Parodies Lost

Let Iraq Burn

Some time ago, long ago that it's not even listed, I wrote an article condemning the Busher for the Iraq but arguing that it would play into the hands of the terrorists if we left. When Bush attacked Iraq for heaven knows what reason, there were tapes of Osama bin Laden dancing the Hora with all this minions. Copies of those tapes are available for a modest fee. You can get them by contacting this writer.

It was like Old Osama had two fingers jammed up the Busher's nose and was dragging him wherever he wanted. He needed new bases to train white, Catholic, English girls who've turned to Islam to become suicide bombers...the Busher gave him most of Yugoslavia & Iraq. What a great president.

But, as they say, it takes a tough man to make a tender chickpea, so I too have finally, painfully, agonizingly come to the conclusion that there's nothing we can do in Iraq but help kill innocent Iraqis and mangle more U.S. troops.

The fact is that the Arabs are loonies. Why they are loonies is a fascinating sociological question I will not try to address in any detail. It's similar, however (oy, is this going to get me in trouble), to self-defeating behaviors we see in some African Americans and Native Americans. Expectations breeds behavior supporting those expectations. Treat Palestinians like 5th class citizens for 60 years or so & guess what, they'll act like fucking idiots, killing each other because it seems less dangerous that trying to kill Jews. (Note, that didn't start with the Israeli occupation. It started with Egypt taking Gaza & the butcher of Jordan taking the so-called West Bank & keeping Palestinians living like rats with no cheese for 30 years.

But what about Iraqi loonies? You can't create a country by jamming three warring tribes together, have them live under one of the worst dictators in history, and expect them to act normally. I simply cannot fathom Sunnis and Shias blowing up each other's children.

This war is no longer a war of liberation...whatever it started out to be. It's a civil (how quaint, "civil")... it's a totally uncivil war aided by the scum in Iran & Syria. It's not that we can't win, we can't even define win. You couldn't describe a political condition in what is now Iraq that stood a chance of working. And, hey, for the first time, it's not all our fault. Let 'em blame the Israelis & Americans for their mess. Sorry, Ahmed, you shit, you clean it up.

And we haven't even addressed the coming war in Northern Iraq between the Kurds (terrible name...they should rename their tribes...get a lot more respect...like "The Crips" or something) and just about everyone else.

So it is with sorrow, despair, anger, confusion, and fill in the blanks, that I've come to the conclusion that we should simply say: "Yo, Arab-type people. As long as you're going to kill each other, we're outa here. Like, what are you--dopes? We're not sending American soldiers into your country to break up battles between warring tribes. We gave you the chance for democracy--sort of--and you blew it. We tried to help you rebuild your nation--and you blew it up. O.k., we had no plans for winning the peace--but it's your country. What are you, without an idea in your collective heads?

"You can't teach a man to fish if he keeps hitting you over the head with the fucking fishing poll. So...we're out of here. If you come to your senses, we'd be glad to come back and help you rebuild your country...but frankly, we're not packing just yet to return."

Technorati Tags: Iraq, Foreign policy, Bush, Arabs, Iran, civil war
Add to: | Technorati | Digg | del.icio.us | Yahoo | BlinkList | Spurl | reddit | Furl |

Update: Americans See Bush Threat & Concerns Raised About Abuse of Power

[Note:  This is an update from the previous article, below]

A Washington Post-ABC News poll taken the day after news was released of the massive NSA collection of American telephone records showed a majority of Americans supporting the effort. However, a Newsweek web exclusive posted Saturday, May 13th paints a different picture.

In a poll conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International of 1,007 adults aged 18 and older between May 11 and 12 by telephone found very different results. A majority of Americans (53 percent) think the NSA's program "goes too far in invading people's privacy," while 41% believe it's necessary to fight terrorism.

An AP analysis issued late this afternoon asked the question, "Is Bush Overreaching?" Newsweek asks the question, "Has the Bush administration gone too far in expanding the powers of the President to fight terrorism?"

Despite assurances from the president that American's rights are “fiercely protected,” and that “we’re not mining or trolling through the personal lives of innocent Americans,” 57 percent of Americans aren't buying it, agreeing that administration has “gone too far in expanding presidential power.” Thirty-eight percent think the Administration’s actions are appropriate. The poll also found that Bush's popularity continues to linger at the lowest in his presidency, at 35 percent, with Iraq being his biggest problem: 86 percent said Iraq and information revealing the way in which the decision was made to go to war account for most of their low opinion of the president.

In virtually every area, Bush fairs poorly.

• Rising gas prices: 17 percent approve.
• Federal budget deficit: 19 percent approve.
• Immigration policy: 25 percent approve.
• Handling of taxes: 39 percent approve.
• State of the Country: 71 percent are dissatisfied.
• The New Congress: 52 percent want to see Democrats in control vs. 35 percent for Republicans.
• Presidential Race: Half want a Democrat while only 31 percent want a Republican.
• Who can better bring about the changes the country needs: Democrats over Republicans by 53 to 30 percent.

The AP story notes, "President Bush has made broad use of his executive powers: authorizing warrantless wiretaps, collecting telephone records on millions of Americans, holding suspected terrorists overseas without legal protections. His administration even is considering using the military to patrol the U.S. border." Bush has consistently told Congress that he will ignore legislation if he thinks it will "interfere with his constitutional authority."

