Yeah, yeah, elections last night and the GOP has shown that it's been recovering since last November. I don't feel like addressing that right now. Here's what's on my mind:
Yesterday I started the application process to become a substitute teacher in my local district, and I have the official interview next Tuesday. I did it because H1N1 has created a new demand for them, and their supply has been more or less at a low constant for a while. So, naturally, I wake up this morning feeling sick.
It's just a bad cold, but still. Sometimes I notice that the only proof I have that karma exists is when it's bad karma.
I try to do good by people, and I'm constantly told that the karmic payback will eventually be totally kick-ass. Just the other day, I told a friend over IM that if she went to a friend's place where we all spent Halloween and found my abandoned half-jug of Carlo Rossi that she should feel free to take it and enjoy. In the past, random acts of kindness prompt similar responses that she gave me on the Rossi thing, which for some reason I can't help but imagine being said by Sarah Palin: "Well you're just rackin' up the good karma, don'tcha know?"
But, over the years, gornischt. So I usually didn't think much of karma, because I had little proof. Then I make one calculated career move (not even a career move - since I lack my teaching certificate, it's part-time work) based on a mild pandemic, and within hours I'm knocked on my ass by cosmic forces I cannot comprehend.
I have a theory, though: karma operates much on the same level of the internet. It's a series of tubes. One can send too many internets and plug up the tubes (as they great and powerful Sen. Ted Stevens has made painfully clear), karma works the same way.
Somewhere they must sell karmic plungers, and if I had to hazard a guess I'd say it's somewhere in Tibet. I have a feeling that, like the Three Stooges trying to enter a room, my good karma tubes have been blocked off by the over-saturation of goodness. Or maybe hair and stuff got stuck in there over the years (karma tubes are more personal than the internet).
Or maybe even lime deposits. We have hard water out where I live. What I need is a karma snake to put down the tubes and knock away the blockage.
In conclusion, don't exploit global pandemics for personal gain, or karma will kill you in the face.
04 November, 2009
07 October, 2009
Do we really want another JFK?
I just read commentator Ed Rollins' take on SNL's criticism of Barack Obama - surprisingly, the overall message wasn't "OH HOW COULD THEY?!" (it wasn't written for MSNBC).
It makes a good point: SNL, even now that it sucks, does and always has shaped perceptions of Presidents. Gerald Ford wasn't as clumsy as SNL would have us think, George H.W. Bush wasn't as goofy, and so on. Even Sarah Palin isn't as crazy or incompetent as Tina Fey made her out to be (I still am not a fan, but come on. I don't know if some of Palin's critics can tell the difference).
SNL's treatment of Obama is brutally honest: on a list of things that he said he would get done as quickly as possible, "Not Done" is the answer 8 months in. It suggests that he's not all he's cracked up to be, if not a standard misleading politician. Rollins points out some of the expectations people had for The One:
"Democrats are still hopeful this president will turn out to be the "Camelot II"; the new generational leader for whom they have waited decades and in some cases lifetimes. Many hope President Obama will be the new John Fitzgerald Kennedy..."
Is this really a comparison we want to be making? If I remember my American history correctly, John F. Kennedy was a downright lousy president. He made Bill Clinton look fanatically monogamous and George W. Bush look like a vigorous vetter of job qualifications.
George W. Bush didn't even have the balls to appoint a nuclear family member (or, nuculer if you wish) to cabinet-level high office. Though, at least Robert Kennedy was at least marginally qualified as Attorney General; Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense, wasn't at all qualified. In the documentary tell-all The Fog of War, McNamara recounts that he was first offered the job of Secretary of the Treasury by JFK, and when he insisted that he was in no way qualified for this, JFK's response was to make him Secretary of Defense.
His wandering penis was legendary, as well. To his credit, unlike Bill Clinton, he aimed high. He screwed Marylin Monroe, for chrissakes, while Bill Clinton, as George Carlin put it, "showed his dick to a government clerk."
As for his presidential track record, 1961 the Bay of Pigs fiasco stands out, as always. This was one of the biggest policy fuck-ups until Jimmy Carter's Iranian hostage rescue mission crashed and burned (literally) before it could even get out of the parking lot. And after training Cuban guerrillas on the CIA dole and sending them off in banana boats to invade Cuba and overthrow Castro, and then refusing them the needed air-support and logistical backing for it to actually work, it should have been no surprise when the USSR stationed nuclear fucking missiles in Cuba one year later.
By virtue of an incompetent but well-meaning US president and a not-crazy Soviet premier, the Cuban Missile Crisis was resolved. And we give JFK most of the credit, probably because we felt bad after he was assassinated rather publicly and didn't have much of of a good presidential legacy to leave behind.
So, do Democrats want another JFK? I sure hope not. Only the most partisan of Republicans would want another presidency that overall lousy.
It makes a good point: SNL, even now that it sucks, does and always has shaped perceptions of Presidents. Gerald Ford wasn't as clumsy as SNL would have us think, George H.W. Bush wasn't as goofy, and so on. Even Sarah Palin isn't as crazy or incompetent as Tina Fey made her out to be (I still am not a fan, but come on. I don't know if some of Palin's critics can tell the difference).
SNL's treatment of Obama is brutally honest: on a list of things that he said he would get done as quickly as possible, "Not Done" is the answer 8 months in. It suggests that he's not all he's cracked up to be, if not a standard misleading politician. Rollins points out some of the expectations people had for The One:
"Democrats are still hopeful this president will turn out to be the "Camelot II"; the new generational leader for whom they have waited decades and in some cases lifetimes. Many hope President Obama will be the new John Fitzgerald Kennedy..."
Is this really a comparison we want to be making? If I remember my American history correctly, John F. Kennedy was a downright lousy president. He made Bill Clinton look fanatically monogamous and George W. Bush look like a vigorous vetter of job qualifications.
George W. Bush didn't even have the balls to appoint a nuclear family member (or, nuculer if you wish) to cabinet-level high office. Though, at least Robert Kennedy was at least marginally qualified as Attorney General; Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense, wasn't at all qualified. In the documentary tell-all The Fog of War, McNamara recounts that he was first offered the job of Secretary of the Treasury by JFK, and when he insisted that he was in no way qualified for this, JFK's response was to make him Secretary of Defense.
His wandering penis was legendary, as well. To his credit, unlike Bill Clinton, he aimed high. He screwed Marylin Monroe, for chrissakes, while Bill Clinton, as George Carlin put it, "showed his dick to a government clerk."
As for his presidential track record, 1961 the Bay of Pigs fiasco stands out, as always. This was one of the biggest policy fuck-ups until Jimmy Carter's Iranian hostage rescue mission crashed and burned (literally) before it could even get out of the parking lot. And after training Cuban guerrillas on the CIA dole and sending them off in banana boats to invade Cuba and overthrow Castro, and then refusing them the needed air-support and logistical backing for it to actually work, it should have been no surprise when the USSR stationed nuclear fucking missiles in Cuba one year later.
By virtue of an incompetent but well-meaning US president and a not-crazy Soviet premier, the Cuban Missile Crisis was resolved. And we give JFK most of the credit, probably because we felt bad after he was assassinated rather publicly and didn't have much of of a good presidential legacy to leave behind.
So, do Democrats want another JFK? I sure hope not. Only the most partisan of Republicans would want another presidency that overall lousy.
30 September, 2009
23 September, 2009
Col. Gaddafi's UN Speech
This morning I switched on the television just in time to catch Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi's big speech to the United Nations General Assembly. In case you're unaware, Libya holds this year's Presidency of the General Assembly, the man being Ali Abdussalam Treki. This picture from the Daily Mail in the UK should sum up the day for you:
The man high up on the top o' the rostrum is Treki, and the goofy bastard down there is Gaddafi. I also suggest that you see the rest of the photos in the Mail's report. They really are something.
Things were cleared for insanity when Gaddafi's speech was delayed by some sort of protest on the General Assembly floor, which cameras refused to show or give the details of. When he finally got up to the podium, decorum dictates that heads of state would have 15 minutes for their speech.
