Marginal Humor...

Came across this site that I found mildly humorous so I thought I would share.

Texts From Last Night

(312): Dude I can't believe you let me go home with the wildabeast lastnight.
(773): You always hook up with hot girls we had to know you were mortal

-Cheers

Rules for dating....

I keep getting requests to post these supposed "Rules" I subscribe to. This isn't that post! However it is a post with a link to an entertaining article at CNN about dating. So I figured it would be an excellent stand in.

Five dating habits--cute or crazy

However, even if you only have one animal in your life, dressing Benji up like he's your mini-me is pushing it. Sure, if it's below zero, some breeds need a little extra wrapping, but no dog should ever don a tutu or a tiara.

Not only is it undignified for your pup (who now secretly hates you), it screams, "I am a lunatic" to the world at large. Encouraging your dog to lick you on the mouth and/or addressing it in baby talk are red flags to people who might have previously considered getting naked with you.

No. It is not cute when you put that sweater on the dog. It is evil!

-Cheers

I was going to do another torture post but.....

As I said, if she didn't exist I do not know what I would do. This woman is a one woman wrecking crew. It's like in her hands 'teh stupid' is a cosmic force. To continue the metaphor, she would be like a Herald of Galactus. Except instead of serving some galaxy spanning, world devouring force of nature. She instead serves the forces of stupid (h/t Dumpbachmann).

"We were led to believe that we would see great change, immediate change, and all we're seeing is a prolonged effort, because just what happened in the 1930s with FDR.

"The more the government spent, the more the government regulated, the more the government put up tariff barriers -- trade barriers -- the more government intervened, the longer the recession occurred. And as a matter of fact, the recession that FDR had to deal with wasn't as bad as the recession Coolidge had to deal with in the early '20s. Yet, the prescription that Coolidge put on that, from history, is lower taxes, lower regulatory burden, and we saw the roaring '20s where we saw markets and growth in the economy like we never seen before in the history of the country.

"FDR applied just the opposite formula -- the Hoot-Smalley Act, which was a tremendous burden on tariff restrictions, and then, of course, trade barriers and the regulatory burden and tax barriers. That's what we saw happen under FDR. That took a recession and blew it into a full-scale depression. The American people suffered for almost 10 years under that kind of thinking."

That is right, 'Hoot-Smalley'. Now I might forgive that sort of thing if it wasn't also a cultural touch stone for my generation (Ben Stein's intonation of it made you wanna know what it was!).

Mrs. Bachmann of of course was referring to the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act. I know it is fun for some to try to pin the blame for the Great Depression on FDR, but seriously this act was written by two republican senators, and was passed by President Hoover in 1929. FDR would not become president until 1932 (technically '33, but I am sure you get the point.). I won't even get into how the profligate spending and lax regulation during the '20s was a root cause for the great depression.

Obviously we need to spend way more on education. History in particular seems to be tough spot for some 'conservatives.

-Cheers

If she didn't exist...

I am developing a severe 'crush' on Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN). Every time I hear her speak, I am just all giddy with excitement over what absolutely insane, inane, positively bat-shit comment she will make.

And true to form she does not let me down.


Now the problem is as others have noted. President Carter was not in office yet in 1976. President Ford was. And he alas, was a republican.

-Cheers

New Conservative at the Times

Ross Douthat has his first piece up at the Times. I recommend it.

I am no big supporter, but I prefer his more measured and reasoned tones to the hysterical hackery of Bill Kristol.

-Cheers

On the subject of Pandemics....

What to do in case of a Zombie Apocalypse (now referred to as 'ZA')....

Cracked has some advice....and it is even pretty good. I didn't think of the Post Office!

For the record I would state that any ZA plan should have as a part of it 1) A suitable location to bunker down in 2) a place to get supplies (camping, non-perishable food stuffs, water purification devices) 3) arms, and weapons (guns, bats, axes, machetes...etc) and 4) First Aid supplies.

So start your planning.

-Cheers

I am the lyingest liar of Liartown....

So yeah....I made a statement yesterday,"Okay this should be my last torture related post for a bit...". Which it would seem was a complete and utter lie.

I just can not seem to quit it. Maybe it is the news that is trickling out? Maybe it is just my own myopic obsession with the subject, or maybe it is the sheer enormity of the topic.

As I said yesterday Gallup released their poll on torture. It has some interesting data points in it.

I had written a pretty comprehensive screed on the subject, but instead I thought I would go another route.

