proven himself to be an utter nitwit, is extremely vulnerable this time. I think Grant would win easily. He deserves it (and he's not for nuclear energy, which is far more important than money). Vote for Larry Grant!
LKBIQ:
“In our civilization, and under our republican form of government, intelligence is so highly honored that it is rewarded by exemption from the cares of office.”
Ambrose Bierce
Friday, February 15, 2008
Stimulus
"Stimulus checks should be in the mail in May. I don't know if I will even get one. But what a concept! It's sort of Pavolovian. You hear the words stimulus and checks and start to salivate, expecting the rewards to come. There is a certain logic involved. The public is about two thirds of the economy. If they stop spending the economy suffers. If the economy suffers too much there is a recession, or depression. So...in order to keep the economy going you just have to give the public some money, assuming they will run right out and spend it and thus save us from ourselves. Not a bad idea, huh? There is a slight flaw in this concept, however, a trivial little matter that has to do with the fact that the government doesn’t have 168 billion dollars to give us all a stimulus. I guess they assume that as we are slightly over 9 trillion dollars in debt another 168 billion won’t matter. This is what passes now for fiscal responsibility. This plan is supposed to stimulate us in two ways, stimulate us to go out and spend, and thus stimulate the economy. There is no doubt most people will spend the money as they are all tapped out and losing their homes and going hungry because of the cost of food and fuel and etc. But there is also a question of where they will spend this money and for what. You can be certain that a great deal of it will be spent in Wal Mart. Wal Mart gets most of its merchandise from China. China is probably going to have to lend us the 168 billion so I suppose in some sense it is only fair that we buy Chinese made Wal Mart junk. But how, you might ask, does that help our economy? Well, you might say we’ll spend a lot of it on oil. Yes, no doubt we will. But the oil mostly comes from Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Canada, and elsewhere. So how does that help our economy? Food, that’s it. We’ll spend a lot of it on food. But our food is increasingly coming from overseas: asparagus from Peru, fish from China, Thailand, New Zealand, and elsewhere. How is that going to help our economy? There must be something made in America, how about cars? Yes, there are cars made in America. The best selling cars made in America are being made by Japanese companies. They do employ American labor so that I guess is good. But explain to me how it is the Japanese can manufacture cars and make a profit in the U.S., where American companies have to increasingly outsource for labor and supplies. I confess this is all a mystery to me. I’m not an economist (of course I’m not into witchcraft either), I don’t understand these things. But I just can’t wait to get my stimulus (if, indeed, I do get one).
Speaking of Wal Mart I find myself sometimes having to shop there. I never used to shop there. But a combination of living too long and shrinking retirement benefits, plus the terrible inflation that has set in, has caused me to attempt to adjust to poverty. Thus I go to Wal Mart with most of the rest of America (sometimes it’s the only game in town). As I am now one of them I do not mean to speak disparagingly about this experience. However, I must admit that when I go there I feel like I am in a gigantic warehouse full of losers. The clerks and managers and such seem to be losers, and the customers for the most part are certainly losers (like me). It is depressing. I know they are working for less than living wages and I know the customers are there because they can’t afford to shop elsewhere (if, indeed, they have anywhere else to shop once they have a Wal Mart in their vicinity). Adding insult to injury I have recently learned that fully 80% of what you buy at Wal Mart is not, in fact, cheaper than elsewhere (they sell a few items cheaper and advertise always cheaper prices, etc..It’s a kind of scam). But like I say, once you have a Wal Mart you don’t find many other places to shop anyway. Sometimes when I first wake up in the morning I lie there reflecting upon things (it’s my best time for reflecting). Often I reflect on the “ultimate real,” but lately I’ve been reflecting on Wal Mart, wondering how much different it might make if the three or four multi-billionaires that own it would just take a few billions less out of the till for themselves and pay their help better (and perhaps even buy better merchandise). But then reality sets in once again and I realize how lucky we are to live under a full-blown “free-market” society where mostly everything is “privatized.” This is why we are doing so well. Just wait until they get to privatize water and air, along with medical care, fuel, and food. It will no doubt put the finishing touches on paradise. If I sound cynical, I am.
The Democrats finally managed to stand up to Bush/Cheney. Only on the question of illegal spying, however. The war and torture party still gets its way on most everything else. Having consistently blocked any Democratic attempt to stop the illegal “war,” and now voting not to ban torture, I guess it is very clear where the Brafia stands. It should be an interesting election: the war and torture party versus us “wimps.”
LKBIQ:
"Life is full of misery, loneliness, and suffering - and its all over much too soon."
Woody Allen
Speaking of Wal Mart I find myself sometimes having to shop there. I never used to shop there. But a combination of living too long and shrinking retirement benefits, plus the terrible inflation that has set in, has caused me to attempt to adjust to poverty. Thus I go to Wal Mart with most of the rest of America (sometimes it’s the only game in town). As I am now one of them I do not mean to speak disparagingly about this experience. However, I must admit that when I go there I feel like I am in a gigantic warehouse full of losers. The clerks and managers and such seem to be losers, and the customers for the most part are certainly losers (like me). It is depressing. I know they are working for less than living wages and I know the customers are there because they can’t afford to shop elsewhere (if, indeed, they have anywhere else to shop once they have a Wal Mart in their vicinity). Adding insult to injury I have recently learned that fully 80% of what you buy at Wal Mart is not, in fact, cheaper than elsewhere (they sell a few items cheaper and advertise always cheaper prices, etc..It’s a kind of scam). But like I say, once you have a Wal Mart you don’t find many other places to shop anyway. Sometimes when I first wake up in the morning I lie there reflecting upon things (it’s my best time for reflecting). Often I reflect on the “ultimate real,” but lately I’ve been reflecting on Wal Mart, wondering how much different it might make if the three or four multi-billionaires that own it would just take a few billions less out of the till for themselves and pay their help better (and perhaps even buy better merchandise). But then reality sets in once again and I realize how lucky we are to live under a full-blown “free-market” society where mostly everything is “privatized.” This is why we are doing so well. Just wait until they get to privatize water and air, along with medical care, fuel, and food. It will no doubt put the finishing touches on paradise. If I sound cynical, I am.
The Democrats finally managed to stand up to Bush/Cheney. Only on the question of illegal spying, however. The war and torture party still gets its way on most everything else. Having consistently blocked any Democratic attempt to stop the illegal “war,” and now voting not to ban torture, I guess it is very clear where the Brafia stands. It should be an interesting election: the war and torture party versus us “wimps.”
LKBIQ:
"Life is full of misery, loneliness, and suffering - and its all over much too soon."
Woody Allen
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Tobacco
The “straight talk express” is evolving into the hypocrites chariot right before our eyes. It turns out that John McCain is a man with no courage of his convictions. McCain not long ago absolutely insisted that waterboarding was torture and should not be permitted. Now he has voted against a ban on it. Flip-flop does not do justice to this blatant hypocrisy. McCain wants to be President so bad he is willing to do anything…anything. What do you expect from a guy willing to be photographed hugging George W. Bush? Sorry, John, if you ever had any credibility you don’t have it anymore. Why not dishonor yourself even more, pick your buddy, Mitt Romney, for your running mate. Don’t let your apparent dislike of him keep you from it, it didn’t keep you from voting on torture. If the Brafia allows this old fool to be their candidate they will only be humoring him in his dotage and waiting for the 2012 election. Such a strategy has worked for them before.
I’ve been thinking about tobacco. Well, actually, I was provoked into thinking about it by someone who insists people should be allowed to smoke if they wish. Interestingly enough, I agree with that. If people want to smoke and take the risks (alone and outside) I think they should be allowed to do that. If a bar owner wants to run a bar where customers want to smoke, fine. None of this bothers me in the slightest. What bothers me about tobacco is not the rights of individuals to do stupid things if they wish, it is that tobacco is allowed to be produced and marketed at all. Tobacco, it seems to me, is a unique product. It is the only thing produced for the express purpose of killing people. Tobacco is a poison. It kills people. Everyone knows this. Even the tobacco companies know it. But they still go ahead year after year packaging and marketing it. You don’t even have to abuse it to get killed. Alcohol is bad, but in order to actually kill yourself with it you have to truly abuse it. Drugs of various kinds, too, can be bad. But they are not produced with the knowledge that they are going to kill people, unless, again, they are terribly abused. How do you explain an industry that knows its product kills hundreds of thousands of people but goes ahead and produces it anyway. Not only produces it, but spends millions of dollars promoting it, even to children. And what do you think of a nation that allows this murderous enterprise to persist and thrive? Just another example of our culture of the absurd. So…if people want to smoke and kill themselves, let them. But let them grow their own weed, roll it up, stick it in their mouths, and light it on fire. There’s no accounting for taste. Marijuana, by the way, doesn’t kill. If you sell it you go to jail. If you sell tobacco you make lots of money, legally, and live (happily?) ever after. If, that is, you have no conscience or respect for others, like Bush the Dumb and Dick the Slimy.
The Clintons have a new magic word – “solutions.” Obama just has speeches, Hillary has solutions. But what if it turns out Obama has both speeches and solutions? Maybe the Clintons could claim they have “magic?” Black magic. Lots of people would eagerly believe they have black magic. That’s why Hillary has a cackle instead of a laugh, she really is a witch or a sorceress. If she has black magic I hope she works it on the Brafia, they certainly deserve it. The polls show Clinton with a pretty commanding lead in both Ohio and Texas, and also in Pennsylvania. I bet when the time comes those leads won’t be so commanding. I think if Obama should unexpectedly take any one of those three states it will be all over for the Clintons, in spite of the superdelegates (do not lose sight of the fact that I am often wrong). Prognostication is not my forte. In fact, I seem to have no forte.
LKBIQ:
I’ve been thinking about tobacco. Well, actually, I was provoked into thinking about it by someone who insists people should be allowed to smoke if they wish. Interestingly enough, I agree with that. If people want to smoke and take the risks (alone and outside) I think they should be allowed to do that. If a bar owner wants to run a bar where customers want to smoke, fine. None of this bothers me in the slightest. What bothers me about tobacco is not the rights of individuals to do stupid things if they wish, it is that tobacco is allowed to be produced and marketed at all. Tobacco, it seems to me, is a unique product. It is the only thing produced for the express purpose of killing people. Tobacco is a poison. It kills people. Everyone knows this. Even the tobacco companies know it. But they still go ahead year after year packaging and marketing it. You don’t even have to abuse it to get killed. Alcohol is bad, but in order to actually kill yourself with it you have to truly abuse it. Drugs of various kinds, too, can be bad. But they are not produced with the knowledge that they are going to kill people, unless, again, they are terribly abused. How do you explain an industry that knows its product kills hundreds of thousands of people but goes ahead and produces it anyway. Not only produces it, but spends millions of dollars promoting it, even to children. And what do you think of a nation that allows this murderous enterprise to persist and thrive? Just another example of our culture of the absurd. So…if people want to smoke and kill themselves, let them. But let them grow their own weed, roll it up, stick it in their mouths, and light it on fire. There’s no accounting for taste. Marijuana, by the way, doesn’t kill. If you sell it you go to jail. If you sell tobacco you make lots of money, legally, and live (happily?) ever after. If, that is, you have no conscience or respect for others, like Bush the Dumb and Dick the Slimy.
The Clintons have a new magic word – “solutions.” Obama just has speeches, Hillary has solutions. But what if it turns out Obama has both speeches and solutions? Maybe the Clintons could claim they have “magic?” Black magic. Lots of people would eagerly believe they have black magic. That’s why Hillary has a cackle instead of a laugh, she really is a witch or a sorceress. If she has black magic I hope she works it on the Brafia, they certainly deserve it. The polls show Clinton with a pretty commanding lead in both Ohio and Texas, and also in Pennsylvania. I bet when the time comes those leads won’t be so commanding. I think if Obama should unexpectedly take any one of those three states it will be all over for the Clintons, in spite of the superdelegates (do not lose sight of the fact that I am often wrong). Prognostication is not my forte. In fact, I seem to have no forte.
LKBIQ:
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Folderol
Young woman mistakenly
deposits meth in her ATM,
along with her address.
I guess it’s good to know that our Senate is fully complicit with the criminal Bush/Cheney administration. With 31 Democratic Senators voting with the Brafia they have tried to keep immunity for the telecom companies that have helped illegally spy on us for so long. The House of Representatives might stop this travesty but don’t bet on it. If nothing happens for a few days we’ll just automatically revert to having to get judicial permission for spying, like we used to before the criminals took over. The telecom industry is the fourth or fifth most powerful lobby. Think that has anything to do with this?
I hope you didn’t miss Bush’s performance this morning trying to coerce Congress into passing this immunity bill. I don’t have his precise words but basically he told us that at this very moment terrorists are plotting to attack our country in such a way that 9/11 will look like a picnic. Fear anyone? Bush is so transparent and so stupid I guess he thinks someone will believe him. I suppose there is a grain of truth in it: someone, somewhere, somehow, someway, someday, might conceive and carry out another terrorist attack. This is like saying Lutherans are people who believe that someone, somewhere, somehow, might actually enjoy him or herself, or something like that.
Justice Scalia, the Dark Prince of the Supreme Court, has now said that the Constitution does not prohibit torture and thus our CIA (or whomever) could slap people and stick things under their fingernails and so on. I haven’t read the Constitution for a long time, and I don’t happen to have a copy handy, but I don’t think it specifically prohibits murder either. It also doesn’t mention a whole host of things that didn’t even exist when it was written. I don’t know why it matters anyway as Bush/Cheney have long since given up paying even lip service to that sacred document. After all, as Bush said, “it’s just a damn piece of paper.”