1 hour, 36 minutes later I had no fucking clue what had just happened. The man went just about everywhere in his meandering oration. He waxed poetic about jet lag, suggested renaming the UN Security council "the terror council," and shat upon the UN charter (not literally, fortunately. I'd have shot myself if I had to see him lift his spiffy Bedouin robes to do that). He had such little bits of wisdom as "why not fish flu?" when talking about the swine flu (or as the USDA urges us for the sake of the pork industry, only to call it H1N1), then going on to suggest that it was engineered by Capitalists to sell medication. Then, to cap it all off, he gave us the laughable "No, we love the Jews!" line of babble.
*Whew* About half way through, his translators had to tag off because the first guy was exhausted. By the end, the hall was barely half-empty. But the speech wasn't the only source of asininity in the Gaddafi story.
Because of the release of the Lockerbie bomber earlier this summer by Scottish authorities, US interests have been really, really dickish with his accommodations. Traditionally, visiting dignitaries to the UN are given lodging within 15 minutes of the UN building in NYC. Because of the fuss we've been putting up to this tinpot weirdo, he was more than 40 miles away in a pitched Bedouin tent on some property in Bedford owned by Donald Trump. Town officials in Bedford basically had him evicted because people had complained - if only they had granted him his original request to pitch the tent in Central Park!
This is the same guy who filed a motion for today's session to have Switzerland abolished and divided between France, Germany and Italy, after his son Hannibal was arrested in a Swiss hotel. The abolition motion was just part of an overall vendetta with the Swiss over the matter, including closing Swiss owned businesses and expelling their diplomats.
This man as a single entity rivals Nikita Khrushchev's shoe-pounding incident in 1960 in its absolute hilarity. Regardless of my low opinion of the UN, at least we'll have an entertaining year.
The man high up on the top o' the rostrum is Treki, and the goofy bastard down there is Gaddafi. I also suggest that you see the rest of the photos in the Mail's report. They really are something.
Things were cleared for insanity when Gaddafi's speech was delayed by some sort of protest on the General Assembly floor, which cameras refused to show or give the details of. When he finally got up to the podium, decorum dictates that heads of state would have 15 minutes for their speech.
1 hour, 36 minutes later I had no fucking clue what had just happened. The man went just about everywhere in his meandering oration. He waxed poetic about jet lag, suggested renaming the UN Security council "the terror council," and shat upon the UN charter (not literally, fortunately. I'd have shot myself if I had to see him lift his spiffy Bedouin robes to do that). He had such little bits of wisdom as "why not fish flu?" when talking about the swine flu (or as the USDA urges us for the sake of the pork industry, only to call it H1N1), then going on to suggest that it was engineered by Capitalists to sell medication. Then, to cap it all off, he gave us the laughable "No, we love the Jews!" line of babble.
*Whew* About half way through, his translators had to tag off because the first guy was exhausted. By the end, the hall was barely half-empty. But the speech wasn't the only source of asininity in the Gaddafi story.
Because of the release of the Lockerbie bomber earlier this summer by Scottish authorities, US interests have been really, really dickish with his accommodations. Traditionally, visiting dignitaries to the UN are given lodging within 15 minutes of the UN building in NYC. Because of the fuss we've been putting up to this tinpot weirdo, he was more than 40 miles away in a pitched Bedouin tent on some property in Bedford owned by Donald Trump. Town officials in Bedford basically had him evicted because people had complained - if only they had granted him his original request to pitch the tent in Central Park!
This is the same guy who filed a motion for today's session to have Switzerland abolished and divided between France, Germany and Italy, after his son Hannibal was arrested in a Swiss hotel. The abolition motion was just part of an overall vendetta with the Swiss over the matter, including closing Swiss owned businesses and expelling their diplomats.
This man as a single entity rivals Nikita Khrushchev's shoe-pounding incident in 1960 in its absolute hilarity. Regardless of my low opinion of the UN, at least we'll have an entertaining year.
15 September, 2009
Fading Stars
14 September marks just yet another example of truly great human beings dying, only to be overshadowed by a big name doing the same.
You probably have heard that actor Patrick Swayze lost a fight with cancer earlier today. Because of this, you may not have noticed that a man more important and consequential than a man who held film superstar status during the 1980s also passed on to the great hereafter. In fact, you probably had never heard of him.
Nobel Laureate and scientist, Norman Borlaug, died hours before. The man made massive inroads in genetic engineering, leading to his development of a highly productive strain of wheat. While bloviating opportunists were blowing hot air about starvation around the globe, especially on the continent of Africa, Borlaug was in the laboratory doing something about it. His brilliance and hard work saved easily millions of people from wasting away through long, painful deaths from starvation, and when he was given the Nobel Peace Prize it was thought that the lives he saved were upwards of 1,000,000,000 (for the numerically challenged, that's one billion.)
Even as groups like Greenpeace whipped up the winds of sensationalism to stoke the fire of political opportunism to destroy genetically modified foods in favor of idealistic, utopian and cripplingly inefficient and unreliable organic farming methods, Borlaug soldiered on. No one in my recent memory has done more for the human cause than Norman Borlaug (1914-2009).
Even if Red Dawn was a great action-propaganda film, Borlaug trumps Swayze. However, I bid them both requiescat in pace.
You probably have heard that actor Patrick Swayze lost a fight with cancer earlier today. Because of this, you may not have noticed that a man more important and consequential than a man who held film superstar status during the 1980s also passed on to the great hereafter. In fact, you probably had never heard of him.
Nobel Laureate and scientist, Norman Borlaug, died hours before. The man made massive inroads in genetic engineering, leading to his development of a highly productive strain of wheat. While bloviating opportunists were blowing hot air about starvation around the globe, especially on the continent of Africa, Borlaug was in the laboratory doing something about it. His brilliance and hard work saved easily millions of people from wasting away through long, painful deaths from starvation, and when he was given the Nobel Peace Prize it was thought that the lives he saved were upwards of 1,000,000,000 (for the numerically challenged, that's one billion.)
Even as groups like Greenpeace whipped up the winds of sensationalism to stoke the fire of political opportunism to destroy genetically modified foods in favor of idealistic, utopian and cripplingly inefficient and unreliable organic farming methods, Borlaug soldiered on. No one in my recent memory has done more for the human cause than Norman Borlaug (1914-2009).
Even if Red Dawn was a great action-propaganda film, Borlaug trumps Swayze. However, I bid them both requiescat in pace.
28 August, 2009
Ah, The Politicization of Death
The petition to honor Ted Kennedy's suggestion to the MA legislature to change state law to allow the governor to appoint a provisional Senator should a seat become vacant is gaining momentum.
This makes me chuckle, since the drive is being led by, naturally, liberal groups who don't want the Democratic super-majority in the US Senate to be broken up. These would be the same blokes who had the law changed a few years ago to keep Gov. Romney from appointing a Republican to the seat if John Kerry won the Presidency in 2004. Way to exploit a Senator's death for political purposes, guys.
And of course it doesn't stop there. Partisan groups are doing their best to exploit the Kennedy name one more time before it finally sinks in how much Ted was a punchline in most actual American minds. For example, the fact that mass e-mails are already going out bearing the message "In Lieu of Flowers, Pass Healthcare Reform". I haven't caught, have they decided that they'll name the bill after him? If not, just wait for it; it'll come.
I'm quite keen to hear the TOTUS (having just picked up the term from other blogs, "Teleprompter of the US") eulogize Ted tomorrow in Boston, based mostly on the curiosity over whether or not it will turn into a campaign speech for health care. If it happens, I may just vomit with rage. I am not at all a fan of Ted Kennedy, and have been quite curious how a man could leave a woman in his car at the bottom of a river to suffocate long enough to find his consigliere and establish an alibi could actually make it that far in American politics, let alone avoid jail. Wait a minute, I forgot: JFK's brother. Right, of course.
But if it turns out that our leaders are so glib as to latch on to a prominent man's death to sell an unpopular incarnation of reform, then I'll have totally lost faith in them. That would be downright heartless of them. I'd expect that shit from Karl Rove, but seriously. I hope they're not that ruthless. Please let them have a little ruth among them.
Though, we are protected somewhat by their sheer incompetence. Who do they think they are, the US government from 2001-2006? The Republicans could have only dreamed of having the Majority that the Democrats have now, and they got a hell of a lot more things - and more unpopular in general than what's on the table right now - rammed through with fake bi-partisan support. The Democrats have it all at their fingertips and they're barely squeaking by.