Here are various stories about how the "debate" has been covered.

• NYTimes: How ABC Tilted the Torture Debate
• The Plume Line: Huge Majorities of Americans say it is Torture
• Glenn Greenwald's Taxonomy of media subterfuge on during the torture debate
• Joe Scarborough is a douche

And instead of just commenting on those, I thought I would dig up a video and let you decide for yourself. I have talked about how we prosecuted individuals for this act during WWII, and even how during the Reagan Administration Texas law enforcement officials were prosecuted for the act. (It is disturbing, but this is what torture looks like, even though the situation is radically different this individual signed on for this, knew what would happen, and still you see the results. Pay attention to the directions the interrogator gives. And take note of how long it all lasts.)



A growing problem I am having with this debate is there is a certain conceit out there. That conceit is this; most lay people believe you can resist torture. The truth is you can not. Torture is done to you. Against your will. You will break. It is only a matter of time.

Now you can be trained to give false information but make no mistake, if you are in the hands of someone who is willing to torture, you have no recourse. That is what makes torture so vile and repulsive it absolutely removes any autonomy from the individual. Nothing stops the torture, not your pleas for mercy, not the rending of your mind or your flesh. Just the will of the torturer.

In our popular culture we like to believe that it is heroic to persevere and the strong willed individual can hold out indefinitely versus these tactics. That it is merely an act of will to resist. No, everyone and every body has its limits. And once those limits are breached, the information that flows has little to do with veracity and much to do with ending the pain. You can be trained, to give false information. You can be trained to be more resistant to pain, but eventually through the combination of tactics listed in those memos, you will be broken.

That is why, in my estimation, the onus for proof of efficacy lay fully with those who endorse these techniques. I have the weight of legal precedent, history and psychology on my side.

The opposition? Action movies, their own sadistic urges and a few episodes of '24'.

And if you think that is the sound of me becoming more strident in my views...then yes...you would be correct.

-Cheers

The grass is greener....

This is pretty big news in the world of politics. Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), will be announcing that he is switching parties.

For those who do not know, Sen. Specter is one of the few republicans in congress, who actually merits the term 'moderate'. With fairly liberal stances on choice, gay-rights, worker's rights, and his personal support of the NIH has, at times earned my grudging respect and also his seat in Pennsylvania. But in this day and age, due to the shrinking, homogenization, and radicalization of the Republican Party there seems to be no place for the senator under their 'big tent'.

But I will let the Senator speak for himself:

"I have been a Republican since 1966. I have been working extremely hard for the Party, for its candidates and for the ideals of a Republican Party whose tent is big enough to welcome diverse points of view. While I have been comfortable being a Republican, my Party has not defined who I am. I have taken each issue one at a time and have exercised independent judgment to do what I thought was best for Pennsylvania and the nation.

Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans......

...Since then, I have traveled the State, talked to Republican leaders and office-holders and my supporters and I have carefully examined public opinion. It has become clear to me that the stimulus vote caused a schism which makes our differences irreconcilable. On this state of the record, I am unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate. I have not represented the Republican Party. I have represented the people of Pennsylvania.

I have decided to run for re-election in 2010 in the Democratic primary.

Now this is not without its risk. He could lose the primary, he could win and be just as intransigence as he has been on the same issues as before.

But it does paint a stark picture of where the Republican Party is at this point.

-Cheers

I lied....

One more post on torture. It seems the American people can hold two distinct ideas in their head at one time.

But by and large the public would like to see some sort of investigation.

-edit--

Those numbers are interesting. I am not sure what to make of them. I wonder if there is some cognitive dissonance going on here. I wonder if there is a resistance by the American public to embrace the idea that torture was carried out in their name. Or if it is just a collective 'Special Pleading Fallacy', "We are American's! We don't torture! If we did it we had good reason to!".

I guarantee that as soon as an American servicemen, or national is treated in this fashion, our adherence to these treaties will once again reign supreme.

-cheers

Torturous Weekend.....

Okay this should be my last torture related post for a bit, what with the "Swine Flu" pushing it from the front pages and all.

Just needed to round up a few links from over the weekend, and echo a few points made by those far more eloquent then my self. Then I can step away for a while.

Torture is illegal. Whether it was effective or not is irrelevant in the eyes of the Law.

Whether investigations should be started or not, is solely a function of whether a crime was committed. This is not a political consideration. This is not a witch-hunt. It is a cornerstone of our republic that, the Law treats its citizens equally. Whether you be king or pauper, you should be treated the same under our system. If a law is broken, then it should be investigated. If there is a defense that is offered then that should be heard for by a court. We do not get to pick and chose which laws we follow and which we get to ignore, at least that is the case for most of the population.

The ability of the media and the political elite to obscure this point is down right infuriating. But then I guess if you have culpability in a thing, you would be the last individual who would want that thing investigated. To turn it in to strictly partisan terms makes it far easier to attack.

As always Glenn Greenwald (here and here), Joan Walsh, Hilzoy, Paul Krugman, Eugene Robinson and Andrew Sullivan say it better.

But I think Greenwald offers up the perfect distillation of how the media and power elite conspire together with this statement.

When poor and ordinary Americans who commit crimes are prosecuted and imprisoned, that is Justice.

When the same thing is done to Washington elites, that is Ugly Retribution.

I am really not sure, how after watching this "debate", you can come to any other conclusion.

-Cheers

Science is Hard....

Behold the pure ownage of Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) all over Nobel Prize winning Dr. Stephen "if this were a movie I would be freakin' Reed Richards" Chu. Revel in Mr. Barton's awesomesauce as he "stumps" Dr. Chu with his amazing question about the origins of oil under Alaska's soil (h/t wonkette, and Huffpo).

I am sure the good doctor positively cried himself to sleep.

And what would a week be with out our favorite member of the House of Representatives, Rep. Michelle "re-edu-ma-cate my ass" Bachmann (R-MN)? The other day on the floor of the House she passed along her feelings on Cap and Trade (which she inventively refers to as 'cap and tax' zing!). As much as I enjoy Mrs. Bachmann's rants, it was nice to see someone actually counter her in real time. Good job Rep. Blumenhauer you do your constituents proud (h/t Wonk Room).


I would just like to point out that sugar is "harmless" as well. Unless you eat too much, then your teeth fall out and you get diabetes and/or a host of other medical issues. But it is natural!

-Cheers

In defense of Torture

Marc Thiessen, former Bush Administration speech writer and Op-ed scribe for the Washington Post, has penned an interesting piece on the release of the OLC (office of legal counsel) memos.

I say interesting because I do not feel sophistry goes far enough, and referring to someone as an amoral ass clown might violate blogger etiquette.

But this section in particular stood out in particular (emphasis added mine):

Critics claim that enhanced techniques do not produce good intelligence because people will say anything to get the techniques to stop. But the memos note that, "as Abu Zubaydah himself explained with respect to enhanced techniques, 'brothers who are captured and interrogated are permitted by Allah to provide information when they believe they have reached the limit of their ability to withhold it in the face of psychological and physical hardship." In other words, the terrorists are called by their faith to resist as far as they can -- and once they have done so, they are free to tell everything they know. This is because of their belief that "Islam will ultimately dominate the world and that this victory is inevitable." The job of the interrogator is to safely help the terrorist do his duty to Allah, so he then feels liberated to speak freely.

This is perhaps one of the most disturbing and disgusting things I have heard. The actual articulation that, 'torture will liberate you', reeks of the sort of justifications we saw from Soviet Russia, China, and North Korea. How can we as a people be okay with that?

Whether actionable intelligence was gained or not, is not the question. The question is, what sort of people are we as a society? Are we the sort that condone torture, or sort that do not?

Ignorance is indeed Strength to these people.

-Cheers

Step2: ????

So you think you have a plan for total world domination?

First check it against this: Evil Overlord List

Then pick out digs to execute your nefarious scheme in complete safety, as the worlds leaders flail with impotent rage due to your machinations.

6 Incredible Real World Super-villain Lairs

Do not forget to practice maniacal laughter!

-Cheers

Irony meter broken.

Have a couple of, " I can't believe there is gambling here!", moments from today.

Jane Harmon (D-CA) was wire-tapped by the NSA. It strains credulity to say this is merely ironic.
Glenn Greenwald brings the thunder on this one.

Evidently the folks on Wall Street are upset at the vitriol directed at them. Dagnabit! They earned those 300 million dollar salaries. The New Yorker reports, and you.....well I am not sure how you will react. I know I had a response to it! But it is not safe for public consumption.

Trust me it had lots of words.

-Cheers

At little chin music for Chuck Todd

I can not seem to find a way to e-mail MSNBC correspondents or else I would have sent this link to Chuck Todd.

Mr. Todd depicts support for 'investigations' as fringe.

Now he is one of my favorite personalities on the t.v. machine, but here I think he needs to take a bit of a look at the data.

People do not like the idea of their leaders being unaccountable for their actions.

-Cheers

Epic Rants Deferred

So I had written another rather lengthy post about torture prosecutions. The Administration has been making loud noises this week and last about granting blanket immunity to the perpetrators, and originators of these memos.

I have some problems with that to say the least.

The least of which not being, that the Department of Justice is supposed (or ostensibly :-)) to be a separate entity from the White House.

Again it is not an issue of political expedience. Some acts are so heinous in their scope and so caustic to the well being of the union, that they must be acted upon. It is a matter of law.

The idea that for the most part, the media has been lockstep with government officials on this is even more disheartening.

While I was in the midst of working my dudgeon into a rich lather. Then this question was asked of the president.

Now I am still more then a bit miffed about the Presidents initial desire to shield those involved, but the admission that it is not his decision to make is a important step away from the Alberto Gonzales led Justice Department.

-Cheers

Ties that bind....

A new imponderable for you all.

What are the protocols, for ostensibly heterosexual non-familial males, buying random gifts for each other?

Say you see a splendid ascot that would just absolutely complement his lovely crushed velvet blazer. Is that within the bounds of friendship?

As another example, is there a difference if I were to buy a tie for say, Cation versus Ed (other then marriage and or girlfriends)?

Also if there are no protocols, should there be some?

And don't worry I have a long winded post still to come.
-Cheers

The art of dissent

This blog was birthed due to my frustration with the last eight years under the Bush Administration. That is no secret.

With the selection of a new administration, one which I actively supported here and around the
Midwest. Many friends asked what I would talk about during this new age. And for the most part, I just said, "There will always something for me to argue about.".

I support the Obama administration when they do things I agree with, and try to call them to task when they do things I do not agree with them. So much so, I sent this letter (via http://www.whitehouse.gov/) to the president to be ignored:

Dear Mr. President and White House Staff,

I am concerned that it has now become formal United States policy, that we have a bifurcated legal system. If crimes were committed and authorized by members of the CIA and/or the DoJ then investigations are necessary.

We have tried individuals for water-boarding in our past. It has the force of legal precedence behind it.

I have heard you speak eloquently on the subject, sir. But rhetorical eloquence is not enough here. Paeans 'to moving forward' and 'retribution' while nice as a salve for conscience, do not follow the rule of law. That you, yourself have spoken of on many occasions, and more importantly in your previous profession. You are uniquely aware of that foundation.

This is not a matter of pragmatism or partisan retribution. This is about returning to the stance that we are a nation of laws. Not of men.I hope you will encourage the DoJ to pursue investigations.

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,
x

I was moved to comment on this, but also realized, it is much harder to proofread in the little posting box they give. So I am sure I will have to do it again.

The 'rule of law' is important to me. That there be no bifurcation of laws between those with power and those without is a cornerstone of our republic. However, at every turn the governing authority and more importantly the media seek to shield its members from anything of the sort.

That is why I always seem to come back to issues such as NSA wire-tapping, torture, and over-reach in the Executive.

I just want it to be clear, due to a previous conversation I had with a friend on some tea-party related, that I do not have a problem with dissent. I think dissent is natural and a necessary component in a functioning democracy. However, I do have a problem with disingenuous or specious arguments. And that was all I was pointing to.

Concern for our legal system and our personal civil liberties, is what motivated the creation of this blog in the first place, and that is my dissent. That is why you will see lots of links to Glenn Greenwald and the Anonymous Liberal. Lawyers who have an eye toward civil liberties.

Mainly because, in my estimation, without freedom and liberty nothing else matters. If you are not free from unwarranted persecution, what does it matter if the government taxes you are not your gains are not your's. What you have is irrelevant. Because those rights can be suspend on a whim, or abridged, or outright abrogated. It is the adherence to the rule of law that keeps that at bay.

So at times it is unpopular. But the law is there to protect the just and the unjust alike. Common man and King, farmer and President are protected by its embrace.

That is why I harp on torture. If you strip away the moral arguments, it is simply against the law. We signed treaties as such. We have prosecuted people for its practice. That is why it is wrong. Not a political decision. However if you read, the actual memos, it is hard not to wonder (to paraphrase Ezra Klein) when we became the kind of country which would put a person in a small box covered in insects.

That is why the NSA wire-tapping sticks in my craw. Not out of some partisan revenge scheme against former President Bush and his cronies, but out of the fear. Because once freedoms are surrendered they are not easily regained.