Kudos to Representative Robert Wexler who is doggedly trying to get Congress to perform its Constitutional duty and impeach Dick the Slimy. He questioned Rice today about the intelligence we were offered before the Iraq “war.” He wants to know why none of the contradictory evidence was mentioned, but only the evidence Condi and others elected to tell us. I didn’t see the exchange but Wexler claims she lied. Condi lie? Surely not Condi? Haven’t all the Brafia members of this administration always told us the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Or have I missed something? By the way, watch out for the mushroom clouds that seem to drift around whenever the Brafia speaks.
Have you heard the latest about smoking pot. It rots your teeth, according to some study or other. Wow! It used to just cause black guys to rush out and rape white women. Where do they find people to make this stuff up? Do you think they interviewed the several millions of pot smokers? Maybe just the homeless ones with no money living under bridges? What will they come up with next? Will anyone ever try to bring to an end this utterly ridiculous, useless, costly, stupid “war on drugs?”
I notice that some are trying to label the Obama phenomena a “cult.” If so, it’s the biggest damn cult anyone has seen for a very long time, maybe ever. Some have not given up yet on Clinton and believe she might still win the nomination. It is, of course, theoretically possible, but I believe it to be highly unlikely. “It’s hard to keep ‘em back on the farm after they’ve seen Paree.” There is a danger here for Obama. If people begin to see him as a Messiah he won’t be able to live up to their expectations. Let’s hope he tries. He may be just the person we’ve been looking for. He may prove to be just another politician. Let’s roll them dice and hope that Big Juju will be on our side this time.
LKBIQ:
“I think that God in creating Man somewhat overestimated his ability.”
Oscar Wilde
deposits meth in her ATM,
along with her address.
I guess it’s good to know that our Senate is fully complicit with the criminal Bush/Cheney administration. With 31 Democratic Senators voting with the Brafia they have tried to keep immunity for the telecom companies that have helped illegally spy on us for so long. The House of Representatives might stop this travesty but don’t bet on it. If nothing happens for a few days we’ll just automatically revert to having to get judicial permission for spying, like we used to before the criminals took over. The telecom industry is the fourth or fifth most powerful lobby. Think that has anything to do with this?
I hope you didn’t miss Bush’s performance this morning trying to coerce Congress into passing this immunity bill. I don’t have his precise words but basically he told us that at this very moment terrorists are plotting to attack our country in such a way that 9/11 will look like a picnic. Fear anyone? Bush is so transparent and so stupid I guess he thinks someone will believe him. I suppose there is a grain of truth in it: someone, somewhere, somehow, someway, someday, might conceive and carry out another terrorist attack. This is like saying Lutherans are people who believe that someone, somewhere, somehow, might actually enjoy him or herself, or something like that.
Justice Scalia, the Dark Prince of the Supreme Court, has now said that the Constitution does not prohibit torture and thus our CIA (or whomever) could slap people and stick things under their fingernails and so on. I haven’t read the Constitution for a long time, and I don’t happen to have a copy handy, but I don’t think it specifically prohibits murder either. It also doesn’t mention a whole host of things that didn’t even exist when it was written. I don’t know why it matters anyway as Bush/Cheney have long since given up paying even lip service to that sacred document. After all, as Bush said, “it’s just a damn piece of paper.”
Kudos to Representative Robert Wexler who is doggedly trying to get Congress to perform its Constitutional duty and impeach Dick the Slimy. He questioned Rice today about the intelligence we were offered before the Iraq “war.” He wants to know why none of the contradictory evidence was mentioned, but only the evidence Condi and others elected to tell us. I didn’t see the exchange but Wexler claims she lied. Condi lie? Surely not Condi? Haven’t all the Brafia members of this administration always told us the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Or have I missed something? By the way, watch out for the mushroom clouds that seem to drift around whenever the Brafia speaks.
Have you heard the latest about smoking pot. It rots your teeth, according to some study or other. Wow! It used to just cause black guys to rush out and rape white women. Where do they find people to make this stuff up? Do you think they interviewed the several millions of pot smokers? Maybe just the homeless ones with no money living under bridges? What will they come up with next? Will anyone ever try to bring to an end this utterly ridiculous, useless, costly, stupid “war on drugs?”
I notice that some are trying to label the Obama phenomena a “cult.” If so, it’s the biggest damn cult anyone has seen for a very long time, maybe ever. Some have not given up yet on Clinton and believe she might still win the nomination. It is, of course, theoretically possible, but I believe it to be highly unlikely. “It’s hard to keep ‘em back on the farm after they’ve seen Paree.” There is a danger here for Obama. If people begin to see him as a Messiah he won’t be able to live up to their expectations. Let’s hope he tries. He may be just the person we’ve been looking for. He may prove to be just another politician. Let’s roll them dice and hope that Big Juju will be on our side this time.
LKBIQ:
“I think that God in creating Man somewhat overestimated his ability.”
Oscar Wilde
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Nukes and stuff
Woman has her dream Greek
wedding, dies of heart attack
dancing in husband’s arms.
More nuclear weapons? I thought we had international agreements to reduce nuclear arms. Bush now wants 150 billion dollars to develop new ones, in spite of the fact they are not needed. Oh, I forgot, they are needed – by the military/industrial/political complex. Another step in creating the new arms race and putting humanity right back on the brink of humanicide. Great job, morons!
If you have been thinking there is something wrong with our Senate, don’t think again. Now the apparent nitwits that inhabit that questionable institution have voted to preserve immunity for the telephone companies who have been illegally helping Bush/Cheney spy on us. Why do they care if they spy on us, they just get more money from them. We continue on our rapidly sinking ship of state. Great job, Senators!
Bill Sali continues in his remarkable ability to vote against anything decent and for anything indecent. Running true to form he voted against making College less expensive (losing 354 – 48), and voted against protection for the mentally ill or addicted (losing 384 – 23). Then he voted for the 168 billion bribe to the public, leading them to believe our President and Congress actually care about us. Sali better hope the Chinese will actually come through with the loan, I think our credit rating, like the dollar, is rapidly deteriorating. Maybe he believes his $600 gift will help get him out of debt. Great job Sali! VOTE FOR LARRY GRANT!!!
John Foster, the Executive Director of the Idaho Democrats has resigned after only a few months in office, “to spend more time with his family.” As usual, an explanation that demands reasonable doubt. I have no idea what is actually going on down there in Boise but I bet it has much more to do with Idaho politics than it has to do with child care.
Since “Super Tuesday” Obama has now won eight elections in a row, having just now won in Virginia, Maryland, and Washington D.C. And, as usual, he won every contest by a large margin of votes. So where does this leave the Clintons who “never give up?” It leaves them now banking on big wins in Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, a form of Giuliani strategy which may well lead them to the same fate as that discredited opportunist.
I predicted in January of 07 that Hillary Clinton would be our next President, that she was the choice of the Corporate power structure, and the whole thing was a done deal. I also predicted that Obamarama would fade quickly. I still think I was right about the first prediction, but I was totally wrong about the second one. Who would have dreamed that a charismatic African American with little experience could go so far in this nation with its history of discrimination? Anyway, he hasn’t won the Presidency yet, I could still be right about Clinton. I sincerely hope not. I know better than to predict anything in politics. I’m almost always wrong. Somehow I am out of sync with the American public. I’m glad.
Bill Kristol just appeared once again on the Daily Show, confirming what I have long thought. He’s crazy. Isn’t someone out of touch with reality crazy? Of course on that score he merely joins the rest of the Brafia that seems to thrive primarily on blood lust and greed.
The Israelis continue bombing Gaza, and now they say they are going to increase their assassinations of Hamas leaders. How well would it be received if the U.S. announced an official policy of assassinating Russian leaders? Israel has never had anything but contempt for either the U.N. or world opinion. They just blissfully go on with their slow and premeditated criminal genocide, with the help of the U.S., and no one seems able to get them to stop. There will never be peace in the Middle East until someone curbs the Israelis. The two questions that dare not be asked of any of the candidates: what will you do about Israeli colonialism? What will you do about the Bush/Cheney war crimes? The dogs bark but the caravan moves on.
LKBIQ:
"I wish I could believe in the Bible, like you people -- I just can't. And I wish I could get hope out of it like you do. I've got no hope."
Clarence Darrow
wedding, dies of heart attack
dancing in husband’s arms.
More nuclear weapons? I thought we had international agreements to reduce nuclear arms. Bush now wants 150 billion dollars to develop new ones, in spite of the fact they are not needed. Oh, I forgot, they are needed – by the military/industrial/political complex. Another step in creating the new arms race and putting humanity right back on the brink of humanicide. Great job, morons!
If you have been thinking there is something wrong with our Senate, don’t think again. Now the apparent nitwits that inhabit that questionable institution have voted to preserve immunity for the telephone companies who have been illegally helping Bush/Cheney spy on us. Why do they care if they spy on us, they just get more money from them. We continue on our rapidly sinking ship of state. Great job, Senators!
Bill Sali continues in his remarkable ability to vote against anything decent and for anything indecent. Running true to form he voted against making College less expensive (losing 354 – 48), and voted against protection for the mentally ill or addicted (losing 384 – 23). Then he voted for the 168 billion bribe to the public, leading them to believe our President and Congress actually care about us. Sali better hope the Chinese will actually come through with the loan, I think our credit rating, like the dollar, is rapidly deteriorating. Maybe he believes his $600 gift will help get him out of debt. Great job Sali! VOTE FOR LARRY GRANT!!!
John Foster, the Executive Director of the Idaho Democrats has resigned after only a few months in office, “to spend more time with his family.” As usual, an explanation that demands reasonable doubt. I have no idea what is actually going on down there in Boise but I bet it has much more to do with Idaho politics than it has to do with child care.
Since “Super Tuesday” Obama has now won eight elections in a row, having just now won in Virginia, Maryland, and Washington D.C. And, as usual, he won every contest by a large margin of votes. So where does this leave the Clintons who “never give up?” It leaves them now banking on big wins in Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, a form of Giuliani strategy which may well lead them to the same fate as that discredited opportunist.
I predicted in January of 07 that Hillary Clinton would be our next President, that she was the choice of the Corporate power structure, and the whole thing was a done deal. I also predicted that Obamarama would fade quickly. I still think I was right about the first prediction, but I was totally wrong about the second one. Who would have dreamed that a charismatic African American with little experience could go so far in this nation with its history of discrimination? Anyway, he hasn’t won the Presidency yet, I could still be right about Clinton. I sincerely hope not. I know better than to predict anything in politics. I’m almost always wrong. Somehow I am out of sync with the American public. I’m glad.
Bill Kristol just appeared once again on the Daily Show, confirming what I have long thought. He’s crazy. Isn’t someone out of touch with reality crazy? Of course on that score he merely joins the rest of the Brafia that seems to thrive primarily on blood lust and greed.
The Israelis continue bombing Gaza, and now they say they are going to increase their assassinations of Hamas leaders. How well would it be received if the U.S. announced an official policy of assassinating Russian leaders? Israel has never had anything but contempt for either the U.N. or world opinion. They just blissfully go on with their slow and premeditated criminal genocide, with the help of the U.S., and no one seems able to get them to stop. There will never be peace in the Middle East until someone curbs the Israelis. The two questions that dare not be asked of any of the candidates: what will you do about Israeli colonialism? What will you do about the Bush/Cheney war crimes? The dogs bark but the caravan moves on.
LKBIQ:
"I wish I could believe in the Bible, like you people -- I just can't. And I wish I could get hope out of it like you do. I've got no hope."
Clarence Darrow
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Afghanistan?
What about Afghnistan? Does anyone have any idea why we are still there, and apparently still losing? Gates has been there whining because there don’t seem to be enough European troops willing to fight and die for the cause. You might well ask, what cause? What is our cause in Afghanistan? Why are we still there? It is pretty obvious we are not working very hard to get Osama bin Laden. And we surely do not intend to occupy the entire country and turn it into an American colony (at least I don’t think we are quite that insane). In order to do that we would doubtless need about a million man army and perhaps one hundred years (no one has ever managed to conquer Afghanistan). As far as I know, aside from the claim that we want to get Osama bin Laden (but aren’t really trying), the only reason we have to be there at all is because we want to build some kind of oil pipeline through that unfortunate country and manage therefore to bypass Russia (I could be wrong about this, if so, please advise). So…why should European countries want to sacrifice their soldiers for our hypothetical pipeline? NATO was created to control Russia (which presumably used to be a threat but, realistically, is no longer). It was certainly not created to help us create a pipeline through Afghanistan. Oh, well, those dumb Europeans, what do they know? I do not believe there is any doubt whatsoever in the minds of those with IQ’s above say, 70, that we are inevitably going to “fail” in Afghanistan. What other outcome is even theoretically possible? If you know, please let me know. This has to be the single most useless military adventure in history, worse, even, than the “Charge of the Light Brigade.” But what do I know?
Well, Barack Hussein Obama, god bless him, has now won Maine, in addition to Nebraska, Washington, and Louisiana (and the Virgin Islands). This means he has won at least 19 out of 30 states so far. If he wins in Virginia, Maryland, and Washington D.C., which he is quite likely to do, Hillary will not have won a single state since super Tuesday. This will have to be excruciatingly embarrassing for the Clintons no matter how many delegates they still have. And what if it then continues and Obama wins at least some more states (which he almost certainly will? We will have a situation in which Obama has won a majority of states (probably by substantial majorities), plus the popular vote, but the Clintons still refuse to give up, hoping the superdelegates (party insiders) will save them. Disaster for the Democratic party is lurking here and it may not be at all easy to avert it.