In fact, I have a feeling that Ted Kennedy's absence will have a detrimental effect on the health care situation for the Democrats. Kennedy was at least willing to compromise; that mindset might be gone. If the Democrats let themselves go down the "my way or the highway" path it could be it.
Anyway, enough of this. Don't use "Ted Kennedy would have wanted it this way" to make political points. That sort of logic is only valid for the flower arrangements and the general level or rowdiness at the wake, and that's it. With that said, I'm sure his wake was kick ass.
This makes me chuckle, since the drive is being led by, naturally, liberal groups who don't want the Democratic super-majority in the US Senate to be broken up. These would be the same blokes who had the law changed a few years ago to keep Gov. Romney from appointing a Republican to the seat if John Kerry won the Presidency in 2004. Way to exploit a Senator's death for political purposes, guys.
And of course it doesn't stop there. Partisan groups are doing their best to exploit the Kennedy name one more time before it finally sinks in how much Ted was a punchline in most actual American minds. For example, the fact that mass e-mails are already going out bearing the message "In Lieu of Flowers, Pass Healthcare Reform". I haven't caught, have they decided that they'll name the bill after him? If not, just wait for it; it'll come.
I'm quite keen to hear the TOTUS (having just picked up the term from other blogs, "Teleprompter of the US") eulogize Ted tomorrow in Boston, based mostly on the curiosity over whether or not it will turn into a campaign speech for health care. If it happens, I may just vomit with rage. I am not at all a fan of Ted Kennedy, and have been quite curious how a man could leave a woman in his car at the bottom of a river to suffocate long enough to find his consigliere and establish an alibi could actually make it that far in American politics, let alone avoid jail. Wait a minute, I forgot: JFK's brother. Right, of course.
But if it turns out that our leaders are so glib as to latch on to a prominent man's death to sell an unpopular incarnation of reform, then I'll have totally lost faith in them. That would be downright heartless of them. I'd expect that shit from Karl Rove, but seriously. I hope they're not that ruthless. Please let them have a little ruth among them.
Though, we are protected somewhat by their sheer incompetence. Who do they think they are, the US government from 2001-2006? The Republicans could have only dreamed of having the Majority that the Democrats have now, and they got a hell of a lot more things - and more unpopular in general than what's on the table right now - rammed through with fake bi-partisan support. The Democrats have it all at their fingertips and they're barely squeaking by.
In fact, I have a feeling that Ted Kennedy's absence will have a detrimental effect on the health care situation for the Democrats. Kennedy was at least willing to compromise; that mindset might be gone. If the Democrats let themselves go down the "my way or the highway" path it could be it.
Anyway, enough of this. Don't use "Ted Kennedy would have wanted it this way" to make political points. That sort of logic is only valid for the flower arrangements and the general level or rowdiness at the wake, and that's it. With that said, I'm sure his wake was kick ass.
27 August, 2009
Chimps are f#$%ing terrifying
I wrote and edited this together at the end of this past March, but I thought that I'd share it here.
One of the communities of chimpanzees that Jane Goodall made famous was the Kasakela community in Tanzania. It was there that she met this particular chimp...
One of the communities of chimpanzees that Jane Goodall made famous was the Kasakela community in Tanzania. It was there that she met this particular chimp...
Dawwwwwww.
Meet Frodo. He looks unassuming enough, right? There with his leaves and his fur and his, OH don't you just want to put him in people clothes and make him do people things? He's just like any of us, but so graceful and gentle.
Well fucking wrong you are, he's worse than most of us. Frodo was famous for asserting himself as the alpha male over the rest of the community. He did this through raw aggression and intimidation. He famously thrashed Jane Goodall, almost breaking her neck, and beat up cartoonist Gary Larson. He was the Sulla of chimpdom. So why is he worse than us? This is shit that humans do every day, but even Sulla, one of the chief butcher dictators of the late Roman republic, didn't do what Frodo is most infamous for...
It's common for chimps to wrest newborns from other chimps and kill them for fresh meat as a display of dominance, but a Tanzanian park worker had no idea how bad that can get. Frodo was eating some leaves near a footpath that the woman was walking, on her way to the research camp. She had her 14 month old child with her, and she was scared shitless when she crossed paths with Frodo.
Obey.
He was aggressive, she understood that, but she didn't expect what Frodo did next: he went up to her, wrenched the baby from her arms, disappeared into the forest and proceeded to eat the baby.
Holy shit. Not even Hitler ate babies. This reaches a low that not even the the man considered to be the most evil thing in human history can claim, "Ja. Been there, done that." So maybe we should be thankful that the chimpanzee is a lower life form, although if apes come any further on the technological scale...they are starting to figure out spears and how to kill things with them.
Holy shit. Not even Hitler ate babies. This reaches a low that not even the the man considered to be the most evil thing in human history can claim, "Ja. Been there, done that." So maybe we should be thankful that the chimpanzee is a lower life form, although if apes come any further on the technological scale...they are starting to figure out spears and how to kill things with them.
With my spear and magic helmet!
I was also surprised while I was researching this to read about the surprisingly complex politics that went on in Kasakela. In 2002 Frodo fell ill, and a coalition of several other male chimps in the community deposed him. After recovering from his infection, he was unable to reassert his alpha male status.
The cheese stands alone.
So the next time you start to feel superior to other life forms, keep running with it! If you start to sympathize with the chimps and bring them up to our level, they might just eat your newborn baby.
26 August, 2009
RIP, Ted
Well, Ted Kennedy left us late last night. Ted jokes are off limits for a while, which is something of a shame, but the man deserves every bit of rest. He's earned it.
But, watching the coverage of his death reminds me of one important thing that crosses my mind every time something big happens with the Kennedys: America isn't supposed to have dynasties.
But, a son of Joe Kennedy got a natural death. How about that? I'm not sure if the news really knows how to react to something like that.
RIP, Edward Kennedy.
But, watching the coverage of his death reminds me of one important thing that crosses my mind every time something big happens with the Kennedys: America isn't supposed to have dynasties.
But, a son of Joe Kennedy got a natural death. How about that? I'm not sure if the news really knows how to react to something like that.
RIP, Edward Kennedy.
25 August, 2009
Italy: The Land Success Forgot
A few minutes ago I stumbled across this article on BBC News:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8217360.stm
Apparently the winner of the Italian lottery hasn't been pinpointed yet, though the village is known. This struck me as slightly idiotic...this person is in line to win what may be the biggest lottery jackpot in European history, or at least since Luca Brindisi won a lifetime supply of indulgences in the big Holy See lotto of 1410.
Speculative medieval history aside, the fact that this person is unknown to the Italians is just one more strike against them as a nation.
Keep in mind that I'm Italian, full breed on my mother's side. I'm in fact a true friend to my Italian brethren, because I'm willing to point out a massive foible on their part, even if it means that we might split: Italy has been unwilling to accept its rightful place in post-Roman history.
Ever since the fall of Rome in 476 A.D. Italy has been grasping at where it once was in history. Unfortunately, its glory days are long since gone, and it would be best for all of us if they just took off the caligae, pulled on their Gucci boots, hopped in their Ferrari and just be content with their new found mediocrity.
There have been some sudden spurts of Italy attempting to regain its former glory. The two main examples I have are: the Renaissance and Fascism. And if you ask me, in the court of world opinion one of those should cancel the other out, big time.
Thank Mussolini for taking the Italian dream and driving it right into the nearest volcano. The rule is, once you've had a kill-crazy dictator run your country for a while you get to take a nice, long vacation on the international back-burner. I'm looking at you, Germany. Russia, get back in the corner! Time-out isn't over yet!
Italy has in recent years seemed to try so hard that it's no wonder that "prima donna" is an Italian phrase. They have, though, gone down a different route: they're riding their mediocrity as a contemporary culture all the way to the front page - front page of what, I don't know, but it's in plain view to anyone who picks it up off the sidewalk.
For example, Italy seems to pride itself on exemplifying every negative point associated with parliamentary government. For a few years it seemed like every day it was a race to collapse the government before lunch. Berlusconi was made Prime Minister, then he'd say something horribly sexist or insensitive, or fuck someone who wasn't his wife, and it was arivederci Berlusconi. Then after the next PM bungled things, a week later they clamored for Berlusconi back. Rinse, repeat.