The technique he's perfected is to issue hundreds of statements when signing bills into law that claiming that he has the right to ignore provisions of the bill he feels interferes with his presidential powers. Because he has not vetoed any bill sent to him, Congress has had no way to challenge these statements where they can be resolved in the courts. This technique is how he has ignored laws requiring him to give reports to Congress about how the Patriot Act is being implemented and about a ban on torture. A number of political analysts have expressed grave concern about his actions.

"The president apparently believes, based on a number of recent statements and policy directives, that anything he approves is automatically legal," said Stephen Cimbala, a Pennsylvania State University professor who studies national security issues. "I do think the president has pushed the envelope," said Georgetown University political scientist Stephen J. Wayne. "He seems so determined for another act of terrorism not to occur on his watch that he has forgotten the constitutional protections that most Americans value as highly as they value their security."

As if things weren't looking bleak enough for the president, it turns out that, by a wide margin, Americans think better of former President Bill Clinton than they do of him. A poll of 1021 adult Americans conducted May 5-7 by Opinion Research Corp. for CNN found that Bush didn't win in a single category: Handling the economy, Clinton beat Bush by a 2 to 1 margin (63 vs. 26 percent); solving the problems of ordinary Americans went to Clinton 62 to 25 percent; foreign affairs, Clinton 56 percent vs. Bush at 32 percent; taxes, Clinton 51 vs. 35 percent; handling national disasters, 51 Clinton, 30 percent Bush; who has divided the country more went to Bush with 59 percent vs. Clinton's 27 percent. Bush can take heart that he and Clinton were statistically tied on two issues: honesty and handling national security.

There seemed to be no good news for the president today.

Technorati Tags: Bush, NSA, phone records, Republicans, privacy, CIA, domestic surveillance, Clinton, gas prices, homeland security, Iraq, terrorism
Add to: | Technorati | Digg | del.icio.us | Yahoo | BlinkList | Spurl | reddit | Furl |

Ronald the Russian Reveals All -- Part I

I coll myself Ronald, is gud American name, no?  But I am not American, I am Russki, intent on telling soft Americans how veak you are, not lak strong Russkis, for whom soft American veaknesses are, how you zay, a joke, somet’ing to make me leff ... ha ha.

I haff been many years in yur crumbling country, America, seeing wit’ my own eyes how yur vaists grow bigger, yur buttocks become lak a cow, moo, moo, yur faces bloat lak a babushka, an old Russki peasant woman, waddling on tree-trunk-lak legs.

But, in my past, I haff spent many years in vat you call Siberia in preezon camp.  Ze cold was lak a razor blade tearing avay yor skeen.  How many of you veak Americans could bear zat kind of treatment?   Bah.  Few, if any haff za strength, za vill, za ... how do you call it, fornication ... nyet, zat is not it.  Ah, fortitude, zat is za vord.

And in yur country, I watch zees so-called men.  I leff, ha ha, at ze veakness of American men.  In ze batroom, zey need two hends to make, how you zay, wee wee.  In Russki, ve use only one hend.  Ve shake heem off wit’ one hend.  Real men don’t need two.

Oh, I know, you tell me about ze Cold War, vich you think yuf won.  Again, I leff, ha ha ha, many ha’s zees time.  In Russki, ve see vat is heppening around ze world.  A mess, is it not?  So, ve t’ink, why should ve spend all our hard-earned Rubles saving ze world.  Fuck ze world.  Let ze stupeed fucking Americans do it.

Ve vere right, can you see zat?  You go into Afghanistan?  Vat, you trying to kill Russkis vith leffing to death?  Zere are not enuff ha ha ha ... vould fill many many pages.  And zen you invade Iraq?  Many Russkis haff to be taken to hospital for oxygen, zey laff themselves how you say stupeed.

Vat is next, stupeed Americans?  Maybe is time to buy gud glesses for ze eyes zo you can see.  In Russki, we grow rich.  In America, you borrow money to geeve to stupeed Iraqis. 

Zis is not all Ronald haz to zay, but is gud start.  Talk to you soon.

<i>Technorati tags:</i>

<a href=http://technorati.com/tag/Russia rel="tag">Russia</a>,

<a href=http://technorati.com/tag/Obesity rel="tag">Obesity</a>,

<a href=http://technorati.com/tag/Politics rel="tag">Politics</a>,

<a href=http://technorati.com/tag/Cold+War rel="tag">Cold War</a>

<a href=http://technorati.com/tag/Afghanistan rel="tag">Afghanistan</a>,

<a href=http://technorati.com/tag/Iraq rel="tag">Iraq</a>

<a href=http://technorati.com/tag/Satire rel="tag">Satire</a>,

Rumsfeld-Fight Terrorists with Ink

In a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations, Defense Secretary Donald "Don't shoot 'til you see their bloodshot eyes" Rumsfeld called on the military to drop buckets of ink on terrorists so they'd be easier to spot and shoot.  (He didn't comment on whether he advised Cheney to spill ink on Harry Whittington, the friend he shot.)

O.k., not really.  He did call for a more effective communications campaign to combat terrorism.  Duh?  "Our enemies have skillfully adapted to fighting wars in today's media age, but for the most part we, our country, our government, has not," he told the assembled deep thinkers, who scratched their chins and nodded sagely.

His idea is to continue to buy coverage in Muslim newspapers.  We also have to stop being reactive.  He wants a 24-hour media operation to pump out good news about America.  And who's to blame?  The media, of course, for hampering such initiatives.