I am having a certain amount of trouble over the issue of gun control. It seems to me the problem has to do with your initial assumptions. If, for example, you start with the assumption that the 2nd amendment can be taken to apply to individual gun owners as well as, or in addition to, militias, then obviously there should be no problem with the individual ownership of guns. But then you are confronted with the question of what kind of guns. If you assume the reason for owning guns is simply practical, that is, either for self defense or hunting, there is no reason you should not be able to own pistols or shotguns or rifles, useful for hunting or self-protection. But, then, why should you want any other kinds of guns, like fully automatic weapons, 50 calibre machine guns, or such? If you argument for them is because you need to protect yourself from the government itself, then why should there be any restrictions at all, Why not bazookas, rocket launchers, howitzers, even tanks? But then the government would still have the air force, submarines, nuclear bombs, poison gas, who knows what all. How would you protect yourself from that? You see the problem, I hope. It basically reduces itself to a matter of trust. If you trust your own government you should be satisfied with hunting weapons and handguns at most. If not, there are no limits. Of course no one in the United States (or hardly anyone) is going to argue that people should not be allowed guns at all. That would mean no self-protection or hunting. But how about inner-city violence? Gangs, that sort of thing? When it is bad enough should a city be allowed to ban guns? Certain kinds of guns? What? I swear this is not a simple problem. Therefore, I wash my hands of it and go with the status quo, whatever that may be.
When confronted with a difficult problem always take the easy way out. Take immigration for another example…aaagh, no forget it. My tiny brain is overtaxed. But how about the Israeli genocide of Palestinians? Should they be allowed to herd the legimitely elected democratic Palestinians into tiny Gaza, shut off their electricity and food supplies, bomb and slowly starve them, and whatever they please, with the blessings of the Bush/Cheney administration? Oh, excuse me, mustn’t upset the Israeli lobby. Israel? Palestine? What do they have to do with the Middle East? I give up. These problems are just too difficult to deal with. Eat, drink, and be merry, tomorrow we die.
LKBIQ:
“There warn’t anybody at the church, except maybe a hog or two, for there warn’t any lock on the door, and hogs likes a puncheon floor in summertime because it’s cool. If you notice, most folks don’t go to church only when they’ve got to; but a hog is different.”
Mark Twain
Well, Barack Hussein Obama, god bless him, has now won Maine, in addition to Nebraska, Washington, and Louisiana (and the Virgin Islands). This means he has won at least 19 out of 30 states so far. If he wins in Virginia, Maryland, and Washington D.C., which he is quite likely to do, Hillary will not have won a single state since super Tuesday. This will have to be excruciatingly embarrassing for the Clintons no matter how many delegates they still have. And what if it then continues and Obama wins at least some more states (which he almost certainly will? We will have a situation in which Obama has won a majority of states (probably by substantial majorities), plus the popular vote, but the Clintons still refuse to give up, hoping the superdelegates (party insiders) will save them. Disaster for the Democratic party is lurking here and it may not be at all easy to avert it.
I am having a certain amount of trouble over the issue of gun control. It seems to me the problem has to do with your initial assumptions. If, for example, you start with the assumption that the 2nd amendment can be taken to apply to individual gun owners as well as, or in addition to, militias, then obviously there should be no problem with the individual ownership of guns. But then you are confronted with the question of what kind of guns. If you assume the reason for owning guns is simply practical, that is, either for self defense or hunting, there is no reason you should not be able to own pistols or shotguns or rifles, useful for hunting or self-protection. But, then, why should you want any other kinds of guns, like fully automatic weapons, 50 calibre machine guns, or such? If you argument for them is because you need to protect yourself from the government itself, then why should there be any restrictions at all, Why not bazookas, rocket launchers, howitzers, even tanks? But then the government would still have the air force, submarines, nuclear bombs, poison gas, who knows what all. How would you protect yourself from that? You see the problem, I hope. It basically reduces itself to a matter of trust. If you trust your own government you should be satisfied with hunting weapons and handguns at most. If not, there are no limits. Of course no one in the United States (or hardly anyone) is going to argue that people should not be allowed guns at all. That would mean no self-protection or hunting. But how about inner-city violence? Gangs, that sort of thing? When it is bad enough should a city be allowed to ban guns? Certain kinds of guns? What? I swear this is not a simple problem. Therefore, I wash my hands of it and go with the status quo, whatever that may be.
When confronted with a difficult problem always take the easy way out. Take immigration for another example…aaagh, no forget it. My tiny brain is overtaxed. But how about the Israeli genocide of Palestinians? Should they be allowed to herd the legimitely elected democratic Palestinians into tiny Gaza, shut off their electricity and food supplies, bomb and slowly starve them, and whatever they please, with the blessings of the Bush/Cheney administration? Oh, excuse me, mustn’t upset the Israeli lobby. Israel? Palestine? What do they have to do with the Middle East? I give up. These problems are just too difficult to deal with. Eat, drink, and be merry, tomorrow we die.
LKBIQ:
“There warn’t anybody at the church, except maybe a hog or two, for there warn’t any lock on the door, and hogs likes a puncheon floor in summertime because it’s cool. If you notice, most folks don’t go to church only when they’ve got to; but a hog is different.”
Mark Twain
Saturday, February 09, 2008
More nonsense
There is just no end to the nonsense that characterizes human behavior. Sometimes it is rather amusing but more often than not it’s just plain stupid. Take, for example, the recent detailed study of Barack Obama’s youthful drug use. It turns out that it was virtually non-existent. Interviews with those who went to school with him and knew him indicate clearly that at worst he seems to have dabbled with marijuana. He is described as a serious young man with no problems with drugs, focused on his studies, and so on. So…referring back to his book it is being suggested that he might have exaggerated his experiments with drugs in order to make it more interesting and increase sales. Perhaps he did. But not content with such speculation, and chagrined at not being able to characterize him as a drug-crazed teen-ager, they now want to say he is a liar! So now Barack’s image is torn between being a fine upstanding serious young man or a liar. Human beings are strange creatures indeed. One might wonder why they even bothered about his so-called drug use, given the fact that our current occupant in the White House was admittedly a drunkard and a cocaine user (he’s been forgiven). Obama won’t find any forgiveness for anything he might have done when the roviaters start in on him.
Another thing that strikes me as amusing, although I’m sure many people will take it very seriously, is a headline I saw somewhere on an article that said, “U.S. doesn’t see a need for a second Iraqi nuclear plant.” Get that? The U.S. doesn’t see the need. One might ask just what business is it of ours whether they want a second plant or not. France has dozens of them and other nations have many more than two. What if the Iranians see a need for it? Oh, yeah, their perceptions and needs don’t count. It’s just another problem with the “white man’s burden.” These people just don’t know what’s good for themselves. We do, of course. We seem to know what’s good for everybody on earth (except, apparently and sadly, ourselves).
As I write this the election returns are coming in. It seems that Obama is winning Nebraska, Washington, and Louisiana, all by very large margins. And while it’s true he got a huge percentage of the black vote, it’s also true that blacks do not make up a large part of the populations in Nebraska or Washington, so he clearly isn’t just winning because of the black vote. Clinton is virtually being shut out when it comes to winning states even though she does claim California, Arizona, and New York. If this continues it is going to be most embarrassing for the Clintons no matter how many delegates they have. Bill Clinton suggested that electing Obama would be a roll of the dice (electing anyone, including Hillary, will be a roll of the dice as no one knows what they will actually do if they get the power). What I say is: “come seven, come eleven, baby needs a new pair of shoes.”
Having seen how difficult it is to conduct a caucus with 150 people, I don’t see how in the world you could conduct one with 1000 or 8000 people. This was never a problem before because there were always so few voters involved. If the trend continues I think we’ll have to give up on the caucus system. The turnout continues to be completely unprecedented everywhere. There is no doubt, people want change,
and they want it bad.
LKBIQ:
"There are men in the world who derive as stern an exaltation from the proximity of disaster and ruin, as others from success."
Sir Winston Churchill
Another thing that strikes me as amusing, although I’m sure many people will take it very seriously, is a headline I saw somewhere on an article that said, “U.S. doesn’t see a need for a second Iraqi nuclear plant.” Get that? The U.S. doesn’t see the need. One might ask just what business is it of ours whether they want a second plant or not. France has dozens of them and other nations have many more than two. What if the Iranians see a need for it? Oh, yeah, their perceptions and needs don’t count. It’s just another problem with the “white man’s burden.” These people just don’t know what’s good for themselves. We do, of course. We seem to know what’s good for everybody on earth (except, apparently and sadly, ourselves).
As I write this the election returns are coming in. It seems that Obama is winning Nebraska, Washington, and Louisiana, all by very large margins. And while it’s true he got a huge percentage of the black vote, it’s also true that blacks do not make up a large part of the populations in Nebraska or Washington, so he clearly isn’t just winning because of the black vote. Clinton is virtually being shut out when it comes to winning states even though she does claim California, Arizona, and New York. If this continues it is going to be most embarrassing for the Clintons no matter how many delegates they have. Bill Clinton suggested that electing Obama would be a roll of the dice (electing anyone, including Hillary, will be a roll of the dice as no one knows what they will actually do if they get the power). What I say is: “come seven, come eleven, baby needs a new pair of shoes.”
Having seen how difficult it is to conduct a caucus with 150 people, I don’t see how in the world you could conduct one with 1000 or 8000 people. This was never a problem before because there were always so few voters involved. If the trend continues I think we’ll have to give up on the caucus system. The turnout continues to be completely unprecedented everywhere. There is no doubt, people want change,
and they want it bad.
LKBIQ:
"There are men in the world who derive as stern an exaltation from the proximity of disaster and ruin, as others from success."
Sir Winston Churchill
Friday, February 08, 2008
Preposterous!
The stuff that has been coming out of this Bush/Cheney White House is so completely, unbelievably, incredibly, fantastically, monumentally, stupidly, unprecedentally, unconscionably, ridiculously PREPOSTEROUS, I believe it has caused the entire American population to lose their senses. No one seems able to cope with a story so out of touch with reality it is becoming unrecognizable as such. The latest claim coming out of the White House is that waterboarding is legal and the President can authorize it again if need be. Waterboarding has been known since the Inquisition as torture. Some Japanese were actually executed because they waterboarded Americans during WW II. Everyone on earth knows it is torture and that it is illegal. So how did it become legal? This is where it becomes stranger than fiction. Bush, our sort-of President, took his personal lawyer, Alberto Gonzales, with him to the White House. He then managed to make him Attorney General. As Attorney General this obsequious peasant decided to do what Bush wanted and declared torture, including waterboarding, legal. He also told Bush that the Geneva Convention, banning torture and other things, was simply “quaint” and out-of-touch. Thus Gonzales and his Justice Department ignored International law as well as the law of the United States and told Bush that as President he had unlimited powers and could do as he wished. Bush/Cheney, sadistic monsters that they are, went wild with their new-found (but completely illegal) powers and starting torturing all around the globe. Now that they have been found out they claim that what they did was legal at the time (it isn’t legal again now). Why was it legal? Because Bush’s toadies in the Justice Department declared that it was. And now the argument coming from the current Attorney General is that because the Justice Department had said it was legal, the current Justice Department cannot investigate themselves for doing what they had said was legal. Dizzy yet? So far everyone seems to accept the idea that Gonzales and his henchmen could blissfully do away with all legal precedents just because they wanted to do so. This is a scheme so fantastic it defies science fiction, to say nothing of just plain old common sense. It is so far-fetched that the Bush/Cheney administration can’t even admit that it is/was torture, as that would land them in prison for war crimes. Hence they continue to claim that it isn’t torture (even though the world knows that it is). So far they are getting away with this obvious crime against humanity. I wouldn’t be surprised to see them eventually living in luxury in Paraguay or even Saudi Arabia. Indeed, at the rate this is currently playing out they may well be dead and gone. What is worse, this business over torture is merely the tip of an enormous iceberg of even more preposterous acts perpetrated by this administration, the collective enormity of them so great as to make the nine and a half trillion dollar U.S. debt almost a comprehensible figure.
John Conyer, who has the power to begin impeachment proceedings against Bush/Cheney, but has resisted doing so, now claims he is on the brink of doing it. However, he has said that one must be careful because there would be blowback from the “corporate power structure.” In other words, he’s afraid of the corporations that are running things. I guess it couldn’t be much more blatant and obvious than that. The corporations don’t want Bush/Cheney impeached so our Congressmen are bowing and scraping and doing their bidding. So much for Congressional power. Congressman Wexler is supposedly bringing up his impeachment attempt next week. Let’s see if he gets any farther than Kucinich. With the exception of Wexler, Kucinich, and a few others we have a Congress staffed overwhelmingly by cowards with no interest whatsoever in the public well-being, justice, truth, honor and decency, or anything unrelated to their maintaining their cushy jobs pretending to be important and relevant. We should certainly show them the way out next November, along with the Brafia Senators.
Equally PREPOSTEROUS is Bush’s recent budget. He wants to increase the defense budget by 8% while cutting back on domestic programs like Medicaid. Our defense budget that is larger already than all the rest of the world combined, and already eats up more than half of our annual budge, needs to be increased? Bush/Cheney and the Pentagon are drinking something a lot more powerful than kool-aid, while chuckling over all those billions that just somehow got lost along the way. Remember we have a long way to go before we rest, and more and more wars to start to prove we’re the best. John McCain will lead the way, he knows what’s right and doesn’t care what we say. Iran’ll be next and then the rest, and we’ll all be happy in our polluted nest. Onward Christian soldiers! Save the heathens! Remember the Alamo! Get rich, sleep till noon, and screw ‘em all. We’re Amuricans, and don’t you forget it!