At least Italy is on the right track. They're glory-hogging at being the worst at things, instead of attempting to be good at stuff again. This past winter some of my friends went to Egypt to study Arabic abroad, and they had to pass through Rome on the way to Cairo. There once was a time, back before running water and recreational bathing, when a phrase like that would fill you with pride. Rome just ain't what it used to be.
Well, no thanks to Alitalia, they were lucky to get through alive, and to hell with any sort of "timetable" my friends were on. Failing at a connecting flight? Check.
France has routinely trounced Italy in Rugby Union since 1987 in the Six Nations tournament. Failing at defeating France? Check.
At least when Germany and Russia exhausted their mulligan with the kill-crazy-dictator rule, they could win at stuff sometimes. Mussolini's feathers-in-the-cap were Ethiopia and Albania, then was pushed back by Greece - a country that has learned its place of international mediocrity, especially by the time this happened in World War II.
Italy should be glad that we're not holding Roberto Benigni against them in this regard. We totally could, because that man has caused about as much misery necessary for an honorable mention.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8217360.stm
Apparently the winner of the Italian lottery hasn't been pinpointed yet, though the village is known. This struck me as slightly idiotic...this person is in line to win what may be the biggest lottery jackpot in European history, or at least since Luca Brindisi won a lifetime supply of indulgences in the big Holy See lotto of 1410.
Speculative medieval history aside, the fact that this person is unknown to the Italians is just one more strike against them as a nation.
Keep in mind that I'm Italian, full breed on my mother's side. I'm in fact a true friend to my Italian brethren, because I'm willing to point out a massive foible on their part, even if it means that we might split: Italy has been unwilling to accept its rightful place in post-Roman history.
Ever since the fall of Rome in 476 A.D. Italy has been grasping at where it once was in history. Unfortunately, its glory days are long since gone, and it would be best for all of us if they just took off the caligae, pulled on their Gucci boots, hopped in their Ferrari and just be content with their new found mediocrity.
There have been some sudden spurts of Italy attempting to regain its former glory. The two main examples I have are: the Renaissance and Fascism. And if you ask me, in the court of world opinion one of those should cancel the other out, big time.
Thank Mussolini for taking the Italian dream and driving it right into the nearest volcano. The rule is, once you've had a kill-crazy dictator run your country for a while you get to take a nice, long vacation on the international back-burner. I'm looking at you, Germany. Russia, get back in the corner! Time-out isn't over yet!
Italy has in recent years seemed to try so hard that it's no wonder that "prima donna" is an Italian phrase. They have, though, gone down a different route: they're riding their mediocrity as a contemporary culture all the way to the front page - front page of what, I don't know, but it's in plain view to anyone who picks it up off the sidewalk.
For example, Italy seems to pride itself on exemplifying every negative point associated with parliamentary government. For a few years it seemed like every day it was a race to collapse the government before lunch. Berlusconi was made Prime Minister, then he'd say something horribly sexist or insensitive, or fuck someone who wasn't his wife, and it was arivederci Berlusconi. Then after the next PM bungled things, a week later they clamored for Berlusconi back. Rinse, repeat.
At least Italy is on the right track. They're glory-hogging at being the worst at things, instead of attempting to be good at stuff again. This past winter some of my friends went to Egypt to study Arabic abroad, and they had to pass through Rome on the way to Cairo. There once was a time, back before running water and recreational bathing, when a phrase like that would fill you with pride. Rome just ain't what it used to be.
Well, no thanks to Alitalia, they were lucky to get through alive, and to hell with any sort of "timetable" my friends were on. Failing at a connecting flight? Check.
France has routinely trounced Italy in Rugby Union since 1987 in the Six Nations tournament. Failing at defeating France? Check.
At least when Germany and Russia exhausted their mulligan with the kill-crazy-dictator rule, they could win at stuff sometimes. Mussolini's feathers-in-the-cap were Ethiopia and Albania, then was pushed back by Greece - a country that has learned its place of international mediocrity, especially by the time this happened in World War II.
Italy should be glad that we're not holding Roberto Benigni against them in this regard. We totally could, because that man has caused about as much misery necessary for an honorable mention.
20 August, 2009
IMAO hit it right on the head
I'm going to have to agree with Frank J.'s always chortle-worthy assessment over at IMAO.
MSNBC might be trying to incite a race war to boost its ratings.
It really wouldn't be the first time something like this has happened. WWII was in fact orchestrated by the film stock industry to boost the length of newsreels. Vietnam? All the work of Mexican drug lords to recruit new hippies as a customer base.
And of course, who could forget the masters of live war mongering for ratings...the BBC.
MSNBC might be trying to incite a race war to boost its ratings.
It really wouldn't be the first time something like this has happened. WWII was in fact orchestrated by the film stock industry to boost the length of newsreels. Vietnam? All the work of Mexican drug lords to recruit new hippies as a customer base.
And of course, who could forget the masters of live war mongering for ratings...the BBC.
19 August, 2009
A round up of ridiculous stories
http://israelmatzav.blogspot.com/2009/08/swedish-tabloid-publishes-claim-that.html
Apparently a Swedish tabloid has printed a story accusing the IDF of harvesting the organs of Arabs.
Jewish blood libel? Seriously? That topic is so last crusade. Go back to 1508!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/music/newsid_10000000/newsid_10001000/10001079.stm
U2 has written the music and lyrics to an upcoming Spider-Man Rock Opera called "Turn Off the Dark." The Edge described the work not as a musical, but more of an opera, because "musicals are really pants."
"(fill in the blank) is really pants" officially tops my list of potential last words before I die.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8209934.stm
France is under attack by Chinese hornets. Thank God these are actual bees and not an escape of the nanobees I reported earlier. Unfortunately for the French there is no central bee authority to surrender to. Waving white flags just makes them ornerier.
http://inventorspot.com/articles/kinkiest_recycling_program_ever_makes_sexhappy_ecoconscious_adul_31567
Recycle your dildo. I need only quote a section of the text: "To recycle the sex toys drop it in the mail. Please clean them first. Yes, they can be used sex toys. They can also be unused. They can even be broken sex toys."
I've heard reducing your carbon footprint referred to as indulgences, but this is ridiculous.
Apparently a Swedish tabloid has printed a story accusing the IDF of harvesting the organs of Arabs.
Jewish blood libel? Seriously? That topic is so last crusade. Go back to 1508!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/music/newsid_10000000/newsid_10001000/10001079.stm
U2 has written the music and lyrics to an upcoming Spider-Man Rock Opera called "Turn Off the Dark." The Edge described the work not as a musical, but more of an opera, because "musicals are really pants."
"(fill in the blank) is really pants" officially tops my list of potential last words before I die.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8209934.stm
France is under attack by Chinese hornets. Thank God these are actual bees and not an escape of the nanobees I reported earlier. Unfortunately for the French there is no central bee authority to surrender to. Waving white flags just makes them ornerier.
http://inventorspot.com/articles/kinkiest_recycling_program_ever_makes_sexhappy_ecoconscious_adul_31567
Recycle your dildo. I need only quote a section of the text: "To recycle the sex toys drop it in the mail. Please clean them first. Yes, they can be used sex toys. They can also be unused. They can even be broken sex toys."
I've heard reducing your carbon footprint referred to as indulgences, but this is ridiculous.
18 August, 2009
Russians Detain Tanker Hijackers
After the Russian cargo ship The Arctic Sea reportedly vanished while passing through the English Channel last month, it was found off the coast of East Africa and Russia has detained the suspected hijackers.
So, I called it wrong. When this story first broke I was convinced that it was the work of some Viking revival - aided by the fact that the cargo was timber, which naturally they need for their longboats. Apparently the hijackers were a mix of Russians, Latvians and Estonians, so certainly NOT Vikings. Coastal British monasteries can rest easy...for now.
So, I called it wrong. When this story first broke I was convinced that it was the work of some Viking revival - aided by the fact that the cargo was timber, which naturally they need for their longboats. Apparently the hijackers were a mix of Russians, Latvians and Estonians, so certainly NOT Vikings. Coastal British monasteries can rest easy...for now.
History Channel's "The Universe" - Case in Point
In my last post where I commented on the deranged nature of the choice in scientists that the History Channel interviews constantly for The Universe, it may have seemed a bit unfair just to say it. So, I thought I'd provide some examples.
Let's begin. Here are two of the most likely scientists on The Universe to end up at the wrong end of MI-6
The Man: Neil deGrasse Tyson.