As a public relations expert, Rummy makes a lousy Defense Secretary.  He's right that we're getting our brains battered in the battle for world & U.S. public opinion, but he doesn't have a clue how to wage that war. 

Like too many people, he equates media with public relations or communications, which is, how do we put this delicately...dumber than a bucket of hair.  There's a great PR saying, "You can't sell from an empty wagon," and that describes our situation.

First, you have to understand the audiences you're trying to reach, how receptive they are to your messages, what are their needs, issues, fears, and desires.

Second, you have to break down their barriers--I call it "The Disarming Prelude"--through empathy, respect, honesty, and even acknowledging the legitimacy of some of their concerns.  Only when you begin to lower the level of intensity and negativity, only when you give them a chance to voice their concerns and see that you take them seriously, will people then listen and maybe consider your point of view.

Third, you have to offer something credible and real.  Denial and rejection--even if correct--won't work when people are already convinced you're doing something wrong.

Fourth, you have to walk your talk.  Peter Drucker once said, "Policy is what you do, not what you say."  Look at what we're doing & our policy, at best, looks like the Keystone Kops chasing the Road Runner and squashing Wiley Coyote on the way.

I could drone on forever.  In fact, I think I have.  But, Mr. Rumsfeld, it's old hat to blame the media for your problems.  Pick a new target.  Blame someone new--like liberals.

In Jamesons Veritas

Political Sanity: Fact or Fiction?

I was going to write about the Bush Bubble Machine's latest magical mystery tour budget, and I still will.  First, as a curmudgeon-in-training, it's my moral obligation.  And second, we've never had a bigger liar in the white house since Nixon.  Now I'm not saying W is corrupt or evil, but he must have an embroidered sign over his bed with Mark Twain's quote:  "You can never go broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people."

But that's not what I want to write about.  In fact, I'm not going to write at all...except that I already am...oh well.  Poldark Maximus' site has an hysterical post on the upcoming presidential elections as well as one filled with deep wisdom and sagacity--since I agree with much of it.  Perhaps it's the continuing loss of memory cells that causes me to say the same thing over and over.  Or perhaps it's the continuing loss of memory cells that causes me to say the same thing over and over.  But I sense a certain annoyance with ideological extremism getting in the way of rational discourse.  Ol' Poldark is heading in the right direction.

The serious stuff: 

a) the country needs an extended period of political and emotional reconciliation, full stop; that b) hardliners to the left OR to the right simply need not apply and waste our time and c) no single party or candidate OWNS the war on terrorism, the protection of civil liberties, the hard answers to retirement and health care or immigration policy and d) if UBL continues to scare the shit out of you, FINE, because it took 30 years to fight the 30 Years War and that was over fine points of religion among Catholics, Lutherans and Calvinists who all worshiped the same God, more or less.

And a hint of the hysterical:

1. Is there anything better in life than a BLT? What is it?
2. You see an injured deer on the side of the road in its obvious death-throes. What do you do? A) Drive on down the road B) Call the State Police C) Draw your sidearm and shoot it in the heart D) Call your campaign manager and ask them what action would carry Ohio?
3. Do you pray at your desk, in bed, or in the shower? To whom?

Read it all here:  Poldark Maximus

In Jamesons Veritas

So What's a Liberal? Or a Conservative?

Life was easier when we liberals were called long-haired, pinko, tree-hugging, anti-American, pro-crime, scum-sucking bottom dwellers.  At least then we knew what our positions were supposed to be, although I, for one, have to confess that, even in my hippie days in the 60s, I don't remember hugging a tree--although there's lots from those days I don't remember...but I digress.

Life was also easier when conservatives were called bigoted, racist, money-grubbing, land-raping, exploiters of the masses, capitalist swine-swilling pigs. 

Liberals were slim and cool.  Conservative were fat and sweaty. 

Of course, conservatives thought liberals were emaciated and dirty and conservatives were respectful and well dressed...but what did they know?

I'll tell you, life is confusing.  For example, why do conservatives get so worked up over the ACLU, whose sole purpose is to conserve our basic civil liberties as outlined in the Constitution and Bill of Rights?  Conservatives should be pouring billions into their coffers to protect the American way, while liberals should hate the ACLU for not bending the rules to fit our preconceived notions of right and wrong.

And tell me it's not weird that liberals support science when most of us couldn't tell the difference between a quark and a quack, while conservatives hate science for being anti-Christian when science (not specific scientists) says nothing at all about creation or God?

Conservatives preach the sanctity of human life while sitting on their hands when innocent people are executed.  Liberals march around prisons to protest executions of known killers like the homeless around a soup kitchen while thinking nothing's wrong with abortion.

It is true that people can't seem to get through life with labeling things, but two labels that have lost all meaning these days liberal and conservative.  One reason, perhaps, is that the policies of both groups have proven to be disastrous.  Sure, conservatives venerate Ronald "Crazy Credit Card Carnivore" Reagan, but given the massive budget deficits created under his 8 years, it's hard to understand why.  Supply side economics?  Contract with America?  Remember those?  Great ideas...if you're not the victim of them.

At least we liberals are more honest.  The Great Society--a wonderful idea--was executed with all the skill of a water buffalo trying to play Chopin on the piano.  Carter, perhaps the best ex-president in memory, was, to be kind, not real effective while in office.  And if the Clintons are liberals, I'm a leprechaun. 