LKBIQ:
“There is a moment of difficulty and danger at which flattery and falsehood can no longer deceive, and simplicity itself can no longer be misled.”
Anonymous
John Conyer, who has the power to begin impeachment proceedings against Bush/Cheney, but has resisted doing so, now claims he is on the brink of doing it. However, he has said that one must be careful because there would be blowback from the “corporate power structure.” In other words, he’s afraid of the corporations that are running things. I guess it couldn’t be much more blatant and obvious than that. The corporations don’t want Bush/Cheney impeached so our Congressmen are bowing and scraping and doing their bidding. So much for Congressional power. Congressman Wexler is supposedly bringing up his impeachment attempt next week. Let’s see if he gets any farther than Kucinich. With the exception of Wexler, Kucinich, and a few others we have a Congress staffed overwhelmingly by cowards with no interest whatsoever in the public well-being, justice, truth, honor and decency, or anything unrelated to their maintaining their cushy jobs pretending to be important and relevant. We should certainly show them the way out next November, along with the Brafia Senators.
Equally PREPOSTEROUS is Bush’s recent budget. He wants to increase the defense budget by 8% while cutting back on domestic programs like Medicaid. Our defense budget that is larger already than all the rest of the world combined, and already eats up more than half of our annual budge, needs to be increased? Bush/Cheney and the Pentagon are drinking something a lot more powerful than kool-aid, while chuckling over all those billions that just somehow got lost along the way. Remember we have a long way to go before we rest, and more and more wars to start to prove we’re the best. John McCain will lead the way, he knows what’s right and doesn’t care what we say. Iran’ll be next and then the rest, and we’ll all be happy in our polluted nest. Onward Christian soldiers! Save the heathens! Remember the Alamo! Get rich, sleep till noon, and screw ‘em all. We’re Amuricans, and don’t you forget it!
LKBIQ:
“There is a moment of difficulty and danger at which flattery and falsehood can no longer deceive, and simplicity itself can no longer be misled.”
Anonymous
Thursday, February 07, 2008
Believing impossible things
Minneapolis man steals her
purse and cell phone, then
demands to suck her toes.
The latest feeble (but so far successful) attempt to keep Bush from being tried for his war crimes comes from our (apparently totally without principles) Attorney General. He has now said that as the (Bush appointed) Justice Department had said it (waterboarding) was legal at the time they did it, it can not now be investigated as criminal. I guess this is another example of Nixon’s claim that “if the President does it, it can’t be illegal.” What a concept! Let’s see, Bush could have his Justice Department toadies declare that robbing banks at gunpoint is legal, they could then rob all the banks, and they couldn’t be prosecuted because it was legal at the time. Actually, this isn’t far from what they have done, only they’ve done it on such a massive scale it is almost impossible to comprehend. They declared that pre-emptive “wars” were part of the new American foreign policy. They then started a pre-emptive “war” against Iraq. The only people who have benefited from this (war crime) are the massive corporations that have been looting our treasury, and are trying desperately to steal Iraqi oil. What a neat system (if you are an absolutely dishonest, heartless, sadistic, greedy monster with no respect whatsoever for either law or human life). Greed is good. It’s the American way. They want us to believe that all of this is to protect us from terrorists, deliver us from evil, and spread democracy around the globe (preferably by the massive bombing of innocent civilians to reduce any possible casualties to our too-thin and exhausted troops). Dick the Slimy (remember him) has said, Damn right! We’d do it again. Other of these nitwits insist its “been worth it.” I’m still waiting to learn what the “it” is that was worthy of all this murder, arson, plunder, rape, and untold misery for millions. Have we actually gained anything at all from this monumental blunder? If so, kindly explain to me what it is.
Mitt Romney has proven that he really is an astute businessman. Having blown some 15 million of his own money (probably more) on acquiring a few delegates, and having then figured out that realistically he had no chance whatsoever of winning the nomination, he has dropped out (or, rather, suspended his campaign, in hopes that something might happen to McCain). I think he said he might try again next time (I really look forward to another few years of flip-flopping and lying). Of course it’s all that evil Huckabee’s fault. If he had just dropped out as Romney wished, things might have been different. I’m kind of disappointed. I’m so used to chronic lying I think a lying Mormon would have given us some continuity. What I liked the best about Romney’s decision is, that because he loves America so much, he is helping to protect us from “surrendering to terrorists” (by not running for President). What a noble sentiment. We Democrats just can’t wait to wave the white flag and keep us from further war crimes and the senseless slaughter of more innocents. Oh, well, we can’t have everything. And think of what we have gained; a warmongering imperialistic militaristic old guy whose motto seems to be shoot first and ask questions later. As a very substantial majority of Americans are opposed to this “war” and want out, and as McCain is in it for the next 100 years (in addition to the other wars he assures us will happen), he should go far in the election to come. As many Brafia absolutely can’t stand him, I think their strategy is to humor him as a sacrificial animal, wait until the Democratic President finds out it is totally impossible to clean up after Bush in only four years, then criticize him or her for their failure, and attempt to regain the White House (this worked pretty well with Carter). But don’t sell McCain short. As the American public voted twice for Bush (sort of, anyway), there’s no telling what they might do by election day (we might even be in another war by then). Of course we could have had Giuliani, another astute Brafia candidate who blew about 50 millions (I think) of other people’s money and managed to get one (1) delegate. Heck of job, Rudy!
I despise meetings. I attend our local Democratic meetings merely to add bulk (and to eat war wonton soup). As Democrats here are few every body counts. I swear that every meeting I have ever attended is basically the same as the first meeting I attended as a cub scout. They always last from two to four times as long as necessary. The same people usually have to speak, whether they have anything to say or not, people rarely stay on the point, and usually they don’t really know much about what they blather on about. Thank god we don’t have to deal with pipe smokers anymore. You know, those guys who had to stop and clean their pipes while reviewing for themselves whatever stupid remarks they were going to make. We used to waste a lot of time waiting for these guys to clean, fill, and light those smelly things. See, I guess “progress” really is being made.
LKBIQ:
“There’s no use trying,” she said: “one can’t believe impossible things..”
“I daresay you haven’t had much practice,” said the Queen. “When I was your age, I always did it for half-an hour a day. Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”
Lewis Carroll
purse and cell phone, then
demands to suck her toes.
The latest feeble (but so far successful) attempt to keep Bush from being tried for his war crimes comes from our (apparently totally without principles) Attorney General. He has now said that as the (Bush appointed) Justice Department had said it (waterboarding) was legal at the time they did it, it can not now be investigated as criminal. I guess this is another example of Nixon’s claim that “if the President does it, it can’t be illegal.” What a concept! Let’s see, Bush could have his Justice Department toadies declare that robbing banks at gunpoint is legal, they could then rob all the banks, and they couldn’t be prosecuted because it was legal at the time. Actually, this isn’t far from what they have done, only they’ve done it on such a massive scale it is almost impossible to comprehend. They declared that pre-emptive “wars” were part of the new American foreign policy. They then started a pre-emptive “war” against Iraq. The only people who have benefited from this (war crime) are the massive corporations that have been looting our treasury, and are trying desperately to steal Iraqi oil. What a neat system (if you are an absolutely dishonest, heartless, sadistic, greedy monster with no respect whatsoever for either law or human life). Greed is good. It’s the American way. They want us to believe that all of this is to protect us from terrorists, deliver us from evil, and spread democracy around the globe (preferably by the massive bombing of innocent civilians to reduce any possible casualties to our too-thin and exhausted troops). Dick the Slimy (remember him) has said, Damn right! We’d do it again. Other of these nitwits insist its “been worth it.” I’m still waiting to learn what the “it” is that was worthy of all this murder, arson, plunder, rape, and untold misery for millions. Have we actually gained anything at all from this monumental blunder? If so, kindly explain to me what it is.
Mitt Romney has proven that he really is an astute businessman. Having blown some 15 million of his own money (probably more) on acquiring a few delegates, and having then figured out that realistically he had no chance whatsoever of winning the nomination, he has dropped out (or, rather, suspended his campaign, in hopes that something might happen to McCain). I think he said he might try again next time (I really look forward to another few years of flip-flopping and lying). Of course it’s all that evil Huckabee’s fault. If he had just dropped out as Romney wished, things might have been different. I’m kind of disappointed. I’m so used to chronic lying I think a lying Mormon would have given us some continuity. What I liked the best about Romney’s decision is, that because he loves America so much, he is helping to protect us from “surrendering to terrorists” (by not running for President). What a noble sentiment. We Democrats just can’t wait to wave the white flag and keep us from further war crimes and the senseless slaughter of more innocents. Oh, well, we can’t have everything. And think of what we have gained; a warmongering imperialistic militaristic old guy whose motto seems to be shoot first and ask questions later. As a very substantial majority of Americans are opposed to this “war” and want out, and as McCain is in it for the next 100 years (in addition to the other wars he assures us will happen), he should go far in the election to come. As many Brafia absolutely can’t stand him, I think their strategy is to humor him as a sacrificial animal, wait until the Democratic President finds out it is totally impossible to clean up after Bush in only four years, then criticize him or her for their failure, and attempt to regain the White House (this worked pretty well with Carter). But don’t sell McCain short. As the American public voted twice for Bush (sort of, anyway), there’s no telling what they might do by election day (we might even be in another war by then). Of course we could have had Giuliani, another astute Brafia candidate who blew about 50 millions (I think) of other people’s money and managed to get one (1) delegate. Heck of job, Rudy!
I despise meetings. I attend our local Democratic meetings merely to add bulk (and to eat war wonton soup). As Democrats here are few every body counts. I swear that every meeting I have ever attended is basically the same as the first meeting I attended as a cub scout. They always last from two to four times as long as necessary. The same people usually have to speak, whether they have anything to say or not, people rarely stay on the point, and usually they don’t really know much about what they blather on about. Thank god we don’t have to deal with pipe smokers anymore. You know, those guys who had to stop and clean their pipes while reviewing for themselves whatever stupid remarks they were going to make. We used to waste a lot of time waiting for these guys to clean, fill, and light those smelly things. See, I guess “progress” really is being made.
LKBIQ:
“There’s no use trying,” she said: “one can’t believe impossible things..”
“I daresay you haven’t had much practice,” said the Queen. “When I was your age, I always did it for half-an hour a day. Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”
Lewis Carroll
Wednesday, February 06, 2008
We're the Crazies
We’re the Crazies
Robber snatches money from till,
patron stops him with well-placed
whack to head with six-pack of bottles.
I have believed from even before he was elected that our Disuniter-in-Chief was borderline retarded. I also think he may well be crazy, or at the very least, sadistic.
But recently I have concluded that we (the American public) are the crazies. We must be to put up with him and his Brafia all this time. Consider some of the sordid facts that we already know: he lied to get us entangled in an illegal pre-emptive “war,” against a nation that was no threat to us. He has ordered the killing of hundreds of thousands of innocent people, many of them women and children. He has hidden prisoners from the Red Cross and “rendered” them into secret prisons around the world. He has violated our Constitution that he pledged to uphold repeatedly. He has placed himself above the law through multiple signing statements and refusal to obey them. He has illegally spied on us and insists he will continue. Our elected Democratic Congress refuses to impeach either him or his criminal Vice-President. He has continued to insist that we do not torture. The Director of the CIA has now admitted that we did waterboard at least three terrorists (and probably falsely claims we don’t do it anymore). Waterboarding is torture. It has to be authorized at the highest levels. Bush must have authorized it. It is a well-known and long-established war crime. Our Attorney General says if it happened to him it would be torture, but refuses to say it is legally torture. Bush claims we don’t torture (we just waterboard) because what we did was legal. Everyone knows it is not legal, that it is torture, that he is a war criminal several times over, that he has violated both our laws and international laws, he shows no remorse or any indication that he will stop. And what do we do? NOTHING! If that doesn’t indicate we are crazy, what does?
Oh, yes, the caucus. Last night here in little old Boundary Country 145 people turned out on a miserable snowy cold night to caucus for the Democrats. That is almost three times as many people as turned out the last time we did this. We have 3 delegates to our state convention. Obama won 2 and Clinton 1. Obama had more than 70% of the vote. In Idaho generally Obama won by 81%. What does this indicate? That people in Idaho, the most red state of all, as well a most lily-white state, presumptive home of the Aryan Nations, overwhelmingly voted for an African-American to be President. I am sure that many of these voters are enamored of Obama who is, admittedly charismatic and inspiring. But I suspect that lurking under all of this is the simple fact that there are damn few people in Idaho who would ever vote for Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton, the very name strikes terror into the hearts of tough-minded Idahoans everywhere. We have people who refuse to commit to running for office because they think she will be the candidate and every redneck in the state will come down off the mountains and vote against her, taking them with her into oblivion. I don’t believe this but people here believe it passionately. Somehow I doubt very much that Hillary Clinton worries a lot about the state of Idaho. But we sure worry a lot about her. It was great that Obama came to Boise and inspired us. But when the general election comes around, no matter who the Democratic candidate is, he or she will almost certainly lose to whatever mangy black-dog Brafia clown they decide to run. Any friend of Bill Sali’s is a friend of ours.