That is why I am for prosecutions in these cases. If not investigations at the very least. If it is truly felt that these acts were justifiable then a court of law is where that case should be made.

So yeah. I will engage in active dissent for the rest of my days. It is patriotic. We must always watch those who are in positions of power. Trust is for friends not for any politician ever.

The other day I was trying explain my world view to someone. Trying to articulate what I hoped to accomplish in my life, as far as, moving our dialog forward. And I was reaching. The words weren't really there. It was hard to combine what I was going for. Because I don't wish for world peace or some sort of existential harmony. So it was difficult to settle on what I wanted to convey. Finally I managed to pull some pieces together from various divergent sources. From Serenity, Planetary, and The Story of B it finally gelled.

And it went something like this.

I want a world that I do not belong in. I want a world that is so much beyond what I can imagine that it seems strange to my eyes. I want my children and grandchildren to have such a different frame of reference that my views will seem quaint. Like an archaeologist looking at hieroglyphics in the pyramids.

I want a better world. But I know that I have no place there.

And that is good, and that is my hope, and that is why I blog.

-Cheers

Judge Me Not.....

That start packing lightsabers and I am in.

Jedi Police!

-Cheers

Developing.....

This is supremely disappointing.

Yet entirely predictable.

More on this later.


edit---The DoJ released papers from the Bush Administration that provided the legal justification for torturing terrorism suspects/detainees. There is coverage here, here and here. The moral and legal sophistry that are contained are disturbing.
-Cheers

This is my problem.

First a primer:

Fascism

Socialism

These words get thrown around far to much today, and most people do not know what they mean. Now the actions of this administration have been wide in their scope, but they have been no more socialist of fascist then the last 4 administrations.

Also "because" is not an argument. Simply not liking someone, or their policies does not make that person a socialist, or fascist. This seems to be a hard thing for some individuals to understand.

As you can see there are many cogent arguments in that clip. I will not even get into the Lincoln-guys warped view of history. While Lincoln was a great president for many reasons. He absolutely expanded the role of the federal government, as well as instituting one of the first progressive income tax programs in our history (meaning wealthy people pay more then poor people).

There are plenty of valid arguments to be had about our collective economic future. But these people are not interested in that. They do not like the current administration, or liberals, or anyone who disagrees with them it seems.

If they have a problem with the growth of government, or the profligate spending. Where were the effigies of Bush-Cheney? Where were the screeds denouncing Greenspan and Phil Gramm?

Yea. This exercise has very little to do with a real discussion of 'what ails us' and more to do with, ' I don't like the new guy.'.

Let me hear the argument for/ or against the nationalization of banks.

How about a rational discussion on how to stem job losses and stimulate spending.

Even talk of how to regulate financial markets so that this does not happen again.

Or if you oppose taxes in total, how would you fund the governmental apparatus (defense, interstate, education)?

As I said, they are not even interested in having a discussion. It is just poorly restrained petulance.

-Cheers

Teabagger's Unite!

For those that haven't had their fill of teabaggery.

Huffington Post has a nice page set up where you can smoother yourself in the tea-baggy goodness.

If I had to offer some insight on the 'Tax Day', it would probably be this: "No one likes paying taxes.".

Everyone for the most part would like their taxes to go down. No one likes to pay any bill.....that is not stripper, hooker or high class prostitute related.

What I find annoying about most of these protests, is the absolutely juvenile nature of the argument. The case is never made that taxes should be lowered and these programs should be cut as result of that. No it is always the extremely thin, "My taxes should be lowered. But I should still have all the benefit that we pay into!".

Though there is waste, taxes pay for our roads, schools, common defense, and a social safety net, things we all need and use.

Taxes are a necessary evil, much like peas and broccoli, that is why we ostensibly have our representatives; to keep it from being to onerous and to share the burden of our social compact evenly.

If you have a rationale why we should not be funding these things, then present it. Otherwise, it is just petulant whining.

There is a cogent case to be made for lower taxes or even the abrogation of the IRS, but those aren't the arguments being put forward. Mainly it seems it is the unrestrained anger of people whose ideas have been rejected by the public and reality at large.

Don't even get me started on the "flat" or "fair" tax......

-Cheers

More Zombie....

Because I know you all don't get enough of me talking about zombies.

Behold! The Zombie Bible!

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth and the Zombies sprang forth from the roiling foam of creation, barking in uncontrollable rage, hungry for human flesh to eat and pestork, giving pause to our Lord who shat himself and uttered 'Oh, fuck' amidst the primordial celestial gloom.

-Cheers

Quote of the day....

Pure unadulterated awesomesauce....

David Shuster bringing the fury:

The people who came up with it are a familiar circle of Republicans, including former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, both of whom have firm support from right wing financiers and lobbyists. … We can only speculate why widespread tea bagging made [Neil] Cavuto think of the Million Man march, unless he got them confused with Dick Armey. And in Cavuto’s defense, if you are planning simultaneous tea bagging all around the country, you’re going to need a Dick Armey.

-Cheers

You got Trouble....

Some show tunes to lighten the mood before I launch into my standard screed.

The stories I am following today:

• I do not argue that 'we' are a predominantly 'Christian Nation', as a matter of demographics.
• However our government is from its founding a secular entity.
• That's what I am talking about!
• The 411 on the Tax day-Tea Parties.
• As mentioned in an earlier post the Presidents embrace of Bush-Cheney's disdain for habeas is disturbing, we as a nation need to not abdicate our duty nor should we let Spain do it for us.
• I swear a pig must have flown over my apartment when I read this post. Bernie saying something sensible and Hannity looking shocked?!?!
  
• It was not the Cuban Missile Crisis, but conservative pundits have no class and people have noticed.
• I know polling data can be hard to read through, so here someone does it for you. But it is amazingly disingenuous to ignore what the pollster says about the data they collect.
• Norm it is over.
  
• Wait? People are happy about their taxes!?!?!?

So that is a quick round up on stuff I am reading today. Get those taxes filed people. Enjoy the weather and if I get a comment about "Shipoopi"......

Well lets just say I have ninjas and am not afraid to use them.

-Cheers

Weekend Notes...and quick shots...

Had a good time this weekend. Hope everyone had a relaxing and enjoyable Easter/Passover holiday.

The race was fun to watch and it was nice to see the support the community poured out for the runners.

Got to see a lot of faces that I had not seen in a long while. That was quite nice and made me a quite a bit nostalgic. Barbecue in Ed's backyard, pool nights in the union, Golden Tee at Murphy's, packing too many people in my itty bitty car, Boom-Booms, Walls and a certain doctor frolicking as god intended. Good times.

Memories.

So plans are, of course, to make some new memories. It's the year for that and all!

In that vein, there has been a suggestion that we do a "Gin-Sanity" Mark II. The Wrath of Rum!

Mike is angling for calling the evening 'the Rum Shot'. Sick bastard that he is. With all the piracy in the news I can't, not think something more piratey would be appropriate.

So stay tuned for more information on that.

Now for some news bits:

• As many people are reporting, the administrations movements on civil liberties is disturbing.
• You all laugh at my zombie apocalypse plan. Obviously I am not the only one who has one!!
• Dr. Krugman drops knowledge on the teabaggers.
• Good luck Chuck!
• There is almost a part of me that wishes this were true!

-Cheers

edit--cleaned up some text and format stuff. mgmt

And this is why I love her.....

No commentary needed.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

-Cheers

An Open dialog

Faith is an often contentious issue. So I often struggle about making posts that deal with it. What with the current polarization of our body politic, it seems that most issues have taken on a theological tint (from climate change to the subject of gay marriage).

But periodically there are things I just can not resist.

I love a good argument. I especially like ones where, one of the debaters absolutely drinks up his opponent's milkshake on national tv.

This dust up happened the other night on Hardball. In general I tend to loathe Christopher Hitchens. By and large he is a pompous, sanctimonious ass, with a palpable disdain for religion, the religious, and religious institutions.

Some of his commentary and issues with religion on the whole are valid complaints, however he tends to wrap this in an all encompassing anti-religious bigotry, that I believe injures his argument.

That all being said, he does know his history. Mr. Blackwell, the woefully uninformed individual charged with debating Mr. Hitchens, is a disappointing hack unfortunately.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

I don't feel that the debate was in anyway even. My dislike for both men notwithstanding, Mr. Hitchens is just better at presenting his side of the case in a factual manner. His contempt is obvious, but his ability to support his point of view is commendable.

This is not so much a support of the views expressed, but an attempt to highlight the sort of argument I dislike. Shorter Blackwell: I am right because I say so!

Basically. Yes you are entitled to your opinion, but not your own facts. And most assuredly if your assertions do not stand up to scrutiny, then they should be savaged, if you place them into the public square.

