Illegitimate Moron

I mean to suggest that he's illegitimate in both senses of the word.

Even more, via Smirking Chimp via the Philadelphia Inquirer, on the stolen election of 2004. Keep up the good work, patriots!

Check It Out Y'All

Check out the new link to the right: it's called "I Fucked Ann Coulter in the Ass...Hard."

It's Hi-lar-i-ous.

Just to be Clear: It IS Called "Politics," Isn't It?

The darnedest thing happened yesterday after the Cubs beat the St. Louis Cardinals 2-0 in a baseball game. St. Louis skipper Tony LaRussa held his usual postgame press conference, but rather than taking questions from reporters in the clubhouse, he instead read a prepared statement that he had written during the game.

"I am surprised and saddened," LaRussa began, "that the Chicago Cubs have abandoned their commitment to honesty and integrity, and have instead chosen to play baseball." Continuing on, despite the obvious confusion on the faces of his listeners, LaRussa noted that the Cubs had scored both of their runs after a leadoff single, a stolen base, a sacrifice bunt, and then a sacrifice fly.

"Our team, which in its own way represents America, is simply trying to go out there and win games," LaRussa said. "However, we can't win many games if teams like Chicago are constantly trying to undermine us by playing baseball while we're trying to win." The Cardinals' manager then concluded by saying that the Cubs were harming the sport by refusing to lay down for his team. "Look, it's real simple. We can't have guys going around trying to beat us. We have to win, and in order to make sure we do, we have to make it so that they always lose. This isn't a game, you know."

Now, that was ridiculous. But not one damn bit more ridiculous than when some fucktard Republican complains about Democrats "playing politics" with the issues. In fact, such a complaint is exactly like complaining that you lost a baseball game because your opponent, well, played baseball better than you did! It's CALLED "politics" for a reason--and I'm guessing that reason is that it is, by definition, political. Any dumbfuck retards on the Right who don't get that should kill themselves now and do the rest of us a favor. Or, am I just "playing smart" in a country that wants to be stupid?

Jesus Christ

If you exist, oh Lord, reward this guy with lots of riches and naked, slutty Bush twins. Goddamn this is funny shit. You may need to try it a couple of times, the link is shitty. And, the language is a little strong, so all you kids under five, go ask mommy to read it to you. All you over five, think about how many kindergarteners you could take. For the record, I could beat up at least ten 5-year olds.

It's always nice when you can say that Americans died for a good cause. Too bad these kids got slagged for nothing. FOUR MORE YEARS! FOUR MORE YEARS! FOUR MORE..ahh, shove it up your ass, killer.

When was the Last Time You Saw a Marine Cry?

Lots of people are coming back from Iraq either dead or with big ol' nasty wounds. The thing I can't get over is that many of these big, tough guys who went off to war all hard have come back broken. I'm not a forgiving person, ordinarily, but I just hate to see US Marines cry. And I see a lot of them doing just that, lately. What's wrong with these guys? Could it be that they're finally coming around to the fact that their government sent them off to a jolly little war without adequate protection? Is it a mental breakdown from the knowledge that they are now complicit in an illegal, genocidal war crime? Do they just dislike being fed into a meat grinder by a collection of punk-ass clowns on Capitol Hill?

Has anyone else noticed that all the nutjob snipers, homegrown terrorists--ah, I mean, "extremist militiamen"--and judge-shooting escaped convicts are ex-military? What can it all mean, I ask facetiously.

Hi, Clyde!

Where Do We Go Now...

Great article by Dr. Jim on what the Left should do now (hint: it involves positive thinking **gross oversimplification alert!**).

Hints for Beginners

If you ever feel like making your own blog, take it from me, a six-month (?) veteran: make it so only registered users can leave comments. Sure, it's exclusive and stifles "free speech." So?

"Free speech" doesn't exist--all there is is the argument over what needs to be said and what isn't worth saying. It's a contest, but there are boundaries. And my point is, if you don't enjoy having a thousand "anonymous" comments on your blog every day, most of them obviously the brain farts of dickless Republicans, turn off the open comments and require a name to go with the stupid.