The problem is that there's nothing with which to replace liberal and conservative.  What the hell's a neocon?  And why aren't there neolibs? 

But the web is flooded with blogs and websites from conservatives and liberals bashing each other with wild abandon.  That's fine with me.  They're fun, and a lot of the people on both sides are intelligent, interesting, and open.  Of course, many are as open to new ideas as a clam glued shut with super glue--but they're fun too.

Maybe ideology isn't important.  Maybe we should just be discussing specific programs without having the distorted filter of seeing ourselves as the good guys and those who disagree as the bad guys.....nah....what a stupid idea.

Oh well, I'm beginning to think that democracy should be reserved for those who demonstrate at least one functional brain cell--which lets out about 99 & 44/100% of all people, probably me included.   

In Jamesons Veritas

Scenes from the Oval Office, ii

I know it's been a long time since my last post, but I've been dodging gov't agents, moving daily from house to house.  The problem is that I only have one house, so it's kind of hard to fool them.  One day I had to pretend to be a lamp, holding a light bulb in my mouth and some stupid fed tried to turn me on by twisting my nose.  Finally, he decided the bulb was bad...my only regret is that I abhor violence.  Otherwise, there'd be little pieces of federal agent all over my floor...but then my bride would make me clean it up and I hate the sight of blood & body parts.

Where was I?  Oh, the secret Bush tapes.  Last time, the Pres was hear a startling truth about Canadians. (If you didn't read the first installment, shame on you.  Scroll down!)

Bush:  The Canadians?  (Big, really big yawn.)  What's so cool about them.  I can't even remember who's their Queen.

Rummy:  They have a Prime Minister, sir.

Bush:  Don't fool me, you sidewinder you.  That woman, what's her name...

Cheney:  You mean Queen Elizabeth?

Bush:  Yeah, Betsy.  She's still the queen of Canada, right.

Cheney:  Yes, sir. 

Bush:  So what's the big deal?

Rummy:  Sir, this is ultra, mega, alpha to omega top secret.

Bush:  Am I cleared for that?

Cheney:  I'm afraid not sir.

Bush:  Aw, shucks, guys, come on.  You know you can trust me.

Rummy (to Cheney):  You spilled the beans.

Cheney (to Rummy):  I thought it was you.

Bush:  Hey, am I or am I not the president?

Cheney:  Well...

Rummy:  Sir, it turns out that the Canadians have massive quantities of natural gas just ripe for the picking. 

Bush:  Well, that's great.  We can kiss those camel...riders goodbye then, right?

Cheney:  But it's their gas and it's difficult to extract without causing a lot of environmental damage.

Bush:  Environemtle...what?

Cheney:  It'll mess up the land.

Bush:  My land?

Cheney:  No, sir.  This is Canada, not Texas.

Bush:  So?  Go get it then.  Won't bother me.

Rummy:  The Canadians are willing to play ball with us sir.

Bush:  Jesus...oops, sorry Lord.  Look, guys, my baseball days are over. 

Rummy:  I mean they want to be cooperative, but their environmentalists are raising Cain over this.

Cheney:  They've suggested a secret plan...

Bush:  Ooooo...I love secret plans. Like our secret plan to invade Iraq?

Rummy:  That got leaked, sir.

Bush:  What?  Find that pisser and have him taken to a location in a country where they know how to deal with anti-Americans.

Rummy:  We're working on that, sir.  The point is, the Canadians think it would be a lot easier if we just invaded the part of Canada that has all this gas, they'll surrender, we'll pay them trillions in reparations, and when we've taken all the gas, we'll give them the land back.

Bush:  Hmm.  Think it'll work.

Cheney:  Sir, they're Canadians.

Bush:  Oh, right.  North of here, aren't they?

Cheney:  For the most part.

Bush:  Well, what do you need from me?

Cheney:  Just sign this paper sir.

Bush:  Darn it, I hate signing all these papers.  Do I have to read it first?

Cheney:  No, sir.  Just sign.

Bush:  O.k., that's better.  Reading is such a bore.  Except the Bible of course, which I read every day.

Rummy:  We know that sir.  That's why we love you.

Bush:  O.k., it's signed.  Now what do I do?

Cheney:  Just go back to reading your Bible, sir.

Bush:  Great.  I'm just getting to the good part where God turns Lot's wife into a pillar of salt.  You know, I wonder if I prayed hard enough, would he turn Hillary into a pillar of salt?

Cheney:  Worth a try, sir.

Bush:  Maybe I'll call Pat Robertson.  He seems to have God's ear.

Rummy:  You do that, sir. 

Bush:  That's all gentlemen.  I have presidential work to do.

And that's the truth.

"War Footing"

Regarding President Bush's handling of the war on terrorism and the invasion of Iraq, "Something is missing in the Bush administration's approach, and in manifests itself in a number of inadequate and sometimes even feckless steps that fail to produce a determined effort, a coherent strategy, or a rallied nation."  Written by a head-in-the-sand liberal?  Anti-Bush, anti-war activist?  Try R. James Woolsey, President Regan's CIA director, who notes, "Even among those of us who support...President Bush...there persists a pervasive disquiet. [Emphasis added.]

Thus begins the Foreword to one of the most disturbing--even terrifying--books on the state of the world today, War Footing, by Frank J. Gaffney, former assistant secretary for defense for international security policy under President Reagan and founder of the Center for Security Policy. 

Some books startle you from the beginning, shaking you out of complacency into a new understanding.  Others build slowly, often reminding you of what you've already read, but by putting the various links together in new ways, leave you shaken, distressed, and muttering, "I never thought about it that way before."  War Footing is in the latter category.  Whatever one's political philosophy--and there's enough in the book to offend everyone--I can't imagine anyone rejecting Gaffney's opening argument that this book is "your owner's manual for the War for the Free World."  Whether one accepts the entire thesis or not, this is a serious, must-read book for anyone concerned about what's going on in the world--we ignore it at our own peril.

No one escapes Gaffney's criticism:  the administration's strategic myopia and pathetic attempts at public diplomacy, the Defense Department's refusal to understand the nature of the enemy, the State Department's undermining of administration policy, corporations who knowingly do business with countries supporting terrorist activities, and the entire country for refusing to take concrete steps that could be implemented quickly and relatively painlessly to end our suicidal dependence on foreign oil.

Making a clear distinction between the majority of Muslims who pose no threat, Gaffney identifies what he calls "the new totalitarians," Islamofascists, and compares them and their goals with those of Hitler, Stalin, and other fascists determined to create a new world order--one in which Americans aren't welcome. 

War Footing is not a dense, policy wonk's dissertation, although there are times one wishes he'd written the thousand-page companion--it is, as he describes, a manual.  At 270 pages, he sets out ten specific steps that need to be taken immediately if we are to survive the coming decades.   

At the same time, he examines the world, region by region, exposing the growing Islamofascist threat.  It shouldn't be news to anyone that Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak is a dictatorial thug who has done everything, including killing wannabe voters, to rig the current election.  And yet, in the Saturday, December 10th Washington Post, the failure of his efforts--and our billion-dollar a year support became clear with the following headline: "Banned Islamic Movement Now the Main Opposition in Egypt." 

If it were only Egypt, perhaps one could relax, but there is literally no world area that, in one way or another, is immune from the Islamofascists or in league with them to thwart American interests.  One might take exception to some of Gaffney's claims, but if he's only fifty percent right, America is woefully unprepared--both to confront the problems overseas and manage them at home.  In the same edition of the Post was a disquieting report that our crisis communications systems are no better than they were pre-9/11.  More billions wasted.

Gaffney--and the considerable group of experts with whom he collaborated--fall well into the conservative arena, and, as a hard-core liberal, I found myself at times frustrated with some of the rhetoric.  (I'm reassured by the fact that hard-core conservatives will be just as frustrated by his criticisms of the administration and big business.)   But there's no question that Russia and China continue to act against our interests around the world, that the Saudis continue to spread and fund the most virulent form of Islamic extremism, that Pakistan, Turkey, and Egypt are at risk of being taken over by the Islamofascists, that demographic, economic, and immigration problems in Europe threaten that continent's future viability...and that America isn't having the kind of open, honest dialogue necessary to fully understand and respond to the real world.   

Parody is Dead

So I haven't posted in a quite a while, sue me.  I've been waiting for something to ridicule, but it's almost impossible to make fun of a world where people seem to work full time making fun of themselves--albeit unintentionally.

Now the Catholic Church is going after anyone who even supports gay culture--straight people who aren't offended by gay people can't be priests.  Taken to the extreme, if you and your spouse (I'm assuming no one reading this would dare have sex out of marriage) do anything but, as Shakespeare said, "make the beast with two backs," i.e. have any kind of sex except for the purpose of procreation, you're sinners, evil in the eyes of the Lord--or at least the Pope's populace and an amazing number of weird Protestant & Jews. 

Mutual masturbation--oops...sorry, go directly to hell, do not pass go, do not collect $200.  Use birth control--sorry, not allowed even for non-Catholics.  Play some games that result in all his Mr. Wigglies wandering around outside the womb, wham, marked with the sign of Lucifer.

How can I turn that into parody?  They've already done it?

And it turns out that millions of dollars people donated in hurricane relief went to the good people of Jacksonville, MI -- whose major problem was that they lost electricity for a while.  Terrifying winds of up to 35 mph rampaged through that poor community.  Some people got a few thousand dollars for their problems.  You gotta love America.  We are sooooo generous.

According to James Fallows in this month's Atlantic (I will post on that shortly), the Bush administration, especially Rumsfeld, Rice, Cheney and his royal nibs--are bored with Iraq.  Bored!  I, alas, am speechless.

Dopey Democrats are can't even figure out how to criticize the administration.  Immediate pull out?  Omigosh--the invasion played right into Osama Bin Laden's hands because he knew Americans didn't have the balls to do it right, stick it out (sorry, sexual metaphor there--I'm now damned for eternity), and would do a cut and run.  Whatever idiocy caused us to invade in the first place, the problem is not and has not been left/right, liberal/conservative/, Republican/Democrat...it's been unbelievable, unfathomable incompetence. 

Medicare drug benefits?  How can you make fun of something so confusing, Ph.Ds can't figure it out?  And it shouldn't be a surprise.  When the stupid plan was announced, people said it was complicated to the point of absurdity.  Samuel Beckett couldn't have written a play more absurd than what the administration is putting seniors through.  Kafka's The Castle was some mild dislocation compared to the bureaucratic maze grannie and grandpa are negotiating.