Can Clinton’s campaign be so hard up for money she had to personally loan it 5 million? Something fishy there. Obama is said to have raised 4.2 million just since last night. The Brafia is in a fine mess. Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch (of criminals). Limbaugh, Coulter, and the rest of the Brafia cheerleaders are “fit to be tied” (interesting, I can’t find this in my Dictionary of Idioms) but it is expressive.
LKBIQ:
“The time to hear bird music is between four and six in the morning. Seven o’clock is not too late, but by eight the fine rapture is over, due, I suspect, to the contentment of the inner man that comes with breakfast; a poet should always be hungry or have a lost love.”
Donald C. Peattie
Robber snatches money from till,
patron stops him with well-placed
whack to head with six-pack of bottles.
I have believed from even before he was elected that our Disuniter-in-Chief was borderline retarded. I also think he may well be crazy, or at the very least, sadistic.
But recently I have concluded that we (the American public) are the crazies. We must be to put up with him and his Brafia all this time. Consider some of the sordid facts that we already know: he lied to get us entangled in an illegal pre-emptive “war,” against a nation that was no threat to us. He has ordered the killing of hundreds of thousands of innocent people, many of them women and children. He has hidden prisoners from the Red Cross and “rendered” them into secret prisons around the world. He has violated our Constitution that he pledged to uphold repeatedly. He has placed himself above the law through multiple signing statements and refusal to obey them. He has illegally spied on us and insists he will continue. Our elected Democratic Congress refuses to impeach either him or his criminal Vice-President. He has continued to insist that we do not torture. The Director of the CIA has now admitted that we did waterboard at least three terrorists (and probably falsely claims we don’t do it anymore). Waterboarding is torture. It has to be authorized at the highest levels. Bush must have authorized it. It is a well-known and long-established war crime. Our Attorney General says if it happened to him it would be torture, but refuses to say it is legally torture. Bush claims we don’t torture (we just waterboard) because what we did was legal. Everyone knows it is not legal, that it is torture, that he is a war criminal several times over, that he has violated both our laws and international laws, he shows no remorse or any indication that he will stop. And what do we do? NOTHING! If that doesn’t indicate we are crazy, what does?
Oh, yes, the caucus. Last night here in little old Boundary Country 145 people turned out on a miserable snowy cold night to caucus for the Democrats. That is almost three times as many people as turned out the last time we did this. We have 3 delegates to our state convention. Obama won 2 and Clinton 1. Obama had more than 70% of the vote. In Idaho generally Obama won by 81%. What does this indicate? That people in Idaho, the most red state of all, as well a most lily-white state, presumptive home of the Aryan Nations, overwhelmingly voted for an African-American to be President. I am sure that many of these voters are enamored of Obama who is, admittedly charismatic and inspiring. But I suspect that lurking under all of this is the simple fact that there are damn few people in Idaho who would ever vote for Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton, the very name strikes terror into the hearts of tough-minded Idahoans everywhere. We have people who refuse to commit to running for office because they think she will be the candidate and every redneck in the state will come down off the mountains and vote against her, taking them with her into oblivion. I don’t believe this but people here believe it passionately. Somehow I doubt very much that Hillary Clinton worries a lot about the state of Idaho. But we sure worry a lot about her. It was great that Obama came to Boise and inspired us. But when the general election comes around, no matter who the Democratic candidate is, he or she will almost certainly lose to whatever mangy black-dog Brafia clown they decide to run. Any friend of Bill Sali’s is a friend of ours.
Can Clinton’s campaign be so hard up for money she had to personally loan it 5 million? Something fishy there. Obama is said to have raised 4.2 million just since last night. The Brafia is in a fine mess. Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch (of criminals). Limbaugh, Coulter, and the rest of the Brafia cheerleaders are “fit to be tied” (interesting, I can’t find this in my Dictionary of Idioms) but it is expressive.
LKBIQ:
“The time to hear bird music is between four and six in the morning. Seven o’clock is not too late, but by eight the fine rapture is over, due, I suspect, to the contentment of the inner man that comes with breakfast; a poet should always be hungry or have a lost love.”
Donald C. Peattie
Monday, February 04, 2008
Nobody likes him?
I have heard several times now, or read several times, that no one likes Mitt Romney. Why? Maybe it has to do with the fact that he is tall and handsome and looks Presidential. He is well-dressed and immaculately groomed and has nice hair. He speaks well and is filthy rich. The problem here is, he is a "goody, goody, two shoes." I suspect this is reason enough for people not to like him. But then, there is also his lying, about lots of things, like hunting and Martin Luther King. And he wants to double Guantanamo. He thinks Bush has done a fine job. He insists we stay in Iraq until we "win." He has flip-flopped on more issues than almost anyone in history. He is an opportunist and always looks at which way the winds are blowing. I don't know if he wears the Mormon underwear or not, or if he thinks it is sacred, he doesn't really talk about his Mormon faith much (I suspect for good reason). He also has a speech problem so that under even light stress he tends to say Reagan, Reagan, Reagan, Reagan, Reagan. However, I think I heard the real reason today why no one likes him. He eats fried chicken with a knife and fork! (aaagh). At least I think that's what I heard that supposedly was coming from Mike Huckabee. Now I would think that if you were a candidate for President and no one liked you that might be a problem. On the other hand, did anyone like Nixon? I think Romney will be finished soon. Being an astute businessman, he probably won't want to invest good money after bad.
I know someone who thinks it is terrible that Muslim women have to wear burkas. It is the "have to" that has caused me to think about this. I don't know much about the Koran but I do know that it enjoins both men and women to dress modestly and cover themselves, especially their genitals. This is obviously a cultural practice that has a very long history. In some Muslim countries some women have managed to give up wearing burkas, in Iran and Egypt, for example. But it is true that the Taliban insist women must continue to wear burkas and are severely punished if they don't. But how is this much different from what happens and has happened in other countries. For example, here in the U.S. women only wore dresses for a very long time. When some switched to slacks there was a bit of "to-do" about it, but eventually it changed. In fact, fashions in both male and female attire seem to be constantly evolving, in some places faster than others. But traditions are resistant to change and it always takes time and creates a bit of a problem. It must be misleading at best to assume that fashions in dress are dictated by males and that women are forced to wear what males tell them to (aside, perhaps, from the current Taliban). In the New Guinea Highlands women always wore little string aprons and went bare-breasted. When, after European contact, they began wearing mother hubbards and such I don't think many men objected. How much of a problem was it when women stopped wearing hoop skirts or girdles. I don't think the question of the burka is the basic problem that bothers western-Europeans. It is, I think, more the infringement of individual liberties and freedom that is involved, just as with the idea that women should not drive, or be educated, or vote, or whatever. The burka and headscarves are trivial compared to this greater infringement on human rights. American women were not forced to wear bikinis. But they are forced to cover their breasts, even the slightest glimpse of a nipple seems to throw some people into a frenzy of moralizing. American culture is weird, in fact, a culture of the absurd if you examine it closely.
I have been looking forward to super tuesday, hoping the selection would be finally over. Now I am told that it cannot possibly settle the nomination as neither Clinton or Obama can possibly get enough delegates to wrap it up. Damn! We have to go on with this ridiculous busines for months more. There ought to be a law, no politics until a month or two (at most) before the election. But like I say, a culture of the absurd. I like Lewis Black's suggestion: the winner of American Idol is blindfolded, throws a dart at a map of the U.S. A monkey is flown to that location and parachuted out. He lands and the first person to hold his hand is the President. Not much more absurd that our present system, and a whole lot cheaper.
Have you heard about Bush's latest budget? Surprise! He wants to increase military spending and cut domestic programs. He and his Brafia friends are sick people and require medical attention, preferrably psychiatric. But nothing that a good impeachment wouldn't help.
LKBIQ:
"Who knows when some slight shock, disturbing the delicate balance between social order and thirsty aspiration, shall send the skyscrapers in our cities toppling?"
Richard Wright
I know someone who thinks it is terrible that Muslim women have to wear burkas. It is the "have to" that has caused me to think about this. I don't know much about the Koran but I do know that it enjoins both men and women to dress modestly and cover themselves, especially their genitals. This is obviously a cultural practice that has a very long history. In some Muslim countries some women have managed to give up wearing burkas, in Iran and Egypt, for example. But it is true that the Taliban insist women must continue to wear burkas and are severely punished if they don't. But how is this much different from what happens and has happened in other countries. For example, here in the U.S. women only wore dresses for a very long time. When some switched to slacks there was a bit of "to-do" about it, but eventually it changed. In fact, fashions in both male and female attire seem to be constantly evolving, in some places faster than others. But traditions are resistant to change and it always takes time and creates a bit of a problem. It must be misleading at best to assume that fashions in dress are dictated by males and that women are forced to wear what males tell them to (aside, perhaps, from the current Taliban). In the New Guinea Highlands women always wore little string aprons and went bare-breasted. When, after European contact, they began wearing mother hubbards and such I don't think many men objected. How much of a problem was it when women stopped wearing hoop skirts or girdles. I don't think the question of the burka is the basic problem that bothers western-Europeans. It is, I think, more the infringement of individual liberties and freedom that is involved, just as with the idea that women should not drive, or be educated, or vote, or whatever. The burka and headscarves are trivial compared to this greater infringement on human rights. American women were not forced to wear bikinis. But they are forced to cover their breasts, even the slightest glimpse of a nipple seems to throw some people into a frenzy of moralizing. American culture is weird, in fact, a culture of the absurd if you examine it closely.
I have been looking forward to super tuesday, hoping the selection would be finally over. Now I am told that it cannot possibly settle the nomination as neither Clinton or Obama can possibly get enough delegates to wrap it up. Damn! We have to go on with this ridiculous busines for months more. There ought to be a law, no politics until a month or two (at most) before the election. But like I say, a culture of the absurd. I like Lewis Black's suggestion: the winner of American Idol is blindfolded, throws a dart at a map of the U.S. A monkey is flown to that location and parachuted out. He lands and the first person to hold his hand is the President. Not much more absurd that our present system, and a whole lot cheaper.
Have you heard about Bush's latest budget? Surprise! He wants to increase military spending and cut domestic programs. He and his Brafia friends are sick people and require medical attention, preferrably psychiatric. But nothing that a good impeachment wouldn't help.
LKBIQ:
"Who knows when some slight shock, disturbing the delicate balance between social order and thirsty aspiration, shall send the skyscrapers in our cities toppling?"
Richard Wright
Saturday, February 02, 2008
Render unto culture
Render unto culture that which is cultural? Are there elements of human behavior that simply have no acceptable explanation other than we conclude they are simply "cultural?" I have puzzled over this for a long time. For example, among the Tuareg, a group of nomadic camel-owning people that inhabited the central and western Sahara, all adult males wore veils. Women, children, and slaves did not wear veils (even though this was ostensibly a Muslim society). The veils were a thin piece of cloth, woven and dyed in the Sudan, that was wound around the neck and face in such a way as to hood he eyes and completely cover the nose and mouth. Men wore these veils both during the day and at night. When eating a man would put his hand under the veil carefully covering his mouth. He would never be seen without his veil, even by his closest friends and allies. No other people are known to have practiced this custom. There appears to be to explanation for it. The people thought to be the ancestors of the Tuareg did not practice it. As no others wore veils it apparently was not for the practical reason of keeping sand out of the eyes and mouth. Apparently the Tuareg themselves had no explanation for it. So in the absence of any other explanation we conclude it was simply an aspect of their culture. I have never been very happy with this explanation, and yet, I know of no other, and now way to ever discover an explanation. Obviously one thinks that somewhere in the distant past someone, probably a chief or leader of some sort decided they should do this and they have followed suit ever after.
Similary, in the Eastern Highlands of New Guinea, during a girl's puberty ceremony, at one point a man inevitably pulls on a finger of her right hand attempting to make it crack. I witnessed many of these ceremonies and this is always done. If you ask them why they do it they respond simply, "fesin b'long tumbuna" (the ancestors did it). But they do offer an explanation of sorts: they say it helps the girls grow faster. This is not really very helpful so, again, we conclude it is merely cultural.
This is what has been called an example of "radical cultral relativism," whose chief proponent has been Richard Schweder: "There are cases where canons of rationality, validity, truth, and efficiency are simply beside the point -- irrelevant!...there's something more to thinking than reason and evidence--culture, the arbitrary, the symbolic, the expressive, the semiotic--that many of our ideas and practices are beyond logic and experience." (quoted in Langness, The Study of Culture, 2005:285)
This point of view certainly raises questions about our attempts to explain everything historically, functionally, and in terms of simple cause and effect. It would seem to render our attempts to understand everything potentially futile, other than just surrendering to "fesin b'long tumbuna."
Barack Obama had a massive turnout in Boise this morning. As many as 15,000 estimated in the stadium and still more outside without seating. This, I think, is a good sign, but does Obama have enough time between now and tuesday to catch Hillary? Let us hope so. There certainly is an Obama bandwagon with MoveOn, the LA Times, a couple of huge unions, some of the Kennedys, Oprah, and many, many more joining in just the past few weeks and days. Go Obama! But will he be able to live up to his expectations that seem to be growing by leaps, if not bounds? What can we do but hope? I, like apparently millions of others, want desperately to believe.
LKBIQ:
"It is a very serious thing for a political creed or a political party when they are compelled in spite of themselves to hail national misfortunes as a means of advancing their cause."
Sir Winston Churchill
Similary, in the Eastern Highlands of New Guinea, during a girl's puberty ceremony, at one point a man inevitably pulls on a finger of her right hand attempting to make it crack. I witnessed many of these ceremonies and this is always done. If you ask them why they do it they respond simply, "fesin b'long tumbuna" (the ancestors did it). But they do offer an explanation of sorts: they say it helps the girls grow faster. This is not really very helpful so, again, we conclude it is merely cultural.