It's funny how accountability scares off the rightwingers. To go off on a tagent, it's sort of like when other people call for the government to get tough on rich people drugs like coke and heroin: all of a sudden the Republicans don't know nothin' 'bout no drug war. Coke? What's that? Like the soda? Why you lookin' at the President all funny like that? That's baby powder on his nose...really! Go get them crackheads! They black!

Master Shake orders you to vote Democrat. If they stop being pussies by 2006. And get some hot chicks with nice boobies on the ticket.

Republicans Endorse Return to Slavery

From Abraham Lincoln:
"Near eighty years ago we began by declaring that all men are created equal, but now from that beginning we have run down to that other declaration, that for some men to enslave others is a 'sacred right of self-government.'"
And this: "That perfect liberty they sigh for is the liberty of making slaves of other people."

Now, substitute the words "enrich themselves at the expense of" for the word "enslave" and you'll see the parallel. Just as the South claimed, disingenuously enough, to defend liberty through preserving slavery, so the Republican Party, libertarians, and other "great thinkers" now claim to defend the soul of liberty through the endorsement of the raw accumulation of wealth. The essence of freedom, they would have us know, is to be unencumbered by any sense of duty to your fellow man.

More astonishing, liberty seems to have been distilled into the notion that being a slave to the market makes one "free." We shall make slaves of ourselves and others, for no other reason than our obeisance to an abstraction called "market forces." Very well. If some men claim to be powerless against an idea (ridiculous!), the perpetuation of which is only possible through their continuing belief in it, then we must consider those men to be insane and a detriment to our collective project. Is it excusable to push away the starving, the suffering, the destitute, and to commend to them that most unjust of constructions, "the market"?

For shame. For shame.

(Can you tell I've been reading Lincoln?)

Whaaaaaa?!

Tune-in to the Science Channel (if you get it; it's a digital cable, bastard spawn of the Discovery Channel--itself no prize) this week for a great commercial that points up the disconnect from logic and reality in this country that I am struggling to understand. The commercial begs viewers to watch the Science Channel for all news technological, and lists some upcoming shows. One of them apparently centers on "how technology is helping New York City prepare for another attack."

But, dear sirs, why in Heaven's name would NYC have to prepare for another attack? Isn't Monkey McMoron keepin' us safer? Haven't we established that all the turr'ists are in Iraq, which is now peaceful and democracy-loving and grateful to us?

What the fuck is going on here? WHY DOES THE SCIENCE CHANNEL HATE AMERICA?

Activist Judges

According to this, Republicans are going to force the issue on the so-called "nuclear option" for ending the filibuster (is it just me, or do the names of these hack tactics become more macho in directly inverse proportion to the dicklessness of the people proposing them?). All I can hear is that comedian channelling Christopher Lloyd doing Rev. Jim doing the Klingon from Star Trek 3: "Captain Kirk...you don't wanna give me the Genesis Device...okey-doke!"

Well, fuck it. Shut 'em down. If even one Democrat keeps his seat in the next election, he (or Hillary) can all but freeze the fucking Senate anyway, through procedural wonkery. Let the Republicans have at it--they have nothing to gain and a world to lose.

On the other hand, this complicates matters somewhat for those of us trying to figure out what the flying fuck Republicans are doing. Nothing they do seems to make any logical sense, and I'm convinced they don't have any plan at all except to wake up, locate today's enemy, and go after it. Tomorrow they'll get up and pick a new, possibly unrelated enemy, and off they'll go again. No thought required; no need to reconcile yesterday with today. They don't after all, live in the "reality-based" community. These simpletons have convinced themselves that they are the visionaries, and they are the masters of the universe.

So, if I get this correctly, the Right has just spent a few weeks denouncing federal judges and calling for strict oversight of them and limits to their power. And now, Bill Frist wants to simultaneously marginalize the minority party (which won't always be the Democrats, Billy boy!) and remove some of the oversight of federal judges he seemed to have a hard-on for just yesterday, to wit: the ability of any reasonable person to block bad judges from getting lifetime appointments.

Does this man, or his party, know how utterly stupid that is? Do they care? Have their drooling, clapping trained-seal supporters given them any reason to fear for their jobs? I'm going with "no" on all three.

I've said it before but it bears repeating: Fuck 'em all. Fuck 'em 'till they're dead.

