Sunday, February 19, 2006


Well, what a dry spell. Good thing I gorged myself during the summer/fall in order to store up enough fat to cover me during my long hibernation.

So, as I'll try to pick this back up, I want to put my money where my mouth is.

I have $5 on this sad wager: U.S. will carry out bombing/warring in Iran by Dec. 31 2006.

This was actually my New Years revelation. I'm sticking to it, not because it is something I want to see, but because in my opinion it is inevitable.

Funny thing though about these "cartoon riots." I, however, have the perfect solution. Let's take any one of the daft Clerics that declared Fatwa against the Denmark paper that printed the cartoons 1 YEAR AGO! and pit them against Pat Robertson.

We'll call it The Holy Battle of the Wingnuts. Broadcast it live, no punches, scratching or physical contact. The two "chosen" will fight eachother by telling the people what God/Mohammed/whatever will do to their opponent.

I would imagine there will be a lot of dead airtime, so to fill in the dull moments, we'll pan to the audience. The audience will be split 50/50. Those on Islamic Cleric's side and those on the Right Wing Christian's side. Panning to the audience, we'll do one-on-one interviews with all the followers. Then finally, the populations of the world (assuming enought translators are available) will finally see that extreme religion can be just as lucrative/enjoyable as extreme sports. To be taken at face value and for observational/learning purposes only.

Saturday, November 05, 2005

Armies of Confliction

It is time for Americans to realize that the 'greater than thou' attitude that some express can only be supported by a concious effort by such a country to uphold rights, responsibilities and respect for humanity.

The three R's we are taught in school have somehow not been put to use. Nevermind 'rithmetic and 'riting were a bending the rules anyway. Usage of at least the first two, by the Americans atop the 'pedestal,' would lead to an epiphany. We have reached a state where we are no longer the shining light on the hill, cliche as it sounds. If this were true, then how does one who is informed (that is using all three of the R's) justify inhumane treatment of others?

Someone finds information that we may still be abusing people and 'rites about it. We as the consumers we are, read this information. Then those who use what they learned in school excercise the 'rithmetic and realize that it doesn't add up. Freedom has no subset of abuse. In fact, abuse is the product of nothing, zero, null, notta damned thing.

I find it heartening to see that Senator McCain, a man who was abused in Vietnam, is listening, reading, 'riting, and following through with the 'rithmetic that abuse just doesn't fucking add up. After all, he should know full well since he has been there. Senator McCain has vowed to add anti-abuse laws to every bill that hits the Senate floor, until the amendment has passed.

A head nod is in order to Senator McCain for taking back the basic principles of human rights, and Geneva Conventions. What seperates people from eachother are location, and cultural beliefs/principles. If we as Americans turn a blind eye to what is being carried out and commanded/condoned by this administration than how can we consider ourselves as spreading freedom? That sounds more liking spreading bullshit.

What is important for us, as Americans, is that as we come to this realization, we must hold the policy makers responsible. Soldiers are trained to follow orders and we should not hold the soldiers as the sole people responsible for these activities. Rather, when a problem is institutional, one must hold the institution responsible. While doing so, maybe we'll even allow them some of the remaining R's, rights and respect. Well, minus the respect.

So as this administration courts the "armies of compassion," nevermind the paradoxical phrase, such groups must ask themselves... "Am I supporting this?"


"Abuse is the weapon of the vulgar"

Samual Griswold Goodrich

Wednesday, October 26, 2005

Abu Ghraib, Underground Beatdowns has an interview with Col. Janice Karpinski. She is talking about Abu Ghraib, which she was in control of until General Miller took control of the interrogations at Abu Ghraib. Col. Karpinski was previously a General, however she was demoted because of her resistance to the violations of the Geneva Conventions carried out by trained and untrained interrogators.

The important and pertinent information here is that there are subordinates that are going to jail for the abuse practices, scapegoating if you will. However, these scapegoats were ordered and maintained from the top down. General Miller brought these techniques from 'Gitmo' and this is an institutional problem, not a few 'bad apples.' Even as the privates that are going to jail, such as Lyndie England, Rumsfeld and the lawyers, that OK'd these Geneva Convention guideline violations, are not going to jail.