-Cheers

The Ironical Karl Rove...

It is rare that I am surprised by the rank hypocrisy of political apparatchiks, but it seems that Karl Rove is trying to set some sort of land speed record or something.

Steve Benen over at The Washington Monthly pulls together the pieces.

Let's take Karl Rove, for example. Last week, the Bush/Cheney "architect" used his role as a high-profile media professional to accuse the Obama White House of using hardball political tactics. A couple of weeks before that, Rove accused the president of looking at every policy issue "from a political perspective." A couple of weeks before that, Rove complained about the scourge of budget deficits. A couple of weeks before that, Rove accused the president of relying on "straw men" for his arguments. A couple of weeks before that, Rove decried White House "power grabs." (Rove also, about a year ago, accused the New York Times of having "outed a CIA agent," which "obviously puts the CIA agent in danger." Rove added that disclosing the name of a CIA operative represents "a very callous view about our nation's security and interests.")

Notice the pattern?

It is almost like he expects us to forget what he was doing 3 months ago?

Projection much Karl?

-Cheers

A night of Lambic

Is like a roll in the hay. Literally.

Belgian Lambic Beer

Money quote:

Belgian scientists have deconstructed lambic and found scores of different species of micro-flora. Two important types are lactic-acid bacteria, which make lambic sour, and yeasts of the genus Brettanomyces, among them B. bruxellensis, which give lambic its characteristic aroma. "Horse blanket" is the term favored by beer cognoscenti. This is not a terribly useful olfactory cue for those of us who dwell in cities, but the scent is of hay and must -- and also of something very much alive. It is a weird concept for beer, no doubt, but strangely compelling and astoundingly complex. Needless to say, sour mustiness is a tough sell -- don't look for commercials of sweaty young things dancing to reggaeton and taking swigs from bottles of lambic.

Yum!

-Cheers

Right-Wing ID...

It is easy to underestimate the role that Jon Stewart plays in our political discourse. But the man definitely has a way of turning a scathing light on the hypocrisy in our system.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Baracknophobia - Obey
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Economic Crisis Political Humor

-Cheers

Political Courage....

There was a post (via Glenn Greenwald) I intended to write about a couple of weeks ago on Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) and the statements he made about reforming the American criminal justice system a few weeks from the floor of the Senate. Here is the text of the speech here.

This is not a sexy topic, in this day and age. We as a society have particularly harsh and uneven criminal justice system in place now. Our current system, by design does not encourage rehabilitation. It also disproportionately afflicts the lower rungs of our economic hierarchy as well as minority groups (Mr. Coates post dovetails nicely with the subject matter of Greenwald's). This post and these studies (here, here, here and here) speak to this predicament. But more insidiously, our current system and our current dialog unfairly stigmatizes those communities.

So what Sen. Webb did was take an issue, not on any one's radar, an issue that opens him up to all sorts of attacks. Predicated on the false, "Tough on Crime", meme that is often trotted out versus democrats (especially in a state such as Virginia that has a large prison industry complex and lobby). Yet despite all that, it is an issue the senator clearly cares deeply about and sees as huge inequity. In particular there was one quote that caught my attention, that I feel needs to definitely be highlighted. When speaking on the senate floor, Sen. Webb, had this to say:

Let's start with a premise that I don't think a lot of Americans are aware of. We have 5% of the world's population; we have 25% of the world's known prison population. We have an incarceration rate in the United States, the world's greatest democracy, that is five times as high as the average incarceration rate of the rest of the world. There are only two possibilities here: either we have the most evil people on earth living in the United States; or we are doing something dramatically wrong in terms of how we approach the issue of criminal justice. . . .

This is a profound statement. The debate that should be being had over these findings alone could fill thesis from here to Kathmandu. But this is never talked about, not even discussed. It is an article of faith, in this country, that tougher penalties and harsher sentencing requirements deter crime. So by extension incarceration rates should go down, under that belief framework. That this is not the case does not seem to get a lot of coverage.

Yet despite all that, Sen. Webb still made his comments, in about as public a forum as one can make in this country. The silence from the media or the cable shows was almost deafening.

This issue has so many larger policy implications from the war on drugs, to prisoner treatment, to even restitution for victims. And none of that was deemed news worthy.

Further Sen. Webb went on to talk about the conditions in prisons and how they only further 'criminalize' its members. From the rigid hierarchies that can form inside those walls to prisoner abuse and sexual victimization. The very system seems to work against itself.