The Human Skin Envelope, Please

And the new Pope is: Cardinal Ratzinger! Congratulations, Your Holiness, on winning the papal sweepstakes. As a parting gift, you will receive the hearts and minds of 1 billion Catholics and the undying enmity of 500 million Jews--in light of that whole "I was a Nazi during WWII" thing. As a hardline conservative, you inherit the unenviable task of dragging women, minorities, and free-thinking people back to the kitchen/bedroom, the cotton field/rice paddy, and the Dark Ages, respectively.

But, you have secret weapon: the overlooked conservative policies of your predecessor, the vastly overrated John Paul II, who did more to hurt women, children (unless sexual abuse is somehow good for them, now?), gays, and Latin American liberation theologists than any other person on earth. And he was right to do it: I mean, who wouldn't want to be a slave in Guatemala forever? I know I would!

So, best of luck to you, Benedict XVI! You'll need it; just like you'll need your considerable people-managing skills, like the ones you honed as a guard at a Nazi factory that used Jewish slave labor.

Go get 'em, tiger!!

Shield Your Eyes!!!

Either it's a goiter of unbelievable size (get your thyroid checked, bitch!), or else Annie is a tranny. By the way, this photo must have been taken after Ann ate something; she looks almost human. Thanks to Chapel Perilous for the picture.

Adultery = Murder

I agree wholeheartedly with conservatives on one issue: the sanctity of marriage. That's why I, along with all my liberal buddies, joined forces with our batshit-crazy rightwing brethren over Michael Schiavo's right to disconnect his wife from life support.
In addition, I am thrilled to see that Congressional Republicans are pushing hard for an amendment to any federal "Defense of Marriage" Act, that will criminalize adultery and immoral behavior by either partner in a marriage. Rudy Giuliani is reportedly on board, telling Cokie Roberts that he "ought to have to pay for leaving my wife in that hospital while she was getting treated for cancer. I mean--I--I'm serious here: kicking my kids out of Gracie Mansion and moving in my secretary, who I was banging at the time; that's just not morally right."
Rep. Henry Hyde, avatar of Whitewater and the Clinton impeachment, also expressed remorse for his past peccadilloes with Congressional interns, telling reporters from Chicago, Illinois' ABC-7 that he felt "terrible" about his hypocrisy. Other members of the Republican party, including Senate majority leader Bill Frist, Rep. Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay, former Rep. Joe Scarborough, who murdered his intern/lover, and Dennis Hastert, along with some Democrats, led by intern-groper extraordinaire Joe Lieberman, admitted that they had all done things they were "not proud of" during their careers, and that they felt that the Defense of Marriage Act was necessary to ensure that they did not repeat past mistakes.
"I'm only human," sobbed Lieberman. "I mean, it was OK to blame Bill for the Monica scandal--can't you see that I wanted to be President? Besides, he had a foxy wife at home--have you seen the horror show that is my wife?" All Republicans present nodded gravely and muttered similar statements about their ugly wives.
Look, people. This ain't hard to figure out: adultery is killing our country. All our strife, all our problems, can be traced back to an undone zipper somewhere. Call it the "magic fly" thesis, but what's wrong with the US of A can't be made right until the pants go back on and the dignity is restored to our elected representatives. For as we all know, it's dignity that separates the Joe Liebermans of the world from the rest of us scum.

And THAT, more than anything, is why we have, as our duty, to give full support to the Defense of Marriage Act. Unless, of course, the Republicans don't, for some reason, want to play by the same rules they've been pushing on everybody else for the last ten years. But that would be bald hypocrisy, and everyone would see through it in an instant. The alternative is too horrible to consider: the careers of honest, rational civil servants and intellectuals would end, politics as we know it would be stood on its head, and we'd be living in a Twilight Zone land of cognitive dissonance where abject stupidity carried the day.

Somebody cue up the Golden Earring...

Go Suck That!

Good article from something called "The Black Commentator" on why the Democratic Leadership Council should be removed from power as quickly as humanly possible. These people have fucked us all royally, and they ought never again to work in politics or on "behalf" of Democrats. Goddamn numbnuts fuckwits.

Bush? Bush Who?