Sigh.  I wish people would stop taking whatever pills are making them crazy so I could go back to making fun of them. 

To paraphrase Mark Twain, "Why shouldn't life be stranger than fiction? Fiction, after all, has to make sense."

It is a Good Day to Die

Warning!  Do not, I repeat, do not read the first section of The Washington Post today if you have a weak stomach.  Fool that I am, the front page wasn't enough, so I kept going.  By the time I finished the columns, I felt like Chief Dan George in Little Big Man, whose tag line was "It is a good day to die." 

What a mess we've created for ourselves.  (Well, I'm not responsible.  I'm an innocent.  Plus I blog which means I'm going my part to befoul the netwaves with blather and useless opinion.)

We start with the ever more weird VP Dick Cheney deciding that American values don't apply to the CIA.  Seems the Bush Bubble Machine wants to except the CIA from a legislative measure endorsed by 90 Senators (so some Republicans must have agreed) that would bar inhumane treatment to prisoners accused to terrorist activity.  Of course, it'll require "a presidential finding that 'such operations are vital to the protection of the United States or its citizens from terrorist attack.'  But the precise applicability of this section is not clear..."  Yeah, like Bush says, "I find that beating the shit out of these guys is vital to protection of the United States."

I understand the emotional response of wanting to beat up people who want to kill you.  After all, from an evolutionary sense, we're only about an hour from some caveman who crawled out, picked up a stick and thought, "Ughuh, mngushush rushushmum." (Translation, "Hey, I bet I can bean someone with this stick.)

But that's why we have a Constitution, Bill of Rights, and are a nation of laws--specifically to prevent us from letting our primitive rage overcome what we intellectually know is wrong.

Moving on, conservatives are working themselves into a whirling dervish frenzy over Supreme Court nominee, Meirs.  It'd be laughable if it was so pitiful.  No discussion about her total lack of qualifications--she ain't conservative enough. 

Daddy's Little Girl:  An 8 year old bagged the first bear of Maryland's hunting season.  Gosh it's great to be an American where even little girls can learn the manly art of killing.  She had to miss a day of school, but, hey, where can you learn life's real lessons except with a gun in your hand.  Hell with school.

And regarding the Mesopotamia (thanks to John Stewart's "The Daily Show"), the new continues to make one proud to be an American.  Bomb kills 16 more in hotel.  "The attack was one of the most complex and coordinated that insurgents have launched in Baghdad. Using rockets, small-arms fire and three suicide bombs, they killed at least 16 people and wounded 22, according to government officials, police and witnesses."  Sigh.  But at least we're winning the "body count" war.  Shudder.  Now if we could only find places for the thousands made homeless by our war to bring democracy to Iraq. 

And for those who think I'm just another pointy-headed liberal, today's column by Richard Cohen offers a depressing realization that the Democrats have seem to have lost any moral compass when it comes to our international affairs, ceding the territory to the Republicans, who, for all their faults, at least believe they're spreading Democracy.  They may only be spreading terrorism, but at least they have some moral compass.  They stole it from the Democrats & the Dems never even noticed.

Oh there's more...the Israel/Palestinian peace process breaking down, conservatives attacking Bush, coral dying in the Caribbean because of higher temperatures...oh well.  At least it's raining outside.  I can take some consolation from that.

Iraqi Elections: The Truth Revealed

It's happening even as I write this on Monday, October 17th, a day that will forever live in infamy.  If we think Pearl Harbor was bad, just wait.  I have it from sources close to the Oval Office that this election in Iraq has nothing to do with approving a flawed constitution that's going to have to be revisited in about an hour.  These sources are so good that if I even told myself who they, some prosecutor would haul me in front of a grand jury.

It has nothing to do with finding a just distribution of power.

It has nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction....wait, how'd that get in here?

It has nothing to do with peace in the middle east.

But...and sit down while you read this--it's for your own protection...the reason we invaded Iraq?  The conspiracists were right, they just weren't bizarre enough in their delusions.

It was all about oil, but not in the way you think.  Why invade a country you can't manage after the war?  The Bush Bubble Machine knew full well they could win the war but could never win the peace.

Why create a constitutional process that would send Thomas Jefferson running off into the wilderness?  You can't take action against something you don't understand & that makes no sense.

Why allow the Iraqis to put all that Islamic religious stuff in the constitution?  Doesn't matter if that's not what the votes about.

Ladies and Gentlemen of America.  Since the vote is going to be "yes," get ready to welcome the 51st state in the United States of America--Iraq.  It's brilliant.  It's so simple.  We don't have to buy their oil any more--it'll be ours.   The terrorists will be totally confused.  The Great Satan will not only be in their midst, we'll have military bases all over the 51st state, the FBI will establish large bureaus, and, in no time, the terrorists will pick on someone else...like Urkmanistarian.

I for one would tip my hat to the administration...if I had a hat.

Intelligent Design? Don't Make Me Laugh.

Let me get this straight.  The purveyors of Intelligent Design argue that evolution can't account for the incredibly complexity of life--ergo (Latin for duh) there has to be some intelligence (religious twinkie code word for God) that designed life.

Well, if that's true, that intelligence certainly didn't design anyone I know.  Let's look at how well we're designed.