The Mission: He's an astrophysicist in New York City, director of the Hayden Planetarium, and works with the American Museum of Natural History in Manhattan. He does a lot of media work, because of his high charisma modifier and disarming similarity to Billy Dee Williams, as encapsulated in the above photograph. His Wikipedia page is quite detailed, all things considered, suggesting to me that he may have written it himself.
The Madness: This morning there was a mini-marathon of the show, and I caught in particular a snippet he did for the episode on space travel. Discussing how to get to Mars in the quickest way possible, he suggested that one could ride a comet as it rockets towards the sun, and dismount it at the right moment to make a round trip in only a matter of weeks, as opposed to a range of months to years under current practices (depends on where Mars is in its orbit relative to Earth). He went on to describe it as, though a sure-fire death sentence (pun unintended), potentially a lot of fun.
In other words....
The Man: Alexei Vladimir Filippenko
The Mission: He's a professor of astronomy at UC Berkeley and is a specialist in supernovae. He was a member of the Supernova Cosmology Project and High-z Supernova Search Team that developed the theory of the accelerating universe, and by implication the ominous-sounding concept of dark energy. He's also a member of questionably named Nuker Team, which utilizes the Hubble telescope to observe supermassive black holes.
The Madness: Well Christ, just look at him! In this photo or any interview he's done in The Universe, he looks like he's close to declaring "No, Mr. Bond. I expect you to die!" He has that twinkle in his eye that suggests higher ambitions, and observe him in such an interview (I wish I could find a good clip out there to demonstrate)...he goes about his trade with an almost Riddler-level of enthusiasm. I have a feeling that his interest in supernovae and black holes isn't all so innocent, either. I'd like to think that he has plans to hold the universe hostage with a machine that could create a black hole right here on Earth. Wait.....shit. Keep an eye out for Alexei Filippenko hijacking that thing once it goes online once and for all.
Besides, his name just screams super villain.
Let's begin. Here are two of the most likely scientists on The Universe to end up at the wrong end of MI-6
The Man: Neil deGrasse Tyson.
The Mission: He's an astrophysicist in New York City, director of the Hayden Planetarium, and works with the American Museum of Natural History in Manhattan. He does a lot of media work, because of his high charisma modifier and disarming similarity to Billy Dee Williams, as encapsulated in the above photograph. His Wikipedia page is quite detailed, all things considered, suggesting to me that he may have written it himself.
The Madness: This morning there was a mini-marathon of the show, and I caught in particular a snippet he did for the episode on space travel. Discussing how to get to Mars in the quickest way possible, he suggested that one could ride a comet as it rockets towards the sun, and dismount it at the right moment to make a round trip in only a matter of weeks, as opposed to a range of months to years under current practices (depends on where Mars is in its orbit relative to Earth). He went on to describe it as, though a sure-fire death sentence (pun unintended), potentially a lot of fun.
In other words....
The Man: Alexei Vladimir Filippenko
The Mission: He's a professor of astronomy at UC Berkeley and is a specialist in supernovae. He was a member of the Supernova Cosmology Project and High-z Supernova Search Team that developed the theory of the accelerating universe, and by implication the ominous-sounding concept of dark energy. He's also a member of questionably named Nuker Team, which utilizes the Hubble telescope to observe supermassive black holes.The Madness: Well Christ, just look at him! In this photo or any interview he's done in The Universe, he looks like he's close to declaring "No, Mr. Bond. I expect you to die!" He has that twinkle in his eye that suggests higher ambitions, and observe him in such an interview (I wish I could find a good clip out there to demonstrate)...he goes about his trade with an almost Riddler-level of enthusiasm. I have a feeling that his interest in supernovae and black holes isn't all so innocent, either. I'd like to think that he has plans to hold the universe hostage with a machine that could create a black hole right here on Earth. Wait.....shit. Keep an eye out for Alexei Filippenko hijacking that thing once it goes online once and for all.
Besides, his name just screams super villain.
Scientists to release swarms of bees on your cancer
Apparently scientists have engineered bees to "sting cancer to death"
To be fair, these aren't actual bees, but a brilliant - albeit terrifying - leap in nanotechnology. These nanobees are actually armed with a cancer-killing chemical extracted from actual bee venom.
Science has done it again. They've taken a very noble concept - in this case, treating cancer - and have gone about it in the most blood-curdling insane way possible. Even the term "nanobees" seems designed to strike fear into the heart of humanity. I can only surmise that mad scientists have taken over the study of nanotechnology.
This all reminds me of the fully realized version of the scientists interviewed on the History Channel's series The Universe. Just watching one episode you can see in all of their eyes the twinkle that says that if they had the resources, they'd immediately make the leap from theoretical astrophysics to super villainous mad science.
Lump this all together with CERN and their black hole machine, and the most obvious conclusion to make is this: all scientists strive to be James Bond villains.
To be fair, these aren't actual bees, but a brilliant - albeit terrifying - leap in nanotechnology. These nanobees are actually armed with a cancer-killing chemical extracted from actual bee venom.
Science has done it again. They've taken a very noble concept - in this case, treating cancer - and have gone about it in the most blood-curdling insane way possible. Even the term "nanobees" seems designed to strike fear into the heart of humanity. I can only surmise that mad scientists have taken over the study of nanotechnology.
This all reminds me of the fully realized version of the scientists interviewed on the History Channel's series The Universe. Just watching one episode you can see in all of their eyes the twinkle that says that if they had the resources, they'd immediately make the leap from theoretical astrophysics to super villainous mad science.
Lump this all together with CERN and their black hole machine, and the most obvious conclusion to make is this: all scientists strive to be James Bond villains.
Robert Novak (1931-2009)
I'm very sad to say that Robert Novak has passed on.
Love him or hate him, he was a frigging icon. Journalists like him don't exist anymore; they're almost all gone. And he was one of very, very few who could stand to make eye contact with James Carville long enough to scream at him on CNN's Crossfire.
The right loved him, and the left loved to hate him. Whichever side is concerned, he'll be missed.
Love him or hate him, he was a frigging icon. Journalists like him don't exist anymore; they're almost all gone. And he was one of very, very few who could stand to make eye contact with James Carville long enough to scream at him on CNN's Crossfire.
The right loved him, and the left loved to hate him. Whichever side is concerned, he'll be missed.
Media loses its collective shit over armed protesters, shocked to learn it's totally legal
As a gun owner who would relish the chance to carry his rifle over his shoulder wherever he went here in N.Y., I'm having quite a laugh observing the major news coverage of gun-owners exercising their constitutional rights at protests in open carry states.
First was the man in New Hampshire with a pistol strapped to his leg, but the other day in Arizona a dozen such folks showed up - including a guy with an AR-15 - and did it perfectly legally and responsibly.
I linked to the MSNBC report because it's, so far, the most alarmist one that I've seen. In the third paragraph they seem honestly shocked that, despite the presence of firearms, "no crimes were committed."
If you look at the CNN article, it comes off as concerned, but still able to comprehend the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as well as Arizona state law allowing open carry. They even cite statements by US Secret Service spokesman Ed Donovan, who, when asked if the President was in any danger at either the Arizona or New Hampshire protests, he responded "Of course not." Unlike MSNBC, CNN also doesn't spin this with the ominous sub-headline of "the beginning of a disturbing trend?"
Yes, MSNBC. One of the most important rights ever recorded on parchment being freely, safely and responsibly exercised is part of a "disturbing trend." These guys weren't saying "Durr hurr I'm gon' kill me a President." The statements they were making were more along the lines of "Remind the government who's boss" and "my rights don't disappear just because."
So, for these two major news sources, the summation is thus:
CNN: Wow, really? *checks the books, does reporting* Hm, okay. It's kosher. Rock on, Constitution.
MSNBC: Wow, really? B-b-b-b-but the Nazis!
First was the man in New Hampshire with a pistol strapped to his leg, but the other day in Arizona a dozen such folks showed up - including a guy with an AR-15 - and did it perfectly legally and responsibly.
I linked to the MSNBC report because it's, so far, the most alarmist one that I've seen. In the third paragraph they seem honestly shocked that, despite the presence of firearms, "no crimes were committed."