My favorite blog of all is WTF Is IT NOW??!, by Maru (see link at right--God, I feel like a shill). She may have a Republican for a boyfriend (hey, they follow orders real good, if you know what I mean. Eh? Eh?), but she's OK with me. Plus, the woman strings together invective like nobody this side of the Rude Pundit. Look that one up your damn self.
But, it's a bit depressing to talk about the Gloryhole-Patroller-in-Chief everyday. What can you say or do to the guy that he hasn't already made obvious and superfluous by his own conduct? It's just too easy, is what I'm saying. And I, for one, am tired of talking about him. I expect I will continue to put down his supporters, though--they, at least, should know better.
Henceforth, then, unless it's really, REALLY funny, I will not be posting anything about that little shit pile. No pictures, no stories, no gay phony reporter in the White House ([ahem!]bedrooms[cough!]), no taped admission to drug use, no mention of his abstinence from church-going while he claims the title of High Holy Protector of the Realm, no longwinded diatribes against his cowardice, venality, and barbarity. Sorry, it's just not even worth noting.
In fact, I recommend that everyone stop paying attention to the monkey boy. If you've read Kitty Kelley's book, you know GW has quite a grudge against his father, and George, Sr. This is really quite obvious: he's a bad kid who just wants attention. Let us all treat him with the derision we usually reserve for spoiled children, and then proceed to work around him until he is ready to come out of the corner. As much as we might enjoy taking a belt and beating his fucking ass...! No, no. We mustn't.
Let's concentrate on eviscerating the GOP, not its silly little figurehead. He's wasted enough of our time and, until we quit looking, he will continue to show his ass with pure abandon. He likes it. He thinks it works. He has been right so far. Let's put the adults back in charge and the kids back in their places. Who's with me?

And Maru, take a break from the Bushwatch. It'll make you crazy.

Hark the Sound of Tar Heel Voices

Hark the sound of Tar Heel voices, ringing clear and true. Singing Carolina's praises, shouting N-C-U! Hail to the brightest star of all, clear its radiance shine. Carolina priceless gem, receive all praises thine.
I'm a Tar Heel born, I'm a Tar Heel bred, and when I die I'm a Tar Heel dead. So it's Rah, Rah, Car'lina-lina Rah, Rah, Car'lina-linaRah, Rah, Car'lina-lina Rah! Rah! Rah! (and might I add, "go to hell, State!")

Aaah. My national champion alma mater. I still can't believe it. Being a Cubs fan, a Bulls fan, and a Hurricanes fan, I never thought I'd see a championship again. I suffered through Bill "Nappy Time" Guthridge, Matt "Psycho Killer" Doherty, and the end of the NCAA run Dean started thirty-some years ago. And, for once in my life, I live right in the middle of enemy territory, Illinois, so I can torment the shiteating-grinners and Big Ten fans up here for the next eleven months.

Thank YOU, Jesus.

Abstinence Makes the Heart Grow Fonder

...and, we can assume from this informative website, it also makes teenagers fixate on anal sex. Sweeeeeeet.

Thanks to Jamie.

Grand Theft Election

More on the stolen election from In These Times Magazine. I highly recommend a subscription--plus you'll get This Modern World in every issue!

Reparations

Here's something I thought of many years ago, and it's the best reason I've ever heard for why reparations should not be paid to African Americans. I sent a letter on the subject to In These Times magazine, a Chicago lefty rag, and they published it. Which makes me quite the celebrity in my own house. Which is to say, I think I'm awesome.

Anyway, the point is this: we live in dumb times. Times where the exchange of money carries with it an implied contract. Just as out-of-court settlements preclude public discussion of the issue resolved, so too do most monetary transactions in a market society.

So what's the problem? In brief, the problem with paying reparations to people many generations removed from the act in question is that once every black person (and, I like to think, lots and lots of "white" people, too) receives the arbitrary lump sum (say, $20,000), the expectation will be that they will no longer voice complaints about their social situation. Does that make sense? See, if I gave you $20,000 dollars, effectively so you'll shut the fuck up, then I expect you to shut the fuck up. You have forfeited the right to say that your schools are terrible (they are), that people discriminate against you (they do), and that society is institutionally racist (it is).

Reparations, in short, would be a buyout of white guilt, and I would be amazed if whites ever again entertained any black complaints.

Two words: bad idea.