• The second I turned 40, I had to go out and get reading glasses.  Then I needed mid-range glasses so I could see my computer screen.  What, he couldn't design an eye that didn't weare out before the rest of me?
• Talk about design flaws, there's this little valve between your esophagus and your stomach.  If it doesn't work right, stomach acid backs up into your esophagus.  It's called acid reflux.  Should this happen when you're sleeping, you'll swear some vampire hunter mistook you for Dracula's spawn and drove a stake into your heart.  Nice work, Mr. Intelligent Designer.
• And advanced planning?  Forgetaboutit.  First you put all this good stuff on the earth like chocolate, whipped cream, hamburgers, onion rings, french fries, Oreos, HoHos, Irish whiskey, cognac and armagnac--and then we find that we're supposed to steal food from rabbits if we want to live long and prosper.  Nice gesture.  The intelligent designer has a vicious sense of humor.
• Speaking of intelligence, Mr. I.D. creates human brains with the capacity to develop extraordinary technological achievements such as the atom bomb, napalm, plastic explosives, cop-killing bullets, global warming, holes in the ozone layer...but without the maturity and wisdom to control those technologies or use technology for some silly ass liberal program such as feeding and housing and teaching the poor.

Those of you who want to promote Intelligent Design have to do more than argue complexity--you have to explain why God (let's call a rock a stone, shall we?) was such a lousy designer.  I mean, I didn't even mention baldness.

And just to rub salt in the gaping wounds of this idiotic theory, check out the latest news from a story in Monday, September 26th Washington Post that describes powerful evidence supporting the theory of evolution.  Theories have to predict things that are testable.  (Something for which we're still waiting from the I.D. folks.)

If Darwin was right, for example, then scientists should be able to perform a neat trick. Using a mathematical formula that emerges from evolutionary theory, they should be able to predict the number of harmful mutations in chimpanzee DNA by knowing the number of mutations in a different species' DNA and the two animals' population sizes.

"That's a very specific prediction," said Eric Lander, a geneticist at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard in Cambridge, Mass., and a leader in the chimp project.

Sure enough, when Lander and his colleagues tallied the harmful mutations in the chimp genome, the number fit perfectly into the range that evolutionary theory had predicted.

Their analysis was just the latest of many in such disparate fields as genetics, biochemistry, geology and paleontology that in recent years have added new credence to the central tenet of evolutionary theory: That a smidgeon of cells 3.5 billion years ago could -- through mechanisms no more extraordinary than random mutation and natural selection -- give rise to the astonishing tapestry of biological diversity that today thrives on Earth.

I know there are serious, well-meaning people who believe that evolution represents a threat to religion.  I know they're afraid of our becoming a secular society rejecting Christianity to bow before the icon of Charles Darwin.  I know they want the U.S. to be a Christian nation (in complete violation of the wishes of the founding fathers.) 

Evolution is only a threat to religion if you're still holding on to Bishop Ussher's bizarre declaration that the world was created about 4,000 years ago (I forget the exact day and time, but he figured it out.) 

Actually, it's the I.D. fanatics that are the greatest threat to religion.  Come to think of it, the I.D. fanatics are the best evidence that Intelligent Design couldn't possibly be true.

 

Stem Cell Insanity

I admit I'm a little slow with complex moral issues, so I called Professor Still Birf at the University of Southern Tennessee to ask about all this stem cell controversy.

Me:  Dr. Birf, I just read in the New York Times about a Swiss team of doctors who found that fetal skin cells could be used to treat serious burns.  They treated 8 badly burned children and avoided having to use painful skin grafts that often don't work and usually leave the kids disfigured.  They called it "a biological bandage that stimulated healing."

Dr. Birf:  So they claim.

Me:  You don't believe them?

Dr. Birf:  Everyone knows the Swiss are Godless communists with no respect for human life.

Me:  Wow, I guess Nancy Reagan must be Swiss. 

Dr. Birf:  I've been trying to tell people that for years, but no ones listening.

Me:  O.k., but I don't understand the president's opposition to expanding stem cell research.  Researchers want to use fertilized eggs that couples were using to get pregnant.  When they succeed, they throw all the other eggs out.  Why can't they be used for research?

Dr. Birf:  Life begins at conception.

Me:  Whose conception?

Dr. Birf:  Huh?

Me:  Never mind.  But these eggs are going to be destroyed.  They could save lives.  It's not like they're ever going to grow up and become Democrats or something.  Just imagine--if people had been allowed to experiment with them, they might have found a cure for Alzheimer's and Ronald Reagan might be alive today.

Dr. Birf:  Hey, are you one of those Godless communists?

Me:  Not that I know of.  I still don't understand your objection to using these cells.

Dr. Birf:  I'm not surprised.  It's very complex.  Think of a slippery slope.  First you use these fertilized eggs, then you use aborted fetuses, and then what?  Two-year old babies you don't want anymore?  All life is sacred.

Me:  Oh, I get it.  The slope could be so bad that eventually they'd be using criminals who'd been executed.

Dr. Birf:  Oh, that's be o.k.

Me:  But I thought all life was sacred.

Dr. Birf:  Not when you're a hardened criminal and a menace to society.

Me:  Wait a minute.  You couldn't use two-year ODs--they're not fetuses anymore.

Dr. Birf:  It's not clear when a fetus becomes a baby--that's why we have to be ever vigilant.

Me:  Thank you, Dr. P.  That's all so much clearer now.

Dr. Birf:  Really?  Could you send me a transcript?

Me:  Sure.