If you look at the CNN article, it comes off as concerned, but still able to comprehend the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as well as Arizona state law allowing open carry. They even cite statements by US Secret Service spokesman Ed Donovan, who, when asked if the President was in any danger at either the Arizona or New Hampshire protests, he responded "Of course not." Unlike MSNBC, CNN also doesn't spin this with the ominous sub-headline of "the beginning of a disturbing trend?"
Yes, MSNBC. One of the most important rights ever recorded on parchment being freely, safely and responsibly exercised is part of a "disturbing trend." These guys weren't saying "Durr hurr I'm gon' kill me a President." The statements they were making were more along the lines of "Remind the government who's boss" and "my rights don't disappear just because."
So, for these two major news sources, the summation is thus:
CNN: Wow, really? *checks the books, does reporting* Hm, okay. It's kosher. Rock on, Constitution.
MSNBC: Wow, really? B-b-b-b-but the Nazis!
17 July, 2009
Malignant Stupidity still alive as Apollo 11 Landing Approaches
Yesterday was the 40th anniversary of the launching of the first manned mission to our moon. On Monday, it will be the 40th anniversary of the landing itself. Progress.
Granted that we basically owe our space program to German know-how, but damn it, at least we got to the moon before the Russkies. Or did we?
Of freaking course we did. And, of course, like any conspiracy theory, the idea that the Apollo 11 moon landings were faked could easily fade away if only people stopped talking about it. Stop giving it airtime and it will inevitably go the way of the dodo.
CNN hasn't figured this out, and even though some of the article addressing this dumbass theory is as dismissive as possible for a journalist (a dismissiveness usually reserved by CNN for Tea Parties and the Senate and House minorities), there is still a big problem: they're giving credence to inherently stupid ideas.
Allow me to address one of the supposed pieces of "proof" that the conspiracy theorists cite for the hoax.
Apparently, this moon rock has a letter "C" on it. And apparently, in Hollywood, letters are clearly printed on props so stagehands know where to place them. Granted, the "C" is indeed there in this picture.
But then you look at another print of the same rock, of probably the same negative:
I don't know about you, but the prop "C" in picture one looks a hell of a lot more like a piece of dust in the negative when the print was made. Back in ye olden days (1969), photographs were were processed in a photo lab by hand. That's why old film-stock movies have pops, spots and lines in them when you see them blown up on a movie screen. Some of them even look like "C"s! So, where a reasonable person sees a speck of dust, an asshole sees a nefarious, clever (though paradoxically half-assed) plot to deceive the Soviets. Not that I'm necessarily against making fools of the Russians.
Another whopper they serve us is that...well, take a look at this picture
THE SKY IS COMPLETELY BLACK! WHY CAN'T WE SEE THE STARS, UNLESS IT IS ON A SOUNDSTAGE WHERE THEY FORGOT TO PAINT ON STARS?! AHA! GOT YOU!
Settle down, straw man! Here comes another photography concept, that of exposure. Thanks to being very much awash in sunlight, the cameras (yes, real live cameras with film which....they don't make anymore *R.I.P.*) had to be set to expose the film enough to clearly take photographs of the surrounding terrain of the moon. That's another thing, they weren't there to take pictures of the stars, they were there to take pictures of (wait for it) The Moon!
There are other things I could get into, but I don't want to waste any more of my time. Even if Apollo 11 was faked, explain the five subsequent manned moon landings (Apollos 12, 14-17). If one was faked, were they all? Even if Apollo 11 were a hoax, we eventually did get to the freaking moon. But, seriously, to the conspiracy theorists: Get A Life. And to CNN: Cover News, Not Lunatics.
Granted that we basically owe our space program to German know-how, but damn it, at least we got to the moon before the Russkies. Or did we?
Of freaking course we did. And, of course, like any conspiracy theory, the idea that the Apollo 11 moon landings were faked could easily fade away if only people stopped talking about it. Stop giving it airtime and it will inevitably go the way of the dodo.
CNN hasn't figured this out, and even though some of the article addressing this dumbass theory is as dismissive as possible for a journalist (a dismissiveness usually reserved by CNN for Tea Parties and the Senate and House minorities), there is still a big problem: they're giving credence to inherently stupid ideas.
Allow me to address one of the supposed pieces of "proof" that the conspiracy theorists cite for the hoax.
But then you look at another print of the same rock, of probably the same negative:
I don't know about you, but the prop "C" in picture one looks a hell of a lot more like a piece of dust in the negative when the print was made. Back in ye olden days (1969), photographs were were processed in a photo lab by hand. That's why old film-stock movies have pops, spots and lines in them when you see them blown up on a movie screen. Some of them even look like "C"s! So, where a reasonable person sees a speck of dust, an asshole sees a nefarious, clever (though paradoxically half-assed) plot to deceive the Soviets. Not that I'm necessarily against making fools of the Russians.Another whopper they serve us is that...well, take a look at this picture
THE SKY IS COMPLETELY BLACK! WHY CAN'T WE SEE THE STARS, UNLESS IT IS ON A SOUNDSTAGE WHERE THEY FORGOT TO PAINT ON STARS?! AHA! GOT YOU!Settle down, straw man! Here comes another photography concept, that of exposure. Thanks to being very much awash in sunlight, the cameras (yes, real live cameras with film which....they don't make anymore *R.I.P.*) had to be set to expose the film enough to clearly take photographs of the surrounding terrain of the moon. That's another thing, they weren't there to take pictures of the stars, they were there to take pictures of (wait for it) The Moon!
There are other things I could get into, but I don't want to waste any more of my time. Even if Apollo 11 was faked, explain the five subsequent manned moon landings (Apollos 12, 14-17). If one was faked, were they all? Even if Apollo 11 were a hoax, we eventually did get to the freaking moon. But, seriously, to the conspiracy theorists: Get A Life. And to CNN: Cover News, Not Lunatics.
06 July, 2009
FBI says that they are not investigating Sarah Palin
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/06/sarah.palin.fbi/index.html
That settles quite a bit. I was in a bet against a friend who was convinced that charges were on their way (or at least really, really wanted them to be). It looks like this blogger just won himself $10.
That settles quite a bit. I was in a bet against a friend who was convinced that charges were on their way (or at least really, really wanted them to be). It looks like this blogger just won himself $10.
Bidding Farewell to one of History's Weirdest Men
Family Sees Image of Michael Jackson In Tree Stump
In their town of Stockton, CA, "Michael Jackson meant more to us than Jesus, to some people. I think they're both about even."
*sigh*. Thank God I'll celebrating my birthday tomorrow during his televised arena funeral, drunk and away from televisions.
In their town of Stockton, CA, "Michael Jackson meant more to us than Jesus, to some people. I think they're both about even."
*sigh*. Thank God I'll celebrating my birthday tomorrow during his televised arena funeral, drunk and away from televisions.
05 July, 2009
Palin's Gamble in Seward's Folly
CNN has published this article chronicling the conservative reaction to the impending resignation of Alaska Governor and rising GOP starlet Sarah Palin:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/05/palin.reaction/index.html
I have many liberal friends who have been thanking the Heavens that Palin is "out" of politics, and are hoping that she's just going to fade away. This belies the malignant idealism that dominates their thoughts in general, and a cold realist would see this for what it is: she's freeing herself for a bull-rush into national politics, and will most likely run for President in 2012 against the incumbent Obama.
But what I'm not saying to my liberal friends is that this is a good thing for the GOP, or that I support her in this. When she ran on McCain's ticket, she was part of what finally turned me off to his campaign. What she represents is a fresh, young face slapped on a dying wing of the Republican party. And I'm not even buying into the smears perpetrated during the 2008 campaign that she's some sort of illiterate theocrat, looking for any opportunity to ban devil books while machine-gunning innocent little puppy dogs from a helicopter. That's a crock, and we all know it, as much as some of my unsavvy liberal friends like to parrot it back to me.
Her resignation announcement can be a double edged sword in this case. What she could be doing is throwing fuel on the fire for her critics: when just in the past month they have suggested that she's been neglecting her affairs of state in favor of potential national ambitions, now she could be construed as outright abandoning them. Some conservatives think it's a dumb move, since by resigning she's losing potential executive experience for a future campaign, among other reasons (although, with 18 months left of what she's decided will be her last term, there's not too much to lose in the big picture). My parents are fond of their own theory that she has pulled a Nixon, and a major scandal is about to break. Whatever her national ambitions are, I doubt they'll succeed.