Although: I think my wife's family has a mixed up wood pile, so if we get $20,000, I'm all for it.

Fool Me Once, Shame On...You?

The 2004 election was stolen -- will someone please tell the media?

By Robert C. Koehler, Guerilla News Network

Was the election of 2004 stolen? Anyone who says yes is immediately a conspiracy nut, and the listener's eyeballs roll. So let's not ask that question.As they slowly hack democracy to death, we're as alone - we citizens - as we've ever been, protected only by the dust-covered cliches of the nation's founding: "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."

It's time to blow off the dust and start paying the price.The media are not on our side. The politicians are not on our side. It's just us, connecting the dots, fitting the fragments together, crunching the numbers, wanting to know why there were so many irregularities in the last election and why these glitches and dirty tricks and wacko numbers had not just an anti-Kerry but a racist tinge. This is not about partisan politics. It's more like: "Oh no, this can't be true."

I just got back from what was officially called the National Election Reform Conference, in Nashville, Tenn., an extraordinary pulling together of disparate voting-rights activists - 30 states were represented, 15 red and 15 blue - sponsored by a Nashville group called Gathering To Save Our Democracy. It had the feel of 1775: citizen patriots taking matters into their own hands to reclaim the republic. This was the level of its urgency.Was the election of 2004 stolen? Thus is the question framed by those who don't want to know the answer. Anyone who says yes is immediately a conspiracy nut, and the listener's eyeballs roll.

So let's not ask that question. Let's simply ask why the lines were so long and the voting machines so few in Columbus and Cleveland and inner-city and college precincts across the country, especially in the swing states, causing an estimated one-third of the voters in these precincts to drop out of line without casting a ballot; why so many otherwise Democratic ballots, thousands and thousands in Ohio alone, but by no means only in Ohio, recorded no vote for president (as though people with no opinion on the presidential race waited in line for three or six or eight hours out of a fervor to have their say in the race for county commissioner); and why virtually every voter complaint about electronic voting machine malfunction indicated an unauthorized vote switch from Kerry to Bush.

This, mind you, is just for starters. We might also ask why so many Ph.D.-level mathematicians and computer programmers and other numbers-savvy scientists are saying that the numbers don't make sense (see, for instance, www.northnet.org/minstrel, the Web site of Dr. Richard Hayes Phillips, lead statistician in the Moss vs. Bush lawsuit challenging the Ohio election results). Indeed, the movement to investigate the 2004 election is led by such people, because the numbers are screaming at them that something is wrong.And we might, no, we must, ask - with more seriousness than the media have asked - about those exit polls, which in years past were extraordinarily accurate but last November went haywire, predicting Kerry by roughly the margin by which he ultimately lost to Bush. This swing is out of the realm of random chance, forcing chagrined pollsters to hypothesize a "shy Republican" factor as the explanation; and the media have bought this evidence-free absurdity because it spares them the need to think about the F-word: fraud.

And the numbers are still haywire. A few days ago, Terry Neal wrote in the Washington Post about Bush's inexplicably low approval rating in the latest Gallup poll, 45 percent, vs. a 49 percent disapproval rating. This is, by a huge margin, the worst rating at this point in a president's second term ever recorded by Gallup, dating back to Truman.

"What's wrong with this picture?" asks exit polling expert Jonathan Simon, who pointed these latest numbers out to me. Bush mustered low approval ratings immediately before the election, surged on Election Day, then saw his ratings plunge immediately afterward. Yet Big Media has no curiosity about this anomaly.

Simon, who spoke at the Nashville conference - one of dozens of speakers to give highly detailed testimony on evidence of fraud and dirty tricks from sea to shining sea - said, "When the autopsy of our democracy is performed, it is my belief that media silence will be given as the primary cause of death."

In contrast to the deathly silence of the media is the silent scream of the numbers. The more you ponder these numbers, and all the accompanying data, the louder that scream grows. Did the people's choice get thwarted? Were thousands disenfranchised by chaos in the precincts, spurious challenges and uncounted provisional ballots? Were millions disenfranchised by electronic voting fraud on insecure, easily hacked computers? And who is authorized to act if this is so? Who is authorized to care?

No one, apparently, except average Americans, who want to be able to trust the voting process again, and who want their country back.