This is what has been called an example of "radical cultral relativism," whose chief proponent has been Richard Schweder: "There are cases where canons of rationality, validity, truth, and efficiency are simply beside the point -- irrelevant!...there's something more to thinking than reason and evidence--culture, the arbitrary, the symbolic, the expressive, the semiotic--that many of our ideas and practices are beyond logic and experience." (quoted in Langness, The Study of Culture, 2005:285)
This point of view certainly raises questions about our attempts to explain everything historically, functionally, and in terms of simple cause and effect. It would seem to render our attempts to understand everything potentially futile, other than just surrendering to "fesin b'long tumbuna."
Barack Obama had a massive turnout in Boise this morning. As many as 15,000 estimated in the stadium and still more outside without seating. This, I think, is a good sign, but does Obama have enough time between now and tuesday to catch Hillary? Let us hope so. There certainly is an Obama bandwagon with MoveOn, the LA Times, a couple of huge unions, some of the Kennedys, Oprah, and many, many more joining in just the past few weeks and days. Go Obama! But will he be able to live up to his expectations that seem to be growing by leaps, if not bounds? What can we do but hope? I, like apparently millions of others, want desperately to believe.
LKBIQ:
"It is a very serious thing for a political creed or a political party when they are compelled in spite of themselves to hail national misfortunes as a means of advancing their cause."
Sir Winston Churchill
Friday, February 01, 2008
Dare I even ask?
A report out today says that our National Guard is not prepared for an attack on us. It doesn’t specify what kind of attack or by whom, but seems to think it might be nuclear or biological, or chemical, or whatever. I wonder if they mean a huge all-out attack by another country trying to invade the U.S., or if they mean just some run-of-the-mill attack by a handful of terrorists with a suitcase bomb, or what. If they are worried about the former, might I ask just what country do they think is strong enough to actually launch such an attack, especially when we are sitting on enough nuclear bombs to probably bring down the entire universe? And if they mean the latter, how prepared are we supposed to be? If it is a suitcase bomb, or chemicals, or biologicals, will it require the full force of all out National Guardsmen plus our entire military? Or just part of our military?
But what I really want to know is, no matter what kind of attack it may be, why in the world are we not prepared? It’s not as if there haven’t been enough funds for the past few years. Need I remind you that a full 50% or more of our national budget goes for defense? That is one hell of a lot of money. So where does it go if not into preparation for unknown attacks of any kind? We have a national defense budget that exceeds all the rest of the world’s military budgets, and has for some time. That’s not enough for us to be prepared? What have we done, pray tell, with all those billions upon billions, upon billions? Where did they go? Apparently not into preparation.
Not only are we being told that we are not prepared to defend ourselves in spite of this obscene budget, we are also being told that we don’t have enough military. We need more. Like 100,000 more, at least. We have a defense budge that is greater than all the rest of the world combined and we need more? What kind of kool-aid are they serving at the Pentagon and in Washington D.C.? And what kind are we drinking that we haven’t laughed these clowns out of existence? By any standard of common sense or reality this defense business is utterly absurd.
Of course there has been the illegal, unconstitutional, immoral, and unnecessary “war” in Iraq in which we are dropping bombs on civilians as if they are gum drops. And we are firing so many rounds of ammunition we have to import some from Israel (they seem to have plenty, that we no doubt paid for in the first place). We apparently get one hit for every million rounds fired. Then there is our “empire.” We have bases in some 70 different countries around the globe. Why? Why do we need these bases all over the place? All these countries are incapable of defending themselves (why should they when we are doing it for them, except we aren’t really doing anything much there anyway)? Like Germany and South Korea need lots of American troops?
Realistically, does anyone believe we are going to be the victim of a massive attack by another country? An attack in which we will need thousands of tanks and howitzers, and battleships and 5000 pound bombs, nuclear bombs, and all of the other military hardware we seem to build, declare obsolete, build some more, declare obsolete, and so on and on into eternity? The absolutely worst case scenario is that some few terrorists would manage to infiltrate our country and explode a big bomb. Granted this would be tragic, does it really require a defense budget larger than all the rest of the world? Of course not. As I have said before several times, our “defense” budget has very little to do with defense. It has everything to do with putting more and more taxpayer money into the pockets of massive corporations that manufacture all this stuff that we don’t really need. The military/industrial/political complex that we have allowed to take over are ruining our country. They simply can’t get enough. Their massive budgets increase year after year to virtually no purpose whatsoever. So in the meantime we go without health care, schools, infrastructure, accept poverty by millions of our people, and so on. We blow these things up around the world so we can rebuild them for the people that had them in the first place. And in the process we spend billions on research to find ways to be even more destructive of life and property. We are engaged in the most massive fit of madness ever to infect the human species. No amount of misery and bloodshed are enough, we have to constantly strive for more ways to inflict even more on our fellow creatures. Our entire history is written in blood and gore. We are a disgrace to life on the planet earth.
Praise the lord and pass the ammunition.
LKBIQ:
“Do you not know, my son, with what little understanding the world is ruled?”
Julius III
But what I really want to know is, no matter what kind of attack it may be, why in the world are we not prepared? It’s not as if there haven’t been enough funds for the past few years. Need I remind you that a full 50% or more of our national budget goes for defense? That is one hell of a lot of money. So where does it go if not into preparation for unknown attacks of any kind? We have a national defense budget that exceeds all the rest of the world’s military budgets, and has for some time. That’s not enough for us to be prepared? What have we done, pray tell, with all those billions upon billions, upon billions? Where did they go? Apparently not into preparation.
Not only are we being told that we are not prepared to defend ourselves in spite of this obscene budget, we are also being told that we don’t have enough military. We need more. Like 100,000 more, at least. We have a defense budge that is greater than all the rest of the world combined and we need more? What kind of kool-aid are they serving at the Pentagon and in Washington D.C.? And what kind are we drinking that we haven’t laughed these clowns out of existence? By any standard of common sense or reality this defense business is utterly absurd.
Of course there has been the illegal, unconstitutional, immoral, and unnecessary “war” in Iraq in which we are dropping bombs on civilians as if they are gum drops. And we are firing so many rounds of ammunition we have to import some from Israel (they seem to have plenty, that we no doubt paid for in the first place). We apparently get one hit for every million rounds fired. Then there is our “empire.” We have bases in some 70 different countries around the globe. Why? Why do we need these bases all over the place? All these countries are incapable of defending themselves (why should they when we are doing it for them, except we aren’t really doing anything much there anyway)? Like Germany and South Korea need lots of American troops?
Realistically, does anyone believe we are going to be the victim of a massive attack by another country? An attack in which we will need thousands of tanks and howitzers, and battleships and 5000 pound bombs, nuclear bombs, and all of the other military hardware we seem to build, declare obsolete, build some more, declare obsolete, and so on and on into eternity? The absolutely worst case scenario is that some few terrorists would manage to infiltrate our country and explode a big bomb. Granted this would be tragic, does it really require a defense budget larger than all the rest of the world? Of course not. As I have said before several times, our “defense” budget has very little to do with defense. It has everything to do with putting more and more taxpayer money into the pockets of massive corporations that manufacture all this stuff that we don’t really need. The military/industrial/political complex that we have allowed to take over are ruining our country. They simply can’t get enough. Their massive budgets increase year after year to virtually no purpose whatsoever. So in the meantime we go without health care, schools, infrastructure, accept poverty by millions of our people, and so on. We blow these things up around the world so we can rebuild them for the people that had them in the first place. And in the process we spend billions on research to find ways to be even more destructive of life and property. We are engaged in the most massive fit of madness ever to infect the human species. No amount of misery and bloodshed are enough, we have to constantly strive for more ways to inflict even more on our fellow creatures. Our entire history is written in blood and gore. We are a disgrace to life on the planet earth.
Praise the lord and pass the ammunition.
LKBIQ:
“Do you not know, my son, with what little understanding the world is ruled?”
Julius III
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Was I hallucinating?
I think I must have been hallucinating. I thought I saw two intelligent, well-informed candidates actually debate for a full 90 minutes in detail, the ISSUES: Iraq, health care, immigration, the economy, and taxes. Incredible. There was no name-calling, no petty squabbling over nonsensical or trivial matters, no evading the problems, no flowery BS. It was a remarkable performance by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. A truly refreshing change from what has gone on previusly as "debates." It makes the recent Brafia debates look like a bunch of kindergartners. It was all the more interesting because the differences between the two candidates on these issues are not really very great. It would be impossible to say who "won." There is a difference between the two health plans, mainly over the issue of whether or not they should be mandatory. Obama says not, Hillary says yes. Both plans would still have problems with people who did not want or would not join a plan. I don't think this is a really serious difference. Then, Clinton doesn't want illegals to have driver's licenses whereas Obama does. Obama argues there is a question of public safety involved. Clinton says illegals shouldn't be rewarded with priviledges. Again, I don't think this is a big difference or problem. On the big picture of immigration they seem to be pretty much in agreement. with one very important exception. This was pointed out by the very clever Rachel Maddow and I'm not sure many were fully aware of it. Obama, among other things, said blacks should not scapegoat illegals as they were not the cause of black unemployment (in the overall scheme of things). Clinton, however, implied just the opposite, by making a subtle (or not so subtle) hint that they might be responsible, thus potentially shoring up part of the black vote.
When asked how they would pay for their health care plans they both said they would raise taxes on the wealthy by doing away with Bush's obscene tax relief for the wealthy, and also by streamlining the system with better technology and organization. As near as I can tell from this debate the only real difference between Obama and Clinton has to do with her unfortunate vote for going to "war" with Iraq, a vote she continues to defend because of the circumstances of the time. She is not being completely honest about this, I think, as she apparently did not even read the document involved and there were thousands of people who knew better that she must have been aware of. Even though there seems little difference in their respective positions about Iraq at the moment, Clinton has a continuing problem here that she will never really be able to bury. I'm not sure that I think this is as important as it has been made out to be. The accuse her of making the vote for political purposes. But she is a politician and politicians often make strange votes for political reasons. Clearly it was a mistake in retrospect, but does it really mean she has terrible judgment all the time? How strongly this should be held against her I'm not sure. The experience vs inexperience issue in general seems to have lost its salience. Both seem to be ready to take over the Presidency quickly. So, is five days enough time for Obama to overcome Clinton's lead? Or is this taking place just too fast for people to get to know Obama better? Perhaps we should all just flip a coin.
Except for the one thing that truly bothers me about Clinton. She is DLC, Brafia- lite. And of course no matter what the candidates say they want to do or will do, there is no guarantee they will actually do that if and when they become President. More importantly, her best line of the night was "It took a Clinton to clean up after the first Bush, maybe it will take a Clinton to clean up after this Bush." This bothers me because in a very real sense Bill Clinton did not entirely clean up after the first Bush administration. Remember Iran-Contra. There is no doubt that the elder Bush was involved up to his eyeballs in illegal actions but Bill Clinton just let it drop. Will Hillary Clinton do anything about the Bush/Cheney war crimes? Will anyone, for that matter?
And how long do we have to put up with this disgusting charade about waterboarding? Now Mukasey says if it was done to him it would be torture. But at the same time he refuses to say if it is (legally) torture. It has been defined as torture since the Inquisition. People have been prosecuted for it. Virtually everyone in the world knows it is torture. People that have experienced it say it is torture. Even John McCain says it's torture. So what's the problem? Mukasey says the CIA doesn't do it anymore. I guess that means it was okay that they did it before? Obviously he won't say it's torture because if he did Bush and Cheney would be clearly guilty of a war crime (actually, they are guilty of so many I don't know why this one would by itself make much difference). But that's the way it stands. The Brafia will do anything to protect their war criminals. Will Hillary Clinton do the same? Will Obama? The question that apparently dare not show its face.
I have just finished Jeffrey Toobin's book on the Supreme Court, The Nine. Absolutely fascinating. Well-written, easy to read, informative, and a pleasure. It tells a great deal about the personalities of the Judges, goes into detail about the major cases, who handled them and why, and in general gives us a lucid picture of an institution that is otherwise pretty secretive. It also gives a glimpse of what went on behind the scenes in some of the appointments. Rather than a sensationalized expose or highly charged partisan political hit, it is a serious and fair assessment of the players and their important decisions, how they came up and how they were decided. Highly recommended.
Another foot of snow! We're on track to have one of the heaviest snow seasons on record. There must be a good three feet of it on the ground already and there is no let-up in sight. One of the cats managed to catch a Flicker and drag it into the house while still alive. It managed to wedge itself behind the water heater where it could not be retrieved and could not escape. Our neighbor came to our rescue and finally managed to catch and release it. We retain lots of feathers. I hope it won't freeze. Life in the country.
LKBIQ:
Radiant moonlight
reflects on virginal snow
and sacred silence
Morialekafa
When asked how they would pay for their health care plans they both said they would raise taxes on the wealthy by doing away with Bush's obscene tax relief for the wealthy, and also by streamlining the system with better technology and organization. As near as I can tell from this debate the only real difference between Obama and Clinton has to do with her unfortunate vote for going to "war" with Iraq, a vote she continues to defend because of the circumstances of the time. She is not being completely honest about this, I think, as she apparently did not even read the document involved and there were thousands of people who knew better that she must have been aware of. Even though there seems little difference in their respective positions about Iraq at the moment, Clinton has a continuing problem here that she will never really be able to bury. I'm not sure that I think this is as important as it has been made out to be. The accuse her of making the vote for political purposes. But she is a politician and politicians often make strange votes for political reasons. Clearly it was a mistake in retrospect, but does it really mean she has terrible judgment all the time? How strongly this should be held against her I'm not sure. The experience vs inexperience issue in general seems to have lost its salience. Both seem to be ready to take over the Presidency quickly. So, is five days enough time for Obama to overcome Clinton's lead? Or is this taking place just too fast for people to get to know Obama better? Perhaps we should all just flip a coin.