We as the American public need to shocked into an awakening. The photos due to come out, supposedly worse pictures, are the only way for us to wake up. The whole argument that the release of the pictures will endanger our soldiers lives is Bullshit. The abuse that is/was carried out is the what adds to our woes. The picture suppression is not about troop safety, it is about administration safety. If a national conversation is started about "we" as distributors of freedom via sick sexual perversions, deprivations and sadistic mind games, I dare say that the public wouldn't agree as such.

Blind followers will only trip and fall, blindly.

Wednesday, October 19, 2005

Limbaugha ha ha.

O' dear, I just had one of the best laughs I've had in a long time. I feel so much healthier because of it, thanks Rush! Yesterday, Rush took it upon himself to be the one man bipartisan debate. I suppose this is possible if he has multiple personalities, which for the record could be plausible :). I mean, there is G.I. Junkie Limbaugh, G.I. Neo-Con Limbaugh, G.I. (Republican) White House Spokesman Limbaugh... all of which can be purchased at his website, however, before you can purchase anything you must register your soul and pay the premium of approaching his enlightenment.

But I digress, Limbaugh had this to say:

LIMBAUGH: Moving onto the audio sound bytes. Yesterday, Michigan State University. A forum on the state of news journalism. ABC's Sam Donaldson says, "How important is objectivity?"

DONALDSON (audio clip): If you listen to Rush Limbaugh, you don't hear a lot of the other side. I try to --

LIMBAUGH: Stop the tape. Sam, you don't listen to Rush Limbaugh. Otherwise you wouldn't have said that. What do I do on this program? I set up exactly what the other side's position is. I'm the only one who'll do it honestly. If I have a liberal guest on this program, I'm not guaranteed the liberal guest is going to be honest about what he believes. So in order to establish what I believe and what I think, I set myself up by presenting the liberal point of view on whatever issue it is I'm talking about. So he's wrong about that.

Let me get this straight, as an honest man (hahum Oxycontin can be attributed to this delusional view) he feels that he is the "only one who'll do it honestly", referring to himself laying out the 'liberal' point of view (POV). Let us follow this junked logic:

self = "Limbaugh"
A="liberal POV"
A2= "Conservative POV"
B= True
D="a external liberal"

Since D AND A = ~B
Therefore (( self AND A) = B )
If A != A2
Then (self AND A) < (self AND A2) since (self > D) AND D != B therefore AND self=self
D < style="font-weight: bold;">AND (D AND C) in the subset of (self AND C)
Therefore self = B

Since an external liberal POV is not True, Limbaugh vocalizes the liberal POV as truth. If the liberal POV is not the same as conservative POV then Limbaughs vocalization of the liberal POV is lesser than Limbaughs vocalization of the conservative POV since an external liberal is not True. Therefore one must conclude that only Limbaugh is True. If the liberal POV is the same as the Conservative POV then the external Liberal belief is a subset of Limbaughs belief and therefore the external liberal is lesser than Limbaugh.

Of course, for anyone to have the patience to work through this logic, logic properties aside, one would have to most certainly be on some Oxycontin in order to settle down enough in order to analyze it. That or just have something to prove, which in the case of the latter, only goes to show you that the liberal mind seeks to understand the opposition in order to justify what kind of crazy good pills ones must swallow in order to take a specific stand.

Interestingly enough, the forum that Sam Donaldson put the question to was about media bias. What better bias does one need with a one-man show!?!?

In holding true to my most recent trend of posting interesting tidbits, I submit as evidence this from the French:

"Two quite opposite qualities equally bias our minds - habits and novelty"
Jean de la Bruyere quotes
(French satiric moralist, 1645-1696)

Tuesday, October 18, 2005

Rumours Amuck.

While I don't hold much to the possible VP rumoured resignation. The only way this could happen is if Cheney is directly responsible for the outing of Valerie Plame, which has sparked the rumour mill today. Supposedly a Cheney top Aide, John Hannah, on loan to the VP office via John Bolton is cooperating with, AKA 'rolled', special prosecutor Fitzgerald. This, though, is interesting because George Stephanapolous dropped a bombshell, a couple weeks ago, saying this went all the way to the top of the Bush administration, according to his sources.

QT: video
WMV: video
via crooks and liars
Upon reflection of the possible repercussions from this, I wondered the process for who gets the VP position, of course assuming Cheney would resign. I headed to wikipedia to find information on the process and found that the most recent example was ... ... Watergate, as a note look at the Succession and the 25th Amendment Section.

This similar to when Ford was put in as VP after Spiro Agnew resigned during Watergate and ... ... Nixon himself then resigned. If I recall correctly, this would put the Senate majority leader as the "acting President" which currently is Bill Frist (R) from TN. Who incidentally has also been subpoenaed by the SEC so such a unlikely scenario could put anyone into the office, of course this is based on huge assumptions.

Funny enough though, is that this is strikingly similar to Watergate, via situational dominoes. However, let there be no mistake outing a CIA NOC is treason, and in my opinion, out performs spying on an opposition party.

As a signoff, I'm noticing that I tend to post something of interest to me, for this post I'll post this quote:

"In politics, what begins in fear usually ends in folly."
---- Coleridge

Sunday, October 16, 2005

auto-manic for the people

Along the lines of my previous post, news came out this past week regarding the big US automakers sales have slumped. Where sales fell as follows:

Ford: down 45%
GM: down 57%

Overall US automakers sales: down 33%

I am not so sadistic that I would consider this a good thing for America, especially to the employed individuals. I hope that such people find jobs and can 'weather' the storm.

The article goes on to reason that the decline in sales is due to the interest rate frenzy having been played out and mopped up. I would have to agree in part. True that the zero percent financing may/is waning, however, the article does not delve into the energy crunch most Americans have been recently put into. The single difference between the big US autos and the 'Asian' import autos is one common denominator, gas mileage.

In fact, in the beautiful NW, consumers are yelling, screaming, ?yodeling? for better fuel efficient vehicles, even asking for better metrics in measuring standard mpg for vehicles. I hope that automakers wake up to the fact that when the people have empty pockets they have choices to make. Choices are made between fast/beefy or efficient/dinky. The genius that the engineers should be approaching is, how can we have both!

That is, how can we satisfy the soccer mom and the hippie? How can we satisfy the redneck and his/her mudden' truck as well as the commuter with their traffic dodger? If they can address these issues, then the ole big US automakers of the past will return to their once righteous glory.

Incidentally, I would like to see the automakers stand up to the energy giants. That would prove to be a battle royale. It is time for automakers here in the US, which by the way only means they originated here since now they probably have their bank assets somewhere in the Cayman Islands :) , to wake up to the consumer. The consumer that when shit hits the fan, realizes that high gas prices translate into not going out and buying that soccer mom Ford Extinction.

An interesting note is the relation of automakers average mpg for their fleet and the price of gasoline over the past few years. Notice the increase of SUVs/Trucks approaching 2005 and the mpg average. Of course, then looking at the sales dropoff of these same vehicles now, one can only wonder when the automakers themselves will cut a backroom deal with energy monopolists and plead for lower prices for their own bottom line.

I do hope to see in the future that we wake up as U.S. consumers to the effects of our actions. Cause and effect is supposed to be the cornerstone of a responsible and intelligent person. It seems to me the time has come for a effective-ass-swat on U.S. consumers in order to pull them from their TV sets and see that our dependency on fossil fuels. Actually, they should be pulled toward their TV sets with enough information to decipher what is being gascast into their eyeballs. The situation we are in right now in the Middle East, has everything to do with energy. The sooner one realizes that, the sooner a consumer can help affect the cause and change the effect of the situation.

If it were not for my tiring eyelids, I would at this point dive into the global warming issue but alas, twill have to wait for another time. I did find this funny t-shirt though...

Wednesday, October 05, 2005

I am at a loss for words....

I ran across this story today. I am at a loss for words. Cars are being stolen from the US and used for suicide car bombings in Iraq!?!?!? Are you freakin serious? How in the world could this happen?