I do not have any real solutions to offer, but it is nice to know that there are those who think it is both a real problem, and that it needs some serious solutions to address it.

And that takes real political courage to stand by your convictions like that. Especially when no one is clamoring for that change, and there is very real political jeopardy. Now I do not agree with everything Sen. Webb says. He has made some truly horrible votes and policy statements in his relatively short tenure in the Senate. But I do have a deep amount of respect for an individual that speaks with sincerity and passion on an issue that may not be part of the conventional wisdom, and for that Sen. Webb should be applauded.

-Cheers.

Commercials II

Okay so I have this fascination with commercials....I can not really explain it. I also really like show tunes for some reason as well.

Some of you may remember a previous post about a T-mobile commercial.

So here is another one that I thought I would share.

Crazy Train....

So this was one of those mornings where I woke up kind of miffed. Not exactly sure why. Just had that feeling that some thing was amiss in the world.

I had a pretty good weekend, so that was not it. I did my standard Sunday news gorging, as is my routine.

But there was something wrong. Some sort of inchoate feeling, that there was a whole lot of crazy on the horizon. It is, sort of like, the dawning realization that someone or thing has tinkled in your cheerios.

So in no particular order:

• Rep. Michelle Bachmann, just wants to let her crazy flag fly! Seriously this woman just gives conservatives a bad name. I mean seriously, Americorp = re-education camps? Seriously?!! Yes the Peace Corp, and Habitat for Humanity are evil steps on the path to Prussian style fascism (can not use the "N"-word this early in the post. If I am going to invoke Godwin's Law, I am really going go for distance.) On the upside the crew at FactCheck.org are on the case.
• The sheer amount of right-wing hysteria is amazing. I did something I should not have done this weekend. I DVR'ed both Hannity, and Glenn Beck's shows on Fox. I know. I know. It was foolish of me. But I had to see it for myself.
  
• Media Matters does a good rundown with the actual text of the speech, but this sort of thing just smacks of dishonesty.
• Jim Cramer still has not figured out what the actual criticism against him was. Hint, it rhymes with "myperbolic".
• And the difference in my mind between a Christian and a Christianist may be a bit subtle for some, but it has to do with the individual who is actively living by the tenets of the good book, versus the person who feels they are the arbiter of other's morality as well as being able to intuit the will of the divine. One of these I think is just fine and dandy, the other is well...some good examples here.

Now it should be no surprise to me that Mrs. Bachmann is crazy, nor that Sean Hannity is a douche, but I am finding it hard to believe the sheer volume on the vitriol they are spewing. It is like the more the country moves away from their perspective, the greater the demagoguery becomes on their part. We are talking truely ugly rhetoric, and it is barely 2 months into this new administration.

What I find absolutely disturbing is the right's absolutist view point on everything. We can not have have policy debates on the merits of those policies. No. If it is a liberal, progressive, democrat plan then it is inherently flawed (not that this does not exist on the left, but to a much lesser degree). Not only is the opposition wrong, but they are morally bankrupt as well. That is the right's view of it's oppossition. It is hard to have a constructive conversation with this bunch of people.

But it is deeper then that. The idea that only your ideas are acceptable, and that only yourinterpretation of events is valid speaks to a dangerous amount of hubris. Elections do have consequences and sometimes the plans put forth do not work. No matter how much you wish them to.

So I echo Hilzoy's comments,

I am not, in general, a big fan of saying: Republicans: you lost. Get over it. But in this case, I'm going to make an exception. The Republicans do not seem to be willing to allow the President to do things that are plainly his prerogative: appointing the reasonable, qualified, law-abiding people of his choice, deciding which documents should be declassified, and so forth. Any moment now they'll threaten not to pass the budget unless he sets his air conditioner at their preferred temperature.

-Cheers

Random Bits....

I really not sure what to say about this. Other then it has perhaps the most awesome dance move ever, in the history of dance at the 1:29 mark of the video.

Funny Videos | Funny Cartoons | More Video Clips

Whether there is actually any humor here is not the point. But that particular move is just the greatest of great maneuvers ever.

In fact I will give a dollar to the person who does that as a greeting the next time I see them! Especially if accompanied with that facial expression.

-cheers

There will be a quiz.....

And here it is! Pew has an online version of the most recent survey they published, the national average was around 50% so on the balance the respondents did better then I thought they would.

I won't bother you all with how I scored, but here is the quiz if you are so inclined.

Pew Online Survey: News IQ

Let me know how you do.

-Cheers