Her problem is that she is at least close to being a neo-conservative, and she's also privy to the same sorts of political flaws that plagued most of the other major candidates. When she said that Obama was "paling around with terrorists," it was just as ridiculous as anything said about her. Bill Ayers, while a socialist, former self-declared revolutionary, and all around jackass, isn't exactly Carlos the Jackal. The Weather Underground, while loony, only killed two people, and those were two of their own during a botched bomb-making session. Other than that, the Weathermen didn't kill, let alone wound another human being (that just wouldn't groove). What Palin said made it sound like Obama was inviting Ayman al-Zawahiri over for tea and scones, which is exactly what many true-believers probably thought when she made that statement.
She thought it would work, and now we have President Obama to deal with. A man with the most dangerous quality for the nation's highest office: an honest mission to do some good. One of the most terrifying types of politicians are those who don't seem to realize the damage they might be doing, and Palin's contributions to the McCain campaign led indirectly to this. Roveian political campaigns are out, for now, and so are the neo-conservatives in the Republican Party.
The real future of the party are the old school Republicans; the ones from the 1960s - the Goldwaters, now embodied by the libertarian rightist movement led by Ron Paul. Paul's ideas appeal to young people, and believe you me: I know a lot of new Republicans who registered just to be part of Ron Paul's 2008 campaign. One friend of mine, dreadlocks down to his shoulderblades, bit the bullet and became a Republican so he could participate.
Unfortunately, constitutionalists are not at the forefront of the Republican party, and currently it's the same old hackneyed politicians who run the show. What the Republicans need to supply are statesmen. And if a 2012 Palin campaign takes off and makes it to the top of the 2012 platform, the result won't be the ushering in of this needed generation of statesmen; it will just be the death throes of neo-conservative domination of the GOP, after which real republicans (small "r" a purposeful one) will need to swoop in and take the helm.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/05/palin.reaction/index.html
I have many liberal friends who have been thanking the Heavens that Palin is "out" of politics, and are hoping that she's just going to fade away. This belies the malignant idealism that dominates their thoughts in general, and a cold realist would see this for what it is: she's freeing herself for a bull-rush into national politics, and will most likely run for President in 2012 against the incumbent Obama.
But what I'm not saying to my liberal friends is that this is a good thing for the GOP, or that I support her in this. When she ran on McCain's ticket, she was part of what finally turned me off to his campaign. What she represents is a fresh, young face slapped on a dying wing of the Republican party. And I'm not even buying into the smears perpetrated during the 2008 campaign that she's some sort of illiterate theocrat, looking for any opportunity to ban devil books while machine-gunning innocent little puppy dogs from a helicopter. That's a crock, and we all know it, as much as some of my unsavvy liberal friends like to parrot it back to me.
Her resignation announcement can be a double edged sword in this case. What she could be doing is throwing fuel on the fire for her critics: when just in the past month they have suggested that she's been neglecting her affairs of state in favor of potential national ambitions, now she could be construed as outright abandoning them. Some conservatives think it's a dumb move, since by resigning she's losing potential executive experience for a future campaign, among other reasons (although, with 18 months left of what she's decided will be her last term, there's not too much to lose in the big picture). My parents are fond of their own theory that she has pulled a Nixon, and a major scandal is about to break. Whatever her national ambitions are, I doubt they'll succeed.
Her problem is that she is at least close to being a neo-conservative, and she's also privy to the same sorts of political flaws that plagued most of the other major candidates. When she said that Obama was "paling around with terrorists," it was just as ridiculous as anything said about her. Bill Ayers, while a socialist, former self-declared revolutionary, and all around jackass, isn't exactly Carlos the Jackal. The Weather Underground, while loony, only killed two people, and those were two of their own during a botched bomb-making session. Other than that, the Weathermen didn't kill, let alone wound another human being (that just wouldn't groove). What Palin said made it sound like Obama was inviting Ayman al-Zawahiri over for tea and scones, which is exactly what many true-believers probably thought when she made that statement.
She thought it would work, and now we have President Obama to deal with. A man with the most dangerous quality for the nation's highest office: an honest mission to do some good. One of the most terrifying types of politicians are those who don't seem to realize the damage they might be doing, and Palin's contributions to the McCain campaign led indirectly to this. Roveian political campaigns are out, for now, and so are the neo-conservatives in the Republican Party.
The real future of the party are the old school Republicans; the ones from the 1960s - the Goldwaters, now embodied by the libertarian rightist movement led by Ron Paul. Paul's ideas appeal to young people, and believe you me: I know a lot of new Republicans who registered just to be part of Ron Paul's 2008 campaign. One friend of mine, dreadlocks down to his shoulderblades, bit the bullet and became a Republican so he could participate.
Unfortunately, constitutionalists are not at the forefront of the Republican party, and currently it's the same old hackneyed politicians who run the show. What the Republicans need to supply are statesmen. And if a 2012 Palin campaign takes off and makes it to the top of the 2012 platform, the result won't be the ushering in of this needed generation of statesmen; it will just be the death throes of neo-conservative domination of the GOP, after which real republicans (small "r" a purposeful one) will need to swoop in and take the helm.
21 February, 2009
Race Baiters: Get a Life
Take another look at this comic that the NY Post ran this past week...and take a really close look:
If you saw anything inherently racist about this cartoon, there's no escaping it: you're an asshole.
The controversy stems from the idea that the chimpanzee in the cartoon being shot by the police represents President Obama. This wasn't a problem when it was George W. Bush being represented as a monkey, but it is now because Obama is black. Historically, race baiters on the white side of the picket fence would compare blacks with monkeys, because monkeys are predominantly dark in their skin and fur and aren't terribly smart.
And that would be, dare I say, inappropriate, if it were meant to be Obama. The passing reference to the "Stimulus Bill" (federal buggering part deux) was meant as a jab at the authors of the bill being as wise as the chimp in the picture. The chimp being shot by the police is a reference to another recent story where an escaped chimp mauled a few people in Connecticut and had to be subdued by police with extreme prejudice.
I'm going to link to pretty pictures for this next section, as the people who need this section don't seem to get how America works, because even a chimp with a slight grasp of civics in this country would know that CONGRESS (the assholes who work in this building) is in charge of writing and passing laws. The President (the asshole who works in this building) signs the laws and executes them. Yes, it's true, and it drives the nanny-staters to tears to hear it: the legislative branch legislates while the executive branch executes. When the Constitution (this thing) gets in the way of people who want sudden and drastic change from a powerful executive, you tend to get a lot of people taking to the streets.
Sorry for that tangent, but back to the point: The chimp in the cartoon was supposed to represent Congress, not Obama. Generally when a character in a political cartoon is supposed to represent a specific person, the cartoonist generally makes the character look even passingly like the public figure in question. Even when Bush was a monkey you still knew it was Bush (granted he looked very monkey-like to begin with). But even if you had a particularly adventurous cartoonist who let loose with the metaphors, there would have been an "OBAMA" written somewhere on or near the monkey. He probably would also have been wearing people clothes. Instead, the chimp represented Congress or even just the authors of the bill in general, who probably had their heads up their asses when they allocated funds. This is backed up with the
very blatant reference to the authors of the bill, who we have already figured out by pure constitutional law and logic could not be the President!
...as an afterthought, let's also just consider the premise of the cartoon. It's the police shooting the chimp, not some crazy bastard with a grudge against blacks. And since when do cops shoot the commander in chief? Chimps, yes. Criminals, yes. A few of the swindlers in Congress, I would certainly hope so. But I would certainly not expect that the NY Post is advocating a coup d’état, and if they were I'd be more worried about that than any sort of implicit racism.
But of course no one wants to listen to reason in this country, and out come the hipster squares with their picketing and chanting and god damned fucking puppets. Maybe no puppets this time, but still. Why all the hullabaloo? Easy: they see their messiah threatened in the public arena and they want to protect him from all of the mean people out there who just want to make him fail. Because they're racists. And mean.
Why the NY Post even apologized is beyond me - though at least they didn't go as far as to retract or denounce the cartoon. All they should have said to those who said that the cartoon was a racist attack on Obama was: "No it's not; get a life."
If you saw anything inherently racist about this cartoon, there's no escaping it: you're an asshole.