Robert Koehler, an award-winning, Chicago-based journalist, is an editor at Tribune Media Services and nationally syndicated writer. You can respond to this column at bkoehler@tribune.com or visit his Web site at commonwonders.com.(c) 2005 Tribune Media Services, Inc. Reprinted from Guerrilla News Network. (url deleted to save space--look it up, you lazy fuck).

"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

Fake News Wins Real Award

Comedy Central is playing up the fact that the Daily Show recently won a Peabody Award for its election coverage last year. In brief: the Peabody Awards were created in 1940 and are given by the University of Georgia, much like the Pulitzer is given out by Columbia University. In fact, the Peabody was created to be a "Pulitzer for radio." Today, it is considered the "most prestigious award in electronic media."

And now, Jon Stewart owns one. Actually, two. He also won for the 2000 election (so that's two more than that lying dicksucker, Bill O'Reilly). But I am unsure if this is a good thing.

I am a fan of his show, and I think he did yeoman's work last year when he offered the lone voice opposed to the drivel being willfully shoveled into the public ear by the regular, gutless media. But, I am not so sure that an alternative to the nightly news ought to replace the nightly news, if you see what I'm saying. TDS's visibility and now apparent viability offers no challenge to the Fucker Carlsons and Cokie Roberts' of the world. Now they can just shrug and say, "hey, if you want straight news, go watch the Daily Show," knowing full well that most people 1. don't have cable and 2. really do expect more from their regular news outlets.

My Teeth Hurt

According to the health newsletter put out by Consumer Reports, drinking wine in excess or holding it in the mouth for long periods of time can soften tooth enamel. You should drink wine with meals, when saliva helps wash your teeth, or drink in moderation. And, here's the part that will make your skin crawl: don't ever, ever, brush your teeth right after you drink wine, because you could be scraping off the softened enamel. Sweet dreams. (shudder)

54 Games Too Many

The Yankees and Red Sox played tonight for the 54th time in two seasons. This is, in a word, utterly ridiculous. The "rivalry" between the big, bad, Bronx Bombers and the small, lovable losers from Beantown is not only a sham (the teams have the two highest payrolls in all of sports, so there's no disparity there), but it's boring.

Major league sports has a problem: the nerds at the home office seize upon any successful matchup and schedule it over and over and over again until it becomes meaningless.

For example, about ten years ago it came to pass that the Detroit Red Wings and the newly-created Colorado Avalanche played a great series in the playoffs, replete with last-second goals, goalies standing on their heads to make saves, bench-clearing brawls (even Roy and Osgood--the goalies--fought each other). It was such a huge hit with fans that the NHL, cash-strapped as always, began scheduling the Wings and Avalanche to play on a regular basis. Though they aren't even in the same division, they suddenly found themselves playing practically all of their non-division games against each other. I mean, they played every Friday night for the whole season, at least a dozen games a year, plus the Western Conference playoffs, where you could count on a seven-game series. The shame of it is that the hockey was great most of the time, but the matchups grew stale very fast, and I for one began to wish for Calgary Flames, Buffalo Sabres, or even Edmonton Oilers games just for some variety. The Wings/Avalanche phony rivalry killed NHL viewership.

Basketball got a similar deal with the New York Knicks/Chicago Bulls, although the schedule couldn't be rearranged at the drop of a hat just so the teams could play more. But when the playoffs began, you could bet that the Bulls/Knicks would go seven games just to maximize revenue for the NBA.

Football, God bless 'em, doesn't have anough slots on the schedule to put up fake rivalries, though they still try to pimp that Giants/Philly thing (hint: nobody cares).

And now, baseball is at it. If you watched last season, you must have been disappointed by the playoff matchups, especially after seeing Boston and NY play at least twenty times during the regular season--every game on national TV. And then seven extra ones before the World Series. Did anyone care by that time? I didn't. And now, in a new season that's only two weeks old, the Yankees and Red Sox have already played 6 of their 9 games against one another. And, as the announcers consoled us tonight, they "won't play again for a long time, not until May 27, in fact." So, let me get this straight: I have to wait a whole six weeks before I can be forced to watch this contrived bullshit again?!

Headline: "Cardinals Draw Lots for Hotel Rooms"

I know, I know. Also not being a Catholic, I thought it was a baseball headline, too. And then I thought, "Who the fuck would want to go to Busch Stadium to see the Cardinals?"

But, it turns out that the cardinals in Rome are drawing lots to see who gets to sleep in that holiest of hostels, um...OK some damn hotel John Paul had built at fabulous expense so the electors could kick back while electing the new pope. Apparently, the old burlap-and-thumbtack chairs were a mit(r)e uncomfortable.

I suppose they could share rooms. I mean, the new rule is that cardinals over 80 don't get to vote anyway, so it's basically a young man's sausage-fest over there...

I See a Hand in the Back...

I've always wanted to ask a libertarian this question, but I've never actually met one. At least, not one who was out of junior high school. Like anarchists, libertarians just seem to outgrow themselves once they visit the real world. Do you think their reluctance to stick to it stems from the realization that they actually have to work for a living and that they aren't going to win the lottery or get whisked off to some fantasy castle somewhere?

But that's not the question. And since we have one who, I presume, is of at least driving age hanging around of late, let's ask him. Now, as I understand it, libertarianism embodies a belief in individual liberty as secured through the ownership and defense of property--so long as you aren't infringing on another's rights, of course (this seems to be the warm, fuzzy underbelly of libertarianism; call it Ayn Rand's fuzzy navel.). Libertarians, it would seem, feel that everything can be reduced to a property relation. In addition, government functions, which they reject, could be performed as easily, and more effectively, by private interests. In a libertarian society, each person's freedom is assured by his right to dispose of himself and his property as he sees fit (this begins to sound like the "Ah do'n wanna pay them thar taxes!" argument). It's live and let live. Butterflies and rainbows and yaaaay!! swingsets!

The question, at last! is this: what do libertarians think is going to happen when Bill Gates buys all the property there is to be had, and you have to drag your monkey ass to work everyday to pay the exorbitant rent on your GatesCo. mobile home, which sits in the middle of Gatesborough country. In effect: what happens to the propertyless? The homeless? The unlucky?

Or DO you think you're going to win the frickin' lottery?

Gay Athletes

I've been wondering about this for some time, at least since that NFL lineman came out a few years ago. Given the rare coverage of this subculture in sports--and yet its appearance in SI, that football show on ESPN two years ago that featured a gay player, etc.--it would seem that those on the inside know far more about this than they are letting on. What does it mean?

Get the Two-ply Tissues!

Acting on a tip from my dad and Jamie, our favorite pump-jockey and public intellectual, I heartily recommend Lego Porn at http://.drew.corrupt.net/bp

Enjoy!

Or use the link here.

Trade Deficit at Record Level

The trade deficit, which we all thought had gone away for good after the Reagan era ended and Bill Clinton virtually eliminated it, is at a record level. The deficit for this year now projects to be over $700 billion, more than $100 billion over what it was last year (also a record). At least the Republicans can say they're the champs of something. I guess they're also pretty good at making hasty decisions, getting people killed, and lining their own pockets.

Anyway, critics have quite rightly pointed out that the nation's inability to balance its trade is hurting us by scaring off investors--nobody wants to buy into a country that is hurtling towards an obvious economic disaster. Many of these critics are conservatives, too, so it ain't like this is all coming straight from Howard Dean. I don't think the Chinese are liberals, but they sure as hell have curtailed their purchases of US bonds.

But, in the face of serious concerns and valid criticisms, the administration has done what it always does in these situations: play the fool. "Oh, there's no trade deficit," said assclown, Secretary of the Treasury, and professional Bush apologist John Snow. "No, no, no: what's happening here is that the US economy is growing faster than everyone elses', so we have a higher demand for imports." Of course, you'd think that the magnificent new economy we have would show itself in, I don't know, employment numbers, manufacturing numbers, new home starts--in fact, you'd think it would show up somewhere other than in John Snow's mind. But, as any fool can see, we are still in a recession. Nothing is improving, but most everything IS getting worse.

And the monkeys in charge have their fingers in their ears. Nice.

Me Hate Me, Part II

Holy fucking shit. What is going on here...