Except for the one thing that truly bothers me about Clinton. She is DLC, Brafia- lite. And of course no matter what the candidates say they want to do or will do, there is no guarantee they will actually do that if and when they become President. More importantly, her best line of the night was "It took a Clinton to clean up after the first Bush, maybe it will take a Clinton to clean up after this Bush." This bothers me because in a very real sense Bill Clinton did not entirely clean up after the first Bush administration. Remember Iran-Contra. There is no doubt that the elder Bush was involved up to his eyeballs in illegal actions but Bill Clinton just let it drop. Will Hillary Clinton do anything about the Bush/Cheney war crimes? Will anyone, for that matter?
And how long do we have to put up with this disgusting charade about waterboarding? Now Mukasey says if it was done to him it would be torture. But at the same time he refuses to say if it is (legally) torture. It has been defined as torture since the Inquisition. People have been prosecuted for it. Virtually everyone in the world knows it is torture. People that have experienced it say it is torture. Even John McCain says it's torture. So what's the problem? Mukasey says the CIA doesn't do it anymore. I guess that means it was okay that they did it before? Obviously he won't say it's torture because if he did Bush and Cheney would be clearly guilty of a war crime (actually, they are guilty of so many I don't know why this one would by itself make much difference). But that's the way it stands. The Brafia will do anything to protect their war criminals. Will Hillary Clinton do the same? Will Obama? The question that apparently dare not show its face.
I have just finished Jeffrey Toobin's book on the Supreme Court, The Nine. Absolutely fascinating. Well-written, easy to read, informative, and a pleasure. It tells a great deal about the personalities of the Judges, goes into detail about the major cases, who handled them and why, and in general gives us a lucid picture of an institution that is otherwise pretty secretive. It also gives a glimpse of what went on behind the scenes in some of the appointments. Rather than a sensationalized expose or highly charged partisan political hit, it is a serious and fair assessment of the players and their important decisions, how they came up and how they were decided. Highly recommended.
Another foot of snow! We're on track to have one of the heaviest snow seasons on record. There must be a good three feet of it on the ground already and there is no let-up in sight. One of the cats managed to catch a Flicker and drag it into the house while still alive. It managed to wedge itself behind the water heater where it could not be retrieved and could not escape. Our neighbor came to our rescue and finally managed to catch and release it. We retain lots of feathers. I hope it won't freeze. Life in the country.
LKBIQ:
Radiant moonlight
reflects on virginal snow
and sacred silence
Morialekafa
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
What a crock!
Angry at being left alone
with infant, he throws it
down the stairwell.
I think we should ban the concept of news 24/7, at least until they live up to the claim. What we are doing now is just getting 24 hours of utter nonsense. Today it is all about whether Obama snubbed Hillary or not, complete with photographs (that can be interpreted any way you wish). To me it is perfectly obvious that Hillary is shaking hands with Ted Kennedy while Obama is turned away talking with someone else. Obama says he didn't snub her. Hillary, I think somewhat ingenuously, says she was reaching out her hand. She was reaching out her hand - to Ted Kennedy. Anyway, I am angry to be commenting on this at all as it is just another stupid tempest in a teapot that isn't worth 5 seconds of time (but MSNBC has spent hours on it today). What a crock! As if this isn't bad enough they show another photograph in which Obama and Kennedy are said to be looking at Hillary. Imagine that! Looking at her! My god, what will they do next! Only newspersons could be crass enough to think that either Obama or Kennedy are boorish enough to snub Hillary Clinton. What a crock! This is supposed to be news? I guess to MSNBC it is news, right up there with her cleavage, her cackle, her pantsuits, wrinkles and all. No doubt there will soon be time devoted to what she had for breakfast and whether it was good or bad or had some sinister symbolic meaning. Chris Matthews seems to love wallowing in this kind of utter nonsense. I gather MSNBC isn't really concerned about Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Palestine, torture, immunity, the recession, impeachment, etc., etc., etc. CNN isn't any better and Fox News isn't news. Carrumba! The MSM are hopeless. The Brafia is having another one of their braying sessions tonight. I can't watch it. My delicate constitution can only handle so much BS a month, and this month has already gone far beyond my capacity.
And please, to whom it may concern: Do not try to tell me how the sweet, innocent Israelis, with their billions and billions of military hardware, sitting on stolen land, refusing to give up even an inch, are being put upon by the evil and malicious Palestinians they have forced into Gaza and are trying to slowly starve to death. And don't even try to tell me there are two sides to every story. At this late moment, for all intents and purposes, there's only one side to this story: the slow, systematic, immoral, premeditated destruction of the Palestinians, aided by the United States.
Rumors are already starting about why John Edwards stepped down from the race. Some say it's because of his wife's health. Some say it's simply because he knew he couldn't win. Some suspect he's made a deal with either Obama or Hillary to become Attorney General or some such other position. He hasn't endorsed either Hillary or Obama yet. So who will it be? Personally, I don't see how he could possibly endorse Hillary after attacking her repeatedly about being a corporate whore, but stranger things have happened. My guess is he'll support Obama. One of my more astute friends things people are beginning to have buyer's remorse about Hillary. I think he may be right. I hope so.
Help! We seem to be caught up in never-ending snowstorms. I don't mind the snow in principle, but when it gets like this I say enough already! I'm starting to worry about the roof because it's deep up there. As Sandhill operates mostly by Linda-power I don't worry too much about anything else. By the way, through the magic of local government, we now live on Wistful Way. It's appropriate.
LKBIQ:
"Hell itself abhors dishonor."
Tuareg proverb
with infant, he throws it
down the stairwell.
I think we should ban the concept of news 24/7, at least until they live up to the claim. What we are doing now is just getting 24 hours of utter nonsense. Today it is all about whether Obama snubbed Hillary or not, complete with photographs (that can be interpreted any way you wish). To me it is perfectly obvious that Hillary is shaking hands with Ted Kennedy while Obama is turned away talking with someone else. Obama says he didn't snub her. Hillary, I think somewhat ingenuously, says she was reaching out her hand. She was reaching out her hand - to Ted Kennedy. Anyway, I am angry to be commenting on this at all as it is just another stupid tempest in a teapot that isn't worth 5 seconds of time (but MSNBC has spent hours on it today). What a crock! As if this isn't bad enough they show another photograph in which Obama and Kennedy are said to be looking at Hillary. Imagine that! Looking at her! My god, what will they do next! Only newspersons could be crass enough to think that either Obama or Kennedy are boorish enough to snub Hillary Clinton. What a crock! This is supposed to be news? I guess to MSNBC it is news, right up there with her cleavage, her cackle, her pantsuits, wrinkles and all. No doubt there will soon be time devoted to what she had for breakfast and whether it was good or bad or had some sinister symbolic meaning. Chris Matthews seems to love wallowing in this kind of utter nonsense. I gather MSNBC isn't really concerned about Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Palestine, torture, immunity, the recession, impeachment, etc., etc., etc. CNN isn't any better and Fox News isn't news. Carrumba! The MSM are hopeless. The Brafia is having another one of their braying sessions tonight. I can't watch it. My delicate constitution can only handle so much BS a month, and this month has already gone far beyond my capacity.
And please, to whom it may concern: Do not try to tell me how the sweet, innocent Israelis, with their billions and billions of military hardware, sitting on stolen land, refusing to give up even an inch, are being put upon by the evil and malicious Palestinians they have forced into Gaza and are trying to slowly starve to death. And don't even try to tell me there are two sides to every story. At this late moment, for all intents and purposes, there's only one side to this story: the slow, systematic, immoral, premeditated destruction of the Palestinians, aided by the United States.
Rumors are already starting about why John Edwards stepped down from the race. Some say it's because of his wife's health. Some say it's simply because he knew he couldn't win. Some suspect he's made a deal with either Obama or Hillary to become Attorney General or some such other position. He hasn't endorsed either Hillary or Obama yet. So who will it be? Personally, I don't see how he could possibly endorse Hillary after attacking her repeatedly about being a corporate whore, but stranger things have happened. My guess is he'll support Obama. One of my more astute friends things people are beginning to have buyer's remorse about Hillary. I think he may be right. I hope so.
Help! We seem to be caught up in never-ending snowstorms. I don't mind the snow in principle, but when it gets like this I say enough already! I'm starting to worry about the roof because it's deep up there. As Sandhill operates mostly by Linda-power I don't worry too much about anything else. By the way, through the magic of local government, we now live on Wistful Way. It's appropriate.
LKBIQ:
"Hell itself abhors dishonor."
Tuareg proverb
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
I don't get it
Man hires prostitute,
thinks she might flee,
bites off her ear.
John McCain has won the Florida primary where the lack of independent voters was supposed to be a problem for him. I think he won because Huckabee managed to take votes from Romney which probably made just enough difference. Happily Giuliani has dropped out. It looks like McCain may have the edge now and could presumably end up as the Brafia candidate. But why? I don't get it? A mere 25% or so of the American public support Bush and his immoral "war." McCain wants to continue that unsavory business, for 100 years if necessary. And he's already talking about further wars. He is obviously a warmongering imperialist which presumably is what Americans no longer want. So why would the Brafia want to run him for President in such an environment (assuming that he does, in fact, get the nomination)? It just doesn't make sense. Will they just put him (or Romney, for that matter) up as a sacrificial candidate, knowing they probably can't win anyway? Of course it's far from over and Romney, the Lying Mormon, may actually win. Again, he wouldn't seem like a very wise choice, being such a transparent prevaricator who will change his spots depending upon the location and the prevailing winds. And, of course, he's also a Mormon. He doesn't believe this will matter. He could well be right (but maybe not).
In 1904, in response to an attempted revolt by the Herero in Namibia, the Germans drove them into the Omaheke desert and blocked all access to water. Between 45,000 and 65,000 thousand died painful deaths from starvation and thirst. Historians have described this as an instance of blatant terrorism and shocking brutality. Does this remind you of anything that's happening in the Middle East at the moment? It does me. In response to the Israeli attempt to starve and humiliate them the Palestinians destroyed a wall keeping them out of Egypt so they could get food, water, and other basic necessities. The Herero had no such opportunity. What the Israelis have been doing to the Palestinians is nothing short of slow genocide, with the blessing of the U.S. If anyone cares they don't seem to be able to do much about it. I remind you that Hamas is the legally elected democratic government of the Palestinians, whereas the U.S. and Israel prefers to pretend that Abbas, sitting on the West Bank, is. There can never be an agreement between the Palestinians and Israelis as long as Hamas is kept out of the negotiations. And there is no way on earth a Palestinian state can ever emerge from this imperialist mess. Bush's claim that all will be well by the end of his term just marks him once again as the world's worst idiot. This is so laughable I'm surprised the Middle East hasn't laughed itself to death. Instead they just wait patiently for this pathetic moron to finish his term (what else can they do, given the fact that our Congress won't do the right and honorable thing and impeach him and his evil Rasputin). The idea that a viable Palestinian state could be created in spite of Israeli intransigence (and greed) is a pipe dream that wouldn't be found even in an 18th century opium den. The Israelis will never permit a viable Palestinian state unless it is some modern form of a bantustan. I have believed from the very beginning that George W. Bush is borderline retarded. He has done nothing in these seven miserable years to cause me to change my opinion. Is our President learning? The answer has to be a resounding NO! Please, Big JuJu, make 2009come quickly.
LKBIQ:
"The dogs bark, but the caravan goes on."
North African proverb
thinks she might flee,
bites off her ear.
John McCain has won the Florida primary where the lack of independent voters was supposed to be a problem for him. I think he won because Huckabee managed to take votes from Romney which probably made just enough difference. Happily Giuliani has dropped out. It looks like McCain may have the edge now and could presumably end up as the Brafia candidate. But why? I don't get it? A mere 25% or so of the American public support Bush and his immoral "war." McCain wants to continue that unsavory business, for 100 years if necessary. And he's already talking about further wars. He is obviously a warmongering imperialist which presumably is what Americans no longer want. So why would the Brafia want to run him for President in such an environment (assuming that he does, in fact, get the nomination)? It just doesn't make sense. Will they just put him (or Romney, for that matter) up as a sacrificial candidate, knowing they probably can't win anyway? Of course it's far from over and Romney, the Lying Mormon, may actually win. Again, he wouldn't seem like a very wise choice, being such a transparent prevaricator who will change his spots depending upon the location and the prevailing winds. And, of course, he's also a Mormon. He doesn't believe this will matter. He could well be right (but maybe not).