All The News That's Fit to Puke

Good morning, Mr. & Ms. America.  News flash:  Bush Backs Intelligent Design.  According to the Washington Post, the president calls for open dialogue in our schools--"both sides should be properly taught," said the Ivy League graduate.  Congressman Barney Frank responded, "People might cite George Bush as proof that you can be totally impervious to the ffects of Harvard and Yale education."

I'm willing to accept that some religious people fear that evolution is a threat to their religion, although I don't agree.  But I'm not willing to give the Prez that leeway.  The religious right is on the move & that, Mr. & Ms. America is not good for U.S.  The creationists cite all the holes and problems with evolution.  Hey, go study quantum physics if you want to see holes & problems & confusion & theories that even physicists admit they don't understand except through mathematical formulae.  But they're still scientific theories, i.e., they can be tested.  Creationism cannot be tested, therefore, it's not a scientific theory.  Post Hoc Propter, ergo cogito sum.

Page Two:  If they wont talk, beat them to death.  Iraqi Maj. Gen. Abed Hamed Mowhoush was beat to death in prison by Americans because he wouldn't tell them how to pronounce his last name.  Since the CIA was involved, it's all classified, so I won't say anything for fear of the same treatment.

Page Three:  Another day, another few dead Americans and Iraqis.  Not to mention fuel rationing in the country with the second largest oil reserves in the world.  Yup, we're winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people.  It's just their guns that hate us. 

Page Four:  Goodnight Mr. & Ms. America.  And God help us all.

Evolution vs. Intelligent Design

Driving around yesterday, I was listening to Kojo Nandi on WKMU, one of those ultra-liberal, anti-American, Commie-inspired public radio stations.  Someone called in to talk about evolution.  I almost ran off the road as I heard this intelligent-sounding fellow talk about how many scientists have given up on evolution, that it's not even really a theory but a hypothesis, that there's no proof of evolution, that the fossil record is a joke, and that "fairness" demands that we teach Intelligent Design as well as evolution.

He was so full of buffalo lard, it's hard to even know where to begin, but the sad reality is that people like this can't be swayed by reason, logic, or facts.  They've distorted the world to fit their own bizarre world view.

And then I remembered two things: 

First, a quote in this month's Discover Magazine by Nobel laureate Leon Lederman in his 1993 book The God Particle.  He said, “The Higgs field, the standard model, and our picture of how God made the universe depend on finding the Higgs boson."  And I realized something.  Scientists have no problem with God.  Many physicists, biologists, astronomers and others are deeply religious.  One of Einstein's most famous quotes was a result of his dismay at the implications of quantum physics--namely that the world is governed by probability curves and is not Newtonian.  Einstein:  "I cannot believe that God plays dice with the world.

Many scientists see no dispute between God and science.  Why then do so many at the fringe of Christianity get themselves tied in knots over science.

Second, the notion that the Bible's to be taken literally and that the Lord created the world in 6 days.  And I remembered that great quote from "Inherit the Wind," the play about the July 1925 Scopes Monkey trial over teaching evolution in school.   At one point,  Clarence Darrow put Williams Jenning Bryan on the stand (their names in the play were changed) and browbeats him into acknowledging that since God didn't create the sun until the 3rd (4th?  I can't find my copy) day, how could one know that the first day was 24 hours--maybe it was 25 hours...or 25 million years.

But I come back, confused & bewildered by those who are either so ignorant or disingenuous as to preach that the English version of the Bible we read is the revealed word.  Have they read the original version in Aramaic, or the subsequent Greek and Hebrew versions?  Do they know how many conflicting passages there are in even the King James' version?  I must confess, I don't understand their fear of evolution and science.

But I do know and fear their growing power and influence.

America The Beautiful

It's time for another rant!  Well, perhaps not another rant.  Perhaps a more sober reflection on the state of our country...nah...let's rant.

Oooo...a better idea.  I'll let Randy Newman do it for me. 

"No one likes us, I don't know why.  We may not be perfect, but heaven knows we try.

"And all around, even our all old friends put us down, let's drop the big one, and see what happens.

"We give them money, but are they greatful?  No they're spiteful and they're hateful.

"They don't respect us, so let's surprise them, we'll drop the big one and pulverize them.

"Asia crowded, Europe's too old, Africa's far too hot, and Canada's too cold.  South America stole our name.  Let's drop the big one, there'll be no one left to blame us.

"We'll save Australia.  Don't wanna hurt no kangaroo.  We'll build an all American amusement park there.  They got surfing too.

"Boom goes London, and Boom Paree, more room for you and more room for me.  And every city, the whole world round, will just be another American town. 

"Oh how peaceful it'll be, we'll set everybody free, you'll wear a Japanese kimona, babe, it'll be Italian shoes for me.  They all hate us anyhow, so let's drop the big one now.

"Let's drop the big one now."

(I couldn't have said it any better....and if I owe Mr. Newman any royalties, someone let me know & I'll be glad to send him a check.)

Happy American day.

Being Smart in Iraq: James Fallows

April's Atlantic Monthly  has a celebration of the obvious written by James Fallows, one of the true Renaissance reporters around these days.  His article, "Getting Out Right," can only be read in full if you subscribe, so I'll outline his points.  Most them fall into the category of "Mr. President, Mr. Cheney, Mr. Rumsfeld, if this is too tough for you, I suggest entering the 'No Diplomat Left Behind' program offered by the Kuwaiti Embassy."