The inquiry began after coalition troops raided a Falluja bomb factory last November and found a Texas-registered four-wheel-drive being prepared for a bombing mission. Investigators said there were several other cases where vehicles evidently stolen in the US wound up in Syria or other Middle Eastern countries and ultimately in the hands of Iraqi insurgent groups, including al-Qaeda in Iraq.

So, as an argument, we as Americans should drive fuel efficient, hybrid, SMALL cars in order to avoid aiding the terrorists. Wow. You won't see that extrapolated for any headline scrolling news.

The 'Gore'y Details of Democracy.

I just read the most practical and well reasoned synopsis of our current state of affairs here in the US. Prepare for a long read, but it is absolutely amazing. Here are some of the most notable portions that caught my attention from this article.

On the eve of the nation's decision to invade Iraq, our longest serving senator, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, stood on the Senate floor asked: "Why is this chamber empty? Why are these halls silent?"

The decision that was then being considered by the Senate with virtually no meaningful debate turned out to be a fateful one. A few days ago, the former head of the National Security Agency, Retired Lt. General William Odom, said, "The invasion of Iraq, I believe, will turn out to be the greatest strategic disaster in U.S. history."

But whether you agree with his assessment or not, Senator Byrd's question is like the others that I have just posed here: he was saying, in effect, this is strange, isn't it? Aren't we supposed to have full and vigorous debates about questions as important as the choice between war and peace?

Those of us who have served in the Senate and watched it change over time, could volunteer an answer to Senator Byrd's two questions: the Senate was silent on the eve of war because Senators don't feel that what they say on the floor of the Senate really matters that much any more. And the chamber was empty because the Senators were somewhere else: they were in fundraisers collecting money from special interests in order to buy 30-second TVcommercials for their next re-election campaign.

Interestingly enough, I myself have swayed away from the lure of the TV. I dare say any 'boob tube' I watch are movies that I've rented and the occasional Jim Lehrer News Hour/BBC. Gore goes on to describe the history and emancipation of ideas associated with democracy and movable type machines. How the national debate moved ideas around in print. However, the move to TV and Radio had been a mostly one sided conversation... a form of propaganda. A one sided conversation where you are told, take it or leave it. There are of course exceptions, such as talk radio with people calling in and such, hahum Air America :) and to be fair, Rush Limbaugh (that took a lot of courage to say :( ) .

People realized that they no longer had a voice in the matter and the 60's revolution took shape.

Soon after television established its dominance over print, young people who realized they were being shut out of the dialogue of democracy came up with a new form of expression in an effort to join the national conversation: the "demonstration." This new form of expression, which began in the 1960s, was essentially a poor quality theatrical production designed to capture the attention of the television cameras long enough to hold up a sign with a few printed words to convey, however plaintively, a message to the American people. Even this outlet is now rarely an avenue for expression on national television.

This, quite obviously, resonates true even today. We seem to be caught teetering on this balance even today. Just two weeks ago, ~1 million people marched around the world in rejection of the war in Iraq. Corporate media saw it as a blip on the news radar, they were written off as extremists, and crazies. For the people marching, however, it was they only thing they felt they had left to do was participate in solidarity for a common cause. Yes, of course there were "strange", a relative term, people marching and some even crazy (again relative.) But, they felt this was the only way to be heard. Well I heard them and it is a shame that the 'powers that be' didn't, atleast in part.

I do not have the perspective most 'older' Americans do as I've only grown up as a child to the baby boomers (not sure what generation title I carry.) However, this doesn't mean that I haven't already seen changes within the timeframe of my being aware and conscious of a "national consciousness."

I am trying to deny the urge to point out the ridiculousness of the current administration, but cannot resist.... Read Gores speech, after you are blown away, picture anything fractionally coherent coming from the vile lips of our current resident president.... Exactly my point. The just of a logical argument from this administration is. We must "A" because we are "A'ers," so just let us do our "A'ing." I've said this before, and actually saw it in a Daily Show skit too. Obviously, you can replace "A" with any verb, and it fits the anti-rhetorical pattern of any single Bush speech. Enough said.