It turns out that the hastily-written, hastily-passed anti-gay, "we hate everyfuckingbody" bills from the last election cycle have two unintended consequences that would be funny except that they're so damn tragic. First, an Ohio woman who had a baby with her partner several years ago, is now using the anti-gay portion of the "sanctity of marriage" bill (are you kidding? Can you say "gay male prostitute in the White House"? "Henry Hyde's mistress"? "Rush Limbaugh's three divorces"?) to argue that her partner, who helped raise the kid, shouldn't get visitation rights, because there was no legal domestic relationship. If I recall correctly, she told Time magazine that "I'm using a law that's going to hurt me down the road..." and then, presumably, she lit up a crack pipe, robbed a bank, and joined a white power hate group--since she is such a proponent of glibly doing things that will only hurt her terribly "down the road". What a cunt.

The even worse news is this: the marriage laws aren't written to target gays, specifically. They disallow any marriage between same-sex partners, but they also render meaningless any relationship that "approximates marriage as defined". Meaning, of course, that common law is abolished. "Households" and "families" don't exist outside of marriage, in theory.

And lo and behold, scores of men in states that passed these ridiculous laws are contesting domestic violence charges against them, because there can be no domestic relationship under the new laws. Simple assault, which they are claiming they ought to be charged with, carries a much, much lighter sentence than domestic violence.

"Puttin' more violent offenders back on the streets--that's what the Republican Party has done for YOU!"

Thanks, you fucking assholes.

View of Manhattan skyline from Onassis Reservoir in Central Park

How to Destroy a Political Movement

I am referring to the conservative takeover of our country--and I'm being nice in calling it a "political movement" instead of what it is: a Christian nutjob-led, fascistic drive towards an apocalyptic clusterfuck.

Anyway, it would appear that the end (for the Right) is drawing nigh. The only question now is how to wrest control from its cold, dead hands. Despite what the polls say, despite the fact that many, if not most of the leaders of the conservative cabal will find themselves--relatively soon--in prison or in disgrace, it seems unlikely that the Boy King and his keepers will willingly surrender the reigns of power. The democratic process is actually dead at the moment--which is not to say that it cannot be resurrected.

So how the fuck do we get the wingnuts out of office--and I don't mean "how do we win elections" (because that, as far as I'm concerned, is a matter of when, not if ), but rather how do we get them physically out of the building?

The Long Goodbye

Nothing has been posted here for a while, and for a very good reason. To wit: I did an entire post last week on some of the more aggravatingly childish habits of rightwing "intellectuals," and Blogger ate it. I hit "publish" and the whole thing vanished forever. Holy shit was I mad. Mad enough to write several profane emails to the Blogger honchos. Mad enough to go torment my conservative colleagues for hours with horror stories from Iraq. And yes, mad enough not to write anything for a week.

What's so convenient about having to back up all your drafts? Dumb fuckers.

Yet Another Case of Overcomplicating an Issue

I find that many on the Left are agonizing a bit too loudly over the results of last year's election. Like Social Security, there may be only one thing you need to know about the election: it was stolen. We now have, in my opinion, the closest thing we'll ever have to conclusive proof that vote counts were doctored, e-voting machines malfunctioned on a massive scale, and voter intimidation and supression prevented hundreds of thousands of people from exercising the franchise.

So...what's all the fuss over "how to make a progressive movement in dark times"? Lefties are tearing out their hair and claiming to see fanatical Republicans everywhere--what, oh what! are we to do?!

Calm down, sister. Throw out the "mandate" margin of victory. It didn't happen. Also, throw out an additional couple million votes, since Bush's popularity fell during his first term. Now tell me again why you're worried?

Things are looking up.

If you see a Republican today, punch 'em in the face and play it off like an April Fool's joke.

Pope on Last Legs; Catholics Demand He be Kept Alive Artificially

Oh, no wait. They don't. Apparently the Pope and Terri Schiavo aren't the same. The 916-year old man we know as the Pontiff will be allowed to die and the bulimic retard had to be kept on eternally to satisfy his batshit crazy followers.

I knew they didn't like the Simpsons. I knew they claimed rights (and rites) over people, living and dead, who maybe sorta one day coulda been Catholics (Schiavo's parents are devout Catholics)--and WE make fun of the Mormons for baptizing Jews after death!

But I never, until this day, understood why Martin Luther was so pissed off.

See you in Hell, your Holiness.