In 1904, in response to an attempted revolt by the Herero in Namibia, the Germans drove them into the Omaheke desert and blocked all access to water. Between 45,000 and 65,000 thousand died painful deaths from starvation and thirst. Historians have described this as an instance of blatant terrorism and shocking brutality. Does this remind you of anything that's happening in the Middle East at the moment? It does me. In response to the Israeli attempt to starve and humiliate them the Palestinians destroyed a wall keeping them out of Egypt so they could get food, water, and other basic necessities. The Herero had no such opportunity. What the Israelis have been doing to the Palestinians is nothing short of slow genocide, with the blessing of the U.S. If anyone cares they don't seem to be able to do much about it. I remind you that Hamas is the legally elected democratic government of the Palestinians, whereas the U.S. and Israel prefers to pretend that Abbas, sitting on the West Bank, is. There can never be an agreement between the Palestinians and Israelis as long as Hamas is kept out of the negotiations. And there is no way on earth a Palestinian state can ever emerge from this imperialist mess. Bush's claim that all will be well by the end of his term just marks him once again as the world's worst idiot. This is so laughable I'm surprised the Middle East hasn't laughed itself to death. Instead they just wait patiently for this pathetic moron to finish his term (what else can they do, given the fact that our Congress won't do the right and honorable thing and impeach him and his evil Rasputin). The idea that a viable Palestinian state could be created in spite of Israeli intransigence (and greed) is a pipe dream that wouldn't be found even in an 18th century opium den. The Israelis will never permit a viable Palestinian state unless it is some modern form of a bantustan. I have believed from the very beginning that George W. Bush is borderline retarded. He has done nothing in these seven miserable years to cause me to change my opinion. Is our President learning? The answer has to be a resounding NO! Please, Big JuJu, make 2009come quickly.
LKBIQ:
"The dogs bark, but the caravan goes on."
North African proverb
Monday, January 28, 2008
State of the Lies
Big News! Just in! Obama is going to be in Boise on Saturday! Maybe Idaho does matter.
Bubblehead: I thought I might have lost you. But you're back and up to your old tricks. How is it you never speak to the point? My blog last night was not designed to specify precisely when marijuana was banned, or by whom. I know that some defined it as a problem before Nixon. Indeed I had the (dis)pleasure of seeing Reefer Madness probably 16 or so years before you were born. I do think the current mess with our drug laws are more appropriately traced to Nixon than anyone earlier, but that is beside the point of my blog, which was to say that our current laws, especially those dealing with marijuana, are stupid. You don't speak to that point. Similarly, in the past, if I say Bush/Cheney are war criminals, you always bring up some peripheral nitpicking point that is basically irrelevant. Do you think they are war criminals, or you just don't want to say? Your approach is always the same and always seems to avoid the point. I swear, if I said humans were creatures with two arms and legs, you'd drag out a one armed man just to prove I was wrong. I'm happy that you know so much about history and such. Be a bit more imaginative and a bit less picky. Or as some say nowadays, get a life.
Masochism. That's what made me watch the State of the Lies and Fairy Tales tonight. As I long ago gave up any hope that Bush would ever tell the unvarnished truth about anything, I can't say I was particularly disappointed. He didn't really say much about the actual state of the union (obviously he wouldn't dare) and spent a lot of time just saying what it is we ought to do (or, rather, what Congress ought to do). Mostly fairy tales. I always wonder if he actually understands everything he is saying (or reading), and, if he does understand any of it, if he believes it (which I find difficult to believe). Of course the surge is working (he says), the Iraqis are making progress (he says), we are going to win (he says), things in Palestine and Israel are going to be just peachy by the end of the year (he says), Iran is a danger to the world (he says), and so on and on, the same old drivel he's been giving us for the past seven years. And of course his Brafia members applaud and stand while the Democrats mostly sit on their hands. A wonderful show of bipartisanship (something the Brafia destroyed a long time ago lest you forget how they refused even to let Democrats use meeting rooms, acted behind closed doors, ran overtime to twist arms to get their way, and etc., etc.). How soon we forget these things. Are we going to forget the almost 4,000 American troops dead, millions of Iraqis displaced and killed, misery so widesspread it could not possibly ever be fully comprehended or measured, and all for a completely unnecessary "war" against a nation that was no threat to us? The only positive thing one can say about Bush's speech is that it was his swan song, the last one we'll ever have to endure. I thought for a while it would never end. Bush needn't worry any more about his legacy, it's already set in stone: the worst President ever, an absolute disgrace to our country, a pathetic loser apparently too dim to even understand how terrible he has been. Good riddance.
I must say I was surprised, as was everyone, when Ted Kennedy endorsed Obama, and even more surprised at how enthusiastic he is about it. People can say endorsements don't count but I bet this one will, and probably just with those people Obama needs to reach out to: Hispanics, young people, and the elderly. I like Hillary and Bill, and I think they have not been treated fairly for years, but I also think they represent the past and the status quo, and I believe Obama is a hope for a better future.
LKBIQ:
"It is the preoccupation with possession, more than anything else, that prevents men from living freely and nobly."
Bertrand Russell
Bubblehead: I thought I might have lost you. But you're back and up to your old tricks. How is it you never speak to the point? My blog last night was not designed to specify precisely when marijuana was banned, or by whom. I know that some defined it as a problem before Nixon. Indeed I had the (dis)pleasure of seeing Reefer Madness probably 16 or so years before you were born. I do think the current mess with our drug laws are more appropriately traced to Nixon than anyone earlier, but that is beside the point of my blog, which was to say that our current laws, especially those dealing with marijuana, are stupid. You don't speak to that point. Similarly, in the past, if I say Bush/Cheney are war criminals, you always bring up some peripheral nitpicking point that is basically irrelevant. Do you think they are war criminals, or you just don't want to say? Your approach is always the same and always seems to avoid the point. I swear, if I said humans were creatures with two arms and legs, you'd drag out a one armed man just to prove I was wrong. I'm happy that you know so much about history and such. Be a bit more imaginative and a bit less picky. Or as some say nowadays, get a life.
Masochism. That's what made me watch the State of the Lies and Fairy Tales tonight. As I long ago gave up any hope that Bush would ever tell the unvarnished truth about anything, I can't say I was particularly disappointed. He didn't really say much about the actual state of the union (obviously he wouldn't dare) and spent a lot of time just saying what it is we ought to do (or, rather, what Congress ought to do). Mostly fairy tales. I always wonder if he actually understands everything he is saying (or reading), and, if he does understand any of it, if he believes it (which I find difficult to believe). Of course the surge is working (he says), the Iraqis are making progress (he says), we are going to win (he says), things in Palestine and Israel are going to be just peachy by the end of the year (he says), Iran is a danger to the world (he says), and so on and on, the same old drivel he's been giving us for the past seven years. And of course his Brafia members applaud and stand while the Democrats mostly sit on their hands. A wonderful show of bipartisanship (something the Brafia destroyed a long time ago lest you forget how they refused even to let Democrats use meeting rooms, acted behind closed doors, ran overtime to twist arms to get their way, and etc., etc.). How soon we forget these things. Are we going to forget the almost 4,000 American troops dead, millions of Iraqis displaced and killed, misery so widesspread it could not possibly ever be fully comprehended or measured, and all for a completely unnecessary "war" against a nation that was no threat to us? The only positive thing one can say about Bush's speech is that it was his swan song, the last one we'll ever have to endure. I thought for a while it would never end. Bush needn't worry any more about his legacy, it's already set in stone: the worst President ever, an absolute disgrace to our country, a pathetic loser apparently too dim to even understand how terrible he has been. Good riddance.
I must say I was surprised, as was everyone, when Ted Kennedy endorsed Obama, and even more surprised at how enthusiastic he is about it. People can say endorsements don't count but I bet this one will, and probably just with those people Obama needs to reach out to: Hispanics, young people, and the elderly. I like Hillary and Bill, and I think they have not been treated fairly for years, but I also think they represent the past and the status quo, and I believe Obama is a hope for a better future.
LKBIQ:
"It is the preoccupation with possession, more than anything else, that prevents men from living freely and nobly."
Bertrand Russell
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Stupid
Stupid is as stupid does I guess. I read today that last year (2007) there were 739,000 (that's seven hundred thirty nine thousand!) arrests for marijuana. There were also 91,000 related felonies. The (one year) cost of this foolishness is estimated at one billion dollars. Our jails and prisons are full of people incarcerated for pot related "crimes." I'm sorry, but no matter how you look at it, this is STUPID! We have known for years that the deleterious effects of marijuana are nowhere near as bad as we are being told, and certainly nowhere near as bad as the effects of alcohol which is legal. Even when Nixon banned pot it was in spite of the reports he received which said it was not all that harmful. Virtually every study of marijuana done since that time have said the same thing. So why do we insist on making pot possession a crime and locking people up for years because of it? The only conclusion I can come to is that we are STUPID! Our prisons are overcrowded and we are building new ones year after year. A disproportionate number of blacks are incarceratead (probably Hispanics too), due in large measure to our absurd laws about marijuana. I believe it is true (I am not sure of this) that we are currently spending more money on prisons than on college and university education. This is STUPID! The facts about marijuana are not hard to come by. There are many books and articles on the subject. Some of them go much further than just marijuana and insist that all drugs should be legal as the current situation is no different than prohibition which, as you know, was a dismal failure. Well, the war on drugs is a dismal failure, a failure far worse than prohibition. But still it continues year after year wasting billions and billions and taking up time that could be better spent working on true crime. The drug "problem" is in reality a medical problem that our apparently less than bright Congress has insisted on making a political problem. Why is this? Because they are STUPID! Obama may, I sincerely hope, have some understanding of this situation, and perhaps might even try to do something about it. Hillary Clinton I am pretty sure will maintain the status quo, as no doubt would John Edwards. So Obama, and yes, the audacity of hope.
It seems most everyone is still digesting the results of the South Carolina primary. It's mostly about how bad Bill Clinton has behaved and the issue of race, race, and more race. I guess no one knew that Obama was an African American until Bill Clinton pointed it out. Bill and Hillary want to win the nomination and they want Hillary in the White House. Obviously they are going to use whatever advantages come their way, just as all other candidates would do. Trying to convert the race card into a Clinton dirty trick I think is missing the point. Obama is an African American and the media are not going to let anyone forget it no matter what Bill and Hillary do. Do we have to be reminded of how the Brafia has handled the Clintons for the past fifteen or sixteen years? Remember Starr? Gingrich? Rove? Barr? Remember the impeachment for a non-crime? Remember how the Clintons were accused of every crime known to man, including murder? So even if the Clintons are using the race card to their advantage that surely pales into insignificance compared to what they have had to put up with. Obama is an African American. The Clintons can't change that. Hillary is a woman and they can't change that. To the Brafia, however, Hillary is not merely a woman, she is the personification of evil, a witch who cackles and secretly eats children for breakfast, fair game for every sleazy roviating scheme they can think of. Speaking of dirty tricks, you ain't see nothing yet, wait until we actually have candidates. Rove and the swift-boaters are licking their chops just thinking of what they can do with Hillary. But rest assured, they won't spare Obama if he's the candidate. He won't stay African American for long. In the hands of the Brafia and Rove he'll become the jungle bunny, a spook, a jigaboo, a drug-crazed Muslim lusting after white women, a secret agent of the Taliban working to overthrow our innocent nation that loves everybody and just wants to spread democracy and joy around the world (let's see, almost 4,000 dead American troops, 30 or 40 thousand maimed, two or three million Iraqis displaced from their homes, probably a million innocents killed, a trillion or more dollars totally wasted). And no end in sight. But I digress. The Democratic candidate, whoever it is, is going to be subject to the most vile accusations and falsehoods that can be created in the brain of Karl Rove and his little band of evil pranksters. Be prepared.
LKBIQ:
"A Christian is a man who feels
Repentance on a Sunday
For what he did on Saturday
And is going to do on Monday.
Thomas R. Ybarra
It seems most everyone is still digesting the results of the South Carolina primary. It's mostly about how bad Bill Clinton has behaved and the issue of race, race, and more race. I guess no one knew that Obama was an African American until Bill Clinton pointed it out. Bill and Hillary want to win the nomination and they want Hillary in the White House. Obviously they are going to use whatever advantages come their way, just as all other candidates would do. Trying to convert the race card into a Clinton dirty trick I think is missing the point. Obama is an African American and the media are not going to let anyone forget it no matter what Bill and Hillary do. Do we have to be reminded of how the Brafia has handled the Clintons for the past fifteen or sixteen years? Remember Starr? Gingrich? Rove? Barr? Remember the impeachment for a non-crime? Remember how the Clintons were accused of every crime known to man, including murder? So even if the Clintons are using the race card to their advantage that surely pales into insignificance compared to what they have had to put up with. Obama is an African American. The Clintons can't change that. Hillary is a woman and they can't change that. To the Brafia, however, Hillary is not merely a woman, she is the personification of evil, a witch who cackles and secretly eats children for breakfast, fair game for every sleazy roviating scheme they can think of. Speaking of dirty tricks, you ain't see nothing yet, wait until we actually have candidates. Rove and the swift-boaters are licking their chops just thinking of what they can do with Hillary. But rest assured, they won't spare Obama if he's the candidate. He won't stay African American for long. In the hands of the Brafia and Rove he'll become the jungle bunny, a spook, a jigaboo, a drug-crazed Muslim lusting after white women, a secret agent of the Taliban working to overthrow our innocent nation that loves everybody and just wants to spread democracy and joy around the world (let's see, almost 4,000 dead American troops, 30 or 40 thousand maimed, two or three million Iraqis displaced from their homes, probably a million innocents killed, a trillion or more dollars totally wasted). And no end in sight. But I digress. The Democratic candidate, whoever it is, is going to be subject to the most vile accusations and falsehoods that can be created in the brain of Karl Rove and his little band of evil pranksters. Be prepared.
LKBIQ:
"A Christian is a man who feels
Repentance on a Sunday
For what he did on Saturday
And is going to do on Monday.
Thomas R. Ybarra
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