The controversy stems from the idea that the chimpanzee in the cartoon being shot by the police represents President Obama. This wasn't a problem when it was George W. Bush being represented as a monkey, but it is now because Obama is black. Historically, race baiters on the white side of the picket fence would compare blacks with monkeys, because monkeys are predominantly dark in their skin and fur and aren't terribly smart.
And that would be, dare I say, inappropriate, if it were meant to be Obama. The passing reference to the "Stimulus Bill" (federal buggering part deux) was meant as a jab at the authors of the bill being as wise as the chimp in the picture. The chimp being shot by the police is a reference to another recent story where an escaped chimp mauled a few people in Connecticut and had to be subdued by police with extreme prejudice.
I'm going to link to pretty pictures for this next section, as the people who need this section don't seem to get how America works, because even a chimp with a slight grasp of civics in this country would know that CONGRESS (the assholes who work in this building) is in charge of writing and passing laws. The President (the asshole who works in this building) signs the laws and executes them. Yes, it's true, and it drives the nanny-staters to tears to hear it: the legislative branch legislates while the executive branch executes. When the Constitution (this thing) gets in the way of people who want sudden and drastic change from a powerful executive, you tend to get a lot of people taking to the streets.
Sorry for that tangent, but back to the point: The chimp in the cartoon was supposed to represent Congress, not Obama. Generally when a character in a political cartoon is supposed to represent a specific person, the cartoonist generally makes the character look even passingly like the public figure in question. Even when Bush was a monkey you still knew it was Bush (granted he looked very monkey-like to begin with). But even if you had a particularly adventurous cartoonist who let loose with the metaphors, there would have been an "OBAMA" written somewhere on or near the monkey. He probably would also have been wearing people clothes. Instead, the chimp represented Congress or even just the authors of the bill in general, who probably had their heads up their asses when they allocated funds. This is backed up with the
very blatant reference to the authors of the bill, who we have already figured out by pure constitutional law and logic could not be the President!
...as an afterthought, let's also just consider the premise of the cartoon. It's the police shooting the chimp, not some crazy bastard with a grudge against blacks. And since when do cops shoot the commander in chief? Chimps, yes. Criminals, yes. A few of the swindlers in Congress, I would certainly hope so. But I would certainly not expect that the NY Post is advocating a coup d’état, and if they were I'd be more worried about that than any sort of implicit racism.
But of course no one wants to listen to reason in this country, and out come the hipster squares with their picketing and chanting and god damned fucking puppets. Maybe no puppets this time, but still. Why all the hullabaloo? Easy: they see their messiah threatened in the public arena and they want to protect him from all of the mean people out there who just want to make him fail. Because they're racists. And mean.
Why the NY Post even apologized is beyond me - though at least they didn't go as far as to retract or denounce the cartoon. All they should have said to those who said that the cartoon was a racist attack on Obama was: "No it's not; get a life."
07 February, 2009
I Don't Care
Before I go on I'll make this very very clear: I've never cared about Michael Phelps. I don't care how much he's swam in his life, I don't care about how many medals he's won, I just don't. It's shallow hero worship and I won't have it.
With that being said, leave the poor sod alone. Ever since the bong incident has come to light, it's
been nothing but all around condemnation. I say "poor sod" because of the tedious and empty life he leads. He swims all day, every day to keep in that shape, and at least leading up to the Olympics he lived with his mother. A grown man, let alone an international sports celebrity?
I'm glad to see him smoking a little pot, because if he had repressed himself any longer he'd certainly be on the fast track to becoming the aquatic Norman Bates.
So lay off the guy. Let him have his fun now that he's got all of his fame and fortune and whatnot. However he got it in the first place.
But most of all, let him do it in peace and stop swinging between sucking his dick and howling for his blood.
With that being said, leave the poor sod alone. Ever since the bong incident has come to light, it's
been nothing but all around condemnation. I say "poor sod" because of the tedious and empty life he leads. He swims all day, every day to keep in that shape, and at least leading up to the Olympics he lived with his mother. A grown man, let alone an international sports celebrity?I'm glad to see him smoking a little pot, because if he had repressed himself any longer he'd certainly be on the fast track to becoming the aquatic Norman Bates.
So lay off the guy. Let him have his fun now that he's got all of his fame and fortune and whatnot. However he got it in the first place.
But most of all, let him do it in peace and stop swinging between sucking his dick and howling for his blood.
13 January, 2009
Sea kittens: as adorable as they are delicious
This summary is not available. Please
click here to view the post.
12 January, 2009
From the archives...Carthago Delenda Est?
I wrote and published this next bit on Facebook last week. A lot of people were badgering me to give my opinion on the current war in Gaza between Israel and Hamas, so I did just that. I'm sure the following isn't what they expected, because I basically suggest that the world take a laissez-faire approach to the conflict until one side wins decisively...well, it sounds better in its original context. Here it is:
Marcus Porcius Cato the Elder, a Roman statesman who lived during the Punic Wars against the North African city-state of Carthage, would often end his speeches before the Senate with the phrase "in conclusion, Carthage must be destroyed." During the Second Punic War, the famous Carthaginian general Hannibal Barca was defeated decisively at the battle of Zama in 202 B.C., effectively ending Carthage's influence. Just to make sure, the Romans fought the Third Punic war from 149 to 146 B.C., which consisted of an extended siege of Carthage and that city and its society's final destruction. From there on out, North Africa was basically pacified and the Roman Republic, later the Empire, exercised a mainly peaceful influence over the region.
So....
Judea was a different story. A somewhat later province of Rome, the Hebrew people who inhabited the region (modern Israel) refused to accept Roman rule throughout its time as a province. The Jewish people objected religiously to its pagan masters and politically to its absolutist control and overseas occupation. The Jews revolted on several occasions, making the Governorship of the province a royal pain in the ass to any Roman patrician sent to fill the position. The last straw was the Bar Kokhba revolt in 132 A.D., where Simon bar Kokhba commanded an insurrection against the Romans, driving them out temporarily and declaring a new Kingdom of Israel. Simon bar Kokhba was declared a Messiah by the Jewish community, though shunned by the new Christian sects. The state lasted three years until in 135 A.D. the Romans returned and with a heavy material and human cost recaptured Judea. Determined never to let this happen again, the emperor Hadrian banished the Jews (killing many of them, selling many more into slavery, though many Jews who slipped through the bureaucracy either fled or remained in the region) and renamed Jerusalem "Aelia Capitolina" (after both himself and Jupiter Capitolinus) and the province "Palastina" (or Palestine) out of spite.
Fast forward to today. From Roman spite springs one of the most contentious ethno-religious political conflicts in history. Back and forth the Palestinians and Israelis go, and it's difficult to ascertain who actually has a true historical right to the region. In my opinion only the final arbiter of armed struggle will determine that, and the U.N. and the United States have only succeeded in one thing: prolonging the conflict beyond what it ever needed to be. By forcing peace on either side, the international community is only asking for more trouble, because the root cause (land claims) hasn't been properly mediated and the main propaganda fuel (organized religion) can never be dealt with because both parties are highly theological societies. So the U.N. and U.S. need to do something that I'm sure they will find difficult but must be done: step back and let history unwrap itself.
In order for this conflict to end one side needs to vanish. Each side has its Cato, surely, and we ("we" being the West) cannot be so arrogant as to think that we can fix this. One side needs to destroy the other, and in modern thinking this is considered to be absolutely horrible, but hey, I've always thought of myself as a living anachronism.
As for myself, I choose to stand back and watch either side give the other the Carthage treatment.
11 January, 2009
Introducing....the Semi-Daily Mashup!
Hello to all, and welcome to my return to the blogging world. I've abandoned my old-timey political pundit blog, America's Glory, for a little more all-around blogging experience. My ever evolving political views will be making regular appearances, along with all sorts of other general social criticisms and commentary, reviews of bits of media, amusing thoughts and general banter for the inquisitive soul. A real mash of pointless shit that might entertain or get your brain gurgling.
One of these days I'll be contributing to a friend's B-Movie review blog, Radiation Scarred Reviews, so keep an eye on that one. There's some good stuff there already, as young as it is.
Well, keep an eye out for updates on a semi-daily basis.
One of these days I'll be contributing to a friend's B-Movie review blog, Radiation Scarred Reviews, so keep an eye on that one. There's some good stuff there already, as young as it is.
Well, keep an eye out for updates on a semi-daily basis.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)