The Talking Lion

Tricks are something a whore does for money... Or Candy!

2006-04-14T05:35:00.000-04:00

- [||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||] +
Anger Level

As you can see I'm like dangerously close to overloading my circuits. So instead of politics, I'm going to list things that make me laugh loudly and/or heroically:

George Michael Bluth
GOB Bluth
Lucille Bluth
Tobias Fünke
Maebe Fünke

and, of course,

Franklin

George Bush doesn't care about black puppets.

WHAT THE FU...

2006-04-13T12:32:00.000-04:00

Honestly, how many conflicts are we trying to instigate?

A U.S. aircraft carrier strike group is moving into the Caribbean this week to start two months of naval exercises. The military is dismissing allegations by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez that it is planning an invasion of his country. But analysts say the show of force sends a signal to Chavez and other Latin American leaders about U.S. strength."There's no other symbol of American power like the carrier," said the Southern Command's chief of staff.

Not to be too hysterical but I want to box George Bush around his ears. What the hell...

The Upcoming War...

2006-04-13T06:07:00.000-04:00

How on earth can anyone be in favor of a military action in Iran?

We're already fighting 2 wars.

We cannot afford it; neither in men nor money. We are deep in the blood red.

We cannot win the peace in three countries. We're close to losing it in the first two.

It's clear (or at least, becoming clearer) that Rumsfeld is incompetent. His own men say so.

It's clear (or at least, becoming clearer) that Bush & Co are dangerous liars.

We can't even protect our own citizens on our own soil. From Sept 11th to Katrina.

Not to mention:

The Middle East would light up like forest fire. We're having a hard enough time at this current temperature

And, finally:

Iran is ten years from nuclear power. Diplomatic efforts are nowhere near exhausted.

What the fuck are we doing talking about regime change in Iran?

Motherfucking Yahoo!....

2006-04-13T02:29:00.000-04:00

Man, I was all geared up to write a really indignant and angry post about how yahoo!news doesn't display the huge story about the not-so-biolabs until the Politics section (which is where it was until like 20 seconds ago). And I was going to yell about how this story is so much more than 'politics'. But now I see it is listed on the top of their Top Stories section and all they've left me to yell about how it's not in their Main section (the very top with pictures and captions).

Sigh.

It should be the most important story of the day. This type of lying is impeachable. And as I said in yesterday's post, you'd be hardpressed to convince me that Bush or Cheney or Rove or any of the senior White House staff didn't know about the not-a-weapons-lab-conclusion in the two days between the findings and Bush declaring that "we have found the WMDs."

What yahoo! did leave me to yell about is that their lead story is, instead, about how Iran has decided to expand its uranium enrichment program.

TEHRAN, Iran - Iran intends to enrich uranium on a scale hundreds of times larger than its current level, the country's deputy nuclear chief said Wednesday, signaling its resolve to expand a program the international community insists it halt.

Now, this is news. There are no doubts about that. But considering that information that has just surfaced about how we are planning the Iran campaign and how Bush may have lied to the country to justify the last war, I think the biolab story takes immediate precedence. But let's talk about the story anyway:

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Tuesday that Iran for the first time had succeeded on a small scale in enriching uranium, a key step in generating fuel for a reactor or fissile material for a bomb. The U.N. Security Council has demanded that Iran stop all enrichment activity because of suspicions the program's aim is to make weapons.

The story goes on to document how the US and UN aret' to crazy about their plans and detail how Iran has made a little bit of enriched uranium but need more cetrifuges (they have 160 and need at least 50,000 to make fissable material to power a plant or, you know, make a bomb).

Iran, which has made no secret of its plans to ultimately expand enrichment to around 50,000 centrifuges to fuel reactors, is still thought to be years away from a full-scale program.

Still, concerns grew Tuesday when Ahmadinejad announced Iran's enrichment success in a nationally televised ceremony, saying the country's nuclear ambitions are peaceful and warning the West that trying to force Iran to abandon enrichment would "cause an everlasting hatred in the hearts of Iranians."

OK. Here's my problem with this whole situation. In the wake of the now public plans not only to bomb the shit out of Iran but also to use nuclear weapons (but only tactical nukes lol), how exactly can we blame Iran for wanting to pursue this technology?

In theory, the US can attack Iran tomorrow. It has come out that we are planning to so. Bush has a poor track record at avoiding needless conflicts diplomatically. And, the cherry on top, Bush in all his messianic megalomania wants to make "saving Iran" his "legacy."

So given all of that, exactly what is sales pitch to Iran to stop in its development?

"Hey, listen. Even though, um, we invaded Iraq despite their cooperating with weapons inspectors and their ultimately posing no real threat, stop developing really the only weapon that will deter neocon assholes from declaring war on you."

Somehow, I can't see that being too effective. And of course there is also the status that nuclear technology gives to the countries who have it. This is the true objective, in my humble estimation. There is no way they would launch a first-strike nuclear attack on Israel, because Israel has enough nukes to return the favor ten-fold.

But before the islamofacists-will-kill-us-all arguments are whined, I would like to state for the record I would rather religious fanatics hell bent on destroying other countries did not have nuclear capacity added to their arsenals.

But, I mean, one of them already has a bunch.

UPDATE: Looks like the story is out of the Top Stories category. I think that category might be compiled based on hits. Regardless, insert the indignant anger I mentioned earlier.

When it rains...

2006-04-12T04:24:00.000-04:00

The WaPo has an article on the front page today revealing that the mobile biological weapon labs that were heralded initially as evidence of WMDs uncovered were, in fact, hydrogen producing facilities. And that "even as Bush spoke, U.S. intelligence officials possessed powerful evidence that it was not [bioweapons laboratories]."

On May 29, 2003, 50 days after the fall of Baghdad, President Bush proclaimed a fresh victory for his administration in Iraq: Two small trailers captured by U.S. and Kurdish troops had turned out to be long-sought mobile "biological laboratories." He declared, "We have found the weapons of mass destruction."
[...]
A secret fact-finding mission to Iraq -- not made public until now -- had already concluded that the trailers had nothing to do with biological weapons. Leaders of the Pentagon-sponsored mission transmitted their unanimous findings to Washington in a field report on May 27, 2003, two days before the president's statement.

This revalation of course is not even close to shocking. At this point it is clear what amazing liars of which this adminstration is made. But let's continue:

The three-page field report and a 122-page final report three weeks later were stamped "secret" and shelved. Meanwhile, for nearly a year, administration and intelligence officials continued to publicly assert that the trailers were weapons factories.
The authors of the reports were nine U.S. and British civilian experts -- scientists and engineers with extensive experience in all the technical fields involved in making bioweapons -- who were dispatched to Baghdad by the Defense Intelligence Agency for an analysis of the trailers. Their actions and findings were described to a Washington Post reporter in interviews with six government officials and weapons experts who participated in the mission or had direct knowledge of it.

Ok, experts were dispatched by our gov't to investigate the trailers. They said that:

"There was no connection to anything biological," said one expert who studied the trailers. Another recalled an epithet that came to be associated with the trailers: "the biggest sand toilets in the world."

I'm glad we went to war over sand toilets (Weapons of Mass Defecation? Anyone? Anyone? Sigh..). The article goes on to talk about how the team was ignored ("experts arguing for both sides", guess which side won) and how the mobile biolab was used in the media campaign for the war. Back to the investigative team:

The technical team was assembled in Kuwait and then flown to Baghdad to begin their work early on May 25, 2003. By that date, the two trailers had been moved to a military base on the grounds of one of deposed president Saddam Hussein's Baghdad palaces. When members of the technical team arrived, they found the trailers parked in an open lot, covered with camouflage netting.
The technical team went to work under a blistering sun in 110-degree temperatures. Using tools from home, they peered into vats, turned valves, tapped gauges and measured pipes. They reconstructed a flow-path through feed tanks and reactor vessels, past cooling chambers and drain valves, and into discharge tanks and exhaust pipes. They took hundreds of photographs.
By the end of their first day, team members still had differing views about what the trailers were. But they agreed about what the trailers were not.
"Within the first four hours," said one team member, who like the others spoke on the condition he not be named, "it was clear to everyone that these were not biological labs."
News of the team's early impressions leaped across the Atlantic well ahead of the technical report. Over the next two days, a stream of anxious e-mails and phone calls from Washington pressed for details and clarifications.
The reason for the nervousness was soon obvious: In Washington, a CIA analyst had written a draft white paper on the trailers, an official assessment that would also reflect the views of the DIA. The white paper described the trailers as "the strongest evidence to date that Iraq was hiding a biological warfare program." It also explicitly rejected an explanation by Iraqi officials, described in a New York Times article a few days earlier, that the trailers might be mobile units for producing hydrogen.
But the technical team's preliminary report, written in a tent in Baghdad and approved by each team member, reached a conclusion opposite from that of the white paper.

The article goes on to explain why they came to the what-was-not conclusion based upon missing components necessary to any significant bio-weapons lab, mobile or not. And it turns out that the most probable explanation for what these trailers are is hydrogen producing facilities for waerther baloons - which is exactly what Iraqi officials said they were before the war.

Now why is this coming out now? I mean, the members of this team knew what these facillities were, and more importantly what they weren't. Why didn't they speak up after any of the administration's countless misrepresentations and flat out lies about the so-called WMD producing labs?

The technical team's preliminary report was transmitted in the early hours of May 27, just before its members began boarding planes to return home. Within 24 hours, the CIA published its white paper, "Iraqi Mobile Biological Warfare Agent Production Plants," on its Web site.
After team members returned to Washington, they began work on a final report. At several points, members were questioned about revising their conclusions, according to sources knowledgeable about the conversations. The questioners generally wanted to know the same thing: Could the report's conclusions be softened, to leave open a possibility that the trailers might have been intended for weapons?
In the end, the final report -- 19 pages plus a 103-page appendix -- remained unequivocal in declaring the trailers unsuitable for weapons production.
"It was very assertive," said one weapons expert familiar with the report's contents.
Then, their mission completed, the team members returned to their jobs and watched as their work appeared to vanish.
"I went home and fully expected that our findings would be publicly stated," one member recalled. "It never happened. And I just had to live with it."

Fuck you, pal. You "live with it" while since your discovery 2000 American soldiers and at least 40,000 Iraqi civillians live no longer.

Like I said, that the adminstration lied to us is no longer even a passing novelty. But this story is some of the first reporting to actually break real lies the admin has knowingly told. And Bush, Cheney and the rest of the White House knowingly lied. You cannot convince me that the findings of the team specifically sent to investigate the trailers (findings which generated such anxiety in Washington) were not communicated to upper management.

So there you have it: Scandal 1045. Let's see if this is the straw that breaks the self-styled autocrat's back.

Goodness...

2006-04-12T04:10:00.000-04:00

Now I'm not one to deal with conspiracy theories. And although I think the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon smelled fishy, I don't think it is because the government did it. I lean toward the belief that the majority of the gross incompetence that occurred has been covered up for obvious reasons.

That being said, I can certainly imagine the Rumsfelds and Wolfowitzs and Chenies talking about allowing al'Qaeda to succeed with their planned attack in order to springboard a radical and aggressive military agenda that their neo-con buddies truly believe is necessary for American (and Israeli) survival and that their business ties could make a pretty penny in the process. (phew, long sentence)

Now, here's a link to a documentary (google video, completely free and streaming) that discusses the many problems with the official story of the attacks of Sept. 11th. I would say that about 45% of this documentary is damning, the rest can be explained away in some fashion. It's that 45% that makes this video worth your attention. Please watch it.

It's got me pretty worked up, I must admit.

Who belongs to that 37%...

2006-04-11T17:01:00.000-04:00

I mean, honestly, why is his approval so high? Are tinfoil caps coming back in a big way?

Luckily for the country most Americans aren't buying his explanation of how he declassified the NIE but he had nothing to do with the leaking of misleading segments thereof or Libby identifying himself as "a former Hill staffer":

Overall, 63% of Americans believe Bush did something either illegal (21%) or unethical (42%), while 28% say he did nothing wrong. While many more Democrats are critical, 3 in 10 Republicans also find that Bush did something illegal or unethical.

The more closely people are following the issue, the more likely they are to say he did something illegal rather than merely unethical.

That's good news. It's jut unfortunate that only "25% of Americans are following the matter "very" closely, while another 39% are following the issue "somewhat" closely."

What I think is the coolest part of this recent White House-committed depravity is that this scandal is an embarrassingly public example that Bush and his cabinet (against the advice of professionals and in this case the very document he supposedly declassified) 'cherry-picked intelligence to justify the war.'

If you are part of the 39% who aren't following this at all, here's a brief summary. In response to Joe Wilson, Cheney's chief of staff, Libby, leaked a portion of the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq to administration friendly reporter, Judith Miller, among others. The NIE is divided into segments with Key Judgements containing the most important and verified information. Libby leaked a part of the NIE that said that Iraq was seeking to obtain yellow cake from Niger. Libby told Miller that this was a Key Judgment which it was not, and in fact, the NIE cast doubt on the Niger claim.

Not only did he misrepresent the NIE, he added that Iraq was "vigorously trying to procure" uranium; language that is not found in the NIE. So, in order to maintain support for the war, someone authorized or told Libby to selectively leak a misleadingly represented part of a classified document. This is extremely unethical and, depending on the details, criminal (and, for once, the public knows it).

The question then was "was he authorized to leak that classified document, if so by who?" Well, Bush said that he declassified the NIE, but, um, he didn't have anything to do with whatever people are upset about, lol.

Enter Bush's Catch-22 by Anonymous Liberal:

The White House is trying to walk a fine line here. On the one hand, in order to characterize everything as being above board, they are forced to confirm Libby's claim that the President personally authorized the release of information from the NIE, a decision which amounted to de facto "declassification."

On the other hand, they are hoping to distance the President as much as possible from Libby's subsequent actions, i.e., misrepresenting the NIE, asking that the information be attributed to a "former Hill staffer," and outing an undercover CIA agent in the process.

So, after three days, they've settled on their spin: the President authorized discussion of the NIE but left all the details to Cheney and his aides. The problem with this strategy is that Libby was quite specific in his testimony about what he was authorized to say. According to Fitzgerald, Libby testified that he was "specifically authorized in advance of the meeting to disclose the key judgments of the classified NIE to Miller."

And as AL points out, that claim is just not in the key judgments.

Because the entire NIE has never been declassified, it very much matters which portions of the document the President claims to have authorized Libby to discuss. Did the President only "declassify" the key judgments section, or did he also "declassify" the portion of the text that Libby misrepresented to Miller? Did Bush or Cheney instruct Libby to describe that section, falsely, as a "key judgment"?

So yeah, from what we know something awful happened and the president and his vice were involved.

I predict that with the heightened criticism and dropping poll numbers,at this rate we will have begun our Iran campaign within the month. U-S-A! U-S-A!

We're not dead...

2006-04-06T16:04:00.000-04:00

Trust me. I will be back. I'm just suffering from hardcore anger fatigue. But that will pass. And as soon as I finish the new design for the site it will be relaunched.

Terminating Civil Liberties...

2006-02-01T14:15:00.000-05:00

My latest column. Not a new discovery, but perhaps an important insight (Pitt News):

I think I have finally figured out President Bush’s favorite movie. Well, this movie might not be his favorite, but it has influenced his policy making at the least. This epiphany emerged after the recent illegal wiretapping scandal, and I feel like an idiot because I should have noticed it earlier. If I hadn’t caught the movie on television, perhaps this insight would be lost forever. The nation should be thankful I spent most of this Saturday on the couch. This movie, of course, is The Terminator. Bear with me.

We all know the movie is about a soldier from the post-apocalyptic future that travels to the present to stop an evil android from killing the mother of the humanity’s only hope. But, I think the president saw this movie and came to the same conclusion that I did this weekend: There are a number of reasons for a giant robot to be chasing you, but it makes a damn good pick-up line.

I mean, this man is telling you that not only is there a giant robot after you, but that copulation with him results in an offspring that saves humanity. I imagine it’s hard to have the requisite resolve to judge who the giant robot is really shooting at after you realize that the thing shooting in your direction is, in fact, a giant robot.

But messianic offspring aside, if you think you’re being saved from a death-dealing automaton by a hot guy, you’re liable to give in to his bedroom eyes, regardless of how silly what he’s saying sounds. The president took this lesson to heart and has crafted his entire administration to be that hot guy.

“Sure,” he says, “I am shooting wildly and throwing homemade explosives behind me as I please, but that’s because there’s a robot after you.” Once you’re convinced that this is truly an android, you tend to listen to the person who tells you he’s from the future. Sure his actions are dangerous — irresponsible at the least — but he must know what he’s doing because you certainly have no relevant training. He needs unregulated wiretapping of his own citizens? It’s illegal, but he says that if he can’t listen the robot will get me. Let him listen, for god’s sake, there’s a giant robot behind us!

This is Bush’s most recent example of legally questionable tactics under the banner of fighting terror, but the subsequent attempt to get into our pants is no longer merely proverbial. You see, Bush is trying to — ahem — relate to America with the formation of a new national secret police force with the power to search American citizens’ pants without a warrant.

The renewal of the USA PATRIOT Act calls for the creation of “a permanent police force, to be known as the ‘United States Secret Service Uniformed Division.’” This new division is empowered to “make arrests without warrant for any offense against the United States committed in their presence” and has a nearly limitless jurisdiction.

They also would have the power to make an arrest “if they have reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing such felony.” As you can see, the language is more than slightly troubling; “any offense” and “reasonable grounds” can be broadly defined and easily abused as a result. “Those are just words, baby.” He promises to be gentle.

I draw attention to how ‘easy’ he thinks we are as his remarkably P.R. savvy administration isn’t even going to take the word “secret” out of the official name for our new secret police. “Listen,” he says, “the future of humanity, of freedom, rests on you agreeing. Giant robot.” With our fear he grooms us to heatedly acquiesce to whatever he wants. Apparently we are also turned on by his determination and steadfastness even in the face of obvious mistakes and their predecessors. We have some unresolved issues with our forefathers, and seeking a strong father-figure is only natural.

In this state of robot panic we are unable to see how dangerous and possibly insane this hot guy is. We are unable to ask ourselves a very necessary question: Is this robot worth abandoning our standards? I mean, we’re a pretty sexy country, and we’ve done way better. And unlike Sarah Connor, this robot is no bigger than we faced in the past, knickers intact. To paraphrase a great man, those who would sacrifice a little loving for protection against robots deserve neither and will end up losing both.

To No One...

2006-01-18T10:34:00.000-05:00

Iiiiiiite. I haven't posted a goddamned thing in awhile.

But. I think. that. I will have an inordinate amount of time over the next few months.

So that means the triumphant return of The Talking Lion (and maybe a new banner!).

And I am pretty sure that Pat and Sean have peaced out of this operation, so it will become my personal blog.

So, a new era begins, bitches.

In the meantime here is a column I wrote about how Alito is a scumbag racist. If you read any respectible blogs you will have seen this stuff before but if you want to read me talk about it click here.

In light of this philosophical affirmation of CAP, it boggles my mind that anyone could support this nominee for the Supreme Court, let alone any minority. That any African-American leader supports conservative judges when in our country’s history conservative courts have never done anything for any minority group other than the wealthy is ridiculous.

To be clear, I don’t accuse all conservatives of being racist. However, I do accuse all minority conservatives of being dangerous idiots. Those who are in this deplorable category should ask themselves a simple question: If conservatives advocate and protect racial equality, why do old racists vote Republican?

I wanted to include cite Ross for the last question, but I forgot before I sent it to my editor. So, before the 4 people who read this, Ross came up with the skeleton of this question after to responding to one of my posts. I just changed a few things.

Also, someone tell Ross to start blogging again.

God, it's happening again...

2005-12-17T20:03:00.000-05:00

So yeah, Bush authorized illegal spying on US citizens. But hey, he has good reason:

Bush defended the program as narrowly designed and used "consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution." He said it is employed only to intercept the international communications of people inside the U.S. who have been determined to have "a clear link" to al-Qaida or related terrorist organizations.

Government officials have refused to provide details, including defining the standards used to establish such a link or saying how many people are being monitored.

Remember the last time he said someone was clearly linked to al-Qaida? Anyone? Anyone? Beuler?

Here's a hint. It rhymes with:

If anyone buys this from this administration without ANY PROOF let me know because I owe them a punch in the face. Thanks.

Also,

The president had harsh words for those who revealed the program to the media, saying they acted improperly and illegally. The surveillance was first disclosed in Friday's New York Times.

"As a result, our enemies have learned information they should not have," Bush said. "The unauthorized disclosure of this effort damages our national security and puts our citizens at risk."

So now he's worried about unathorized disclosure... Asshole.

Joementum...

2005-12-07T04:30:00.000-05:00

"It's time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge he'll be commander-in-chief for three more years," the senator said. "We undermine the president's credibility at our nation's peril."
Joe Leiberman (via The Heretik)

Just a quick comment on this type of attack against news outlets and others people reporting and drawing attention to the facts of the war and/or criticizing those in charge.

If something is poorly run and is causing death and chaos without a foreseeable solution, my acknowledgement of this does not make the death and chaos my fault. Reporting on Iraq can hardly ever be positive due to the nature of the facts, and the American people who financed this war and take part in the selection process of our government deserve to know what is going on.

If I do not bring attention to important events just because they reflect poorly on my nation, that does more disservice to said nation than the "loss of credibility".

Thus, bad news is not the fault of the press. Any credibility being lost by the president is his own damn fault for being an incompetent lying shitbag. Not reporting it, not yelling about it after its reported allows it to continue unchecked which our country simply cannot afford.

If I had any confidence that the Bush Administration could turn it around and succeed in Iraq; if I had any delusions that the considerable efforts of those who serve in Iraq could overcome the incompetence of those who lead them; if there was anyway to change leadership in the executive branch tomorrow and a get new start at fixing Iraq, I would whole-heartedly support our continued occupation of Iraq.

We broke it, after all. It should be our responsibility to remake Iraq. But right now all we are doing is fucking it up worse than it was before we arrived (quite the statement considering who was in charge of Iraq before we arrive, but a statement echoed even by the new Iraqi leadership). And because there is no hope of not fucking everything up, the continued loss of American lives and billions upon billions of dollars becomes an exercise in futility.

And I hate the president and his band of assholes for making me make this choice. I want Iraq to be a nation remade to foster freedom and shine as an example of a successful democracy in a region of the world where that just doesn't exist. But there is no way, short of some deus ex machina-esque miracle, that this kind of result is possible given who is in charge.

This will be a sad chapter in American history and may be the first chapter of the end of our global dominance. I hope 2006 can win the D's a legislative body so there can be an official investigation into all the ways everything that the Bush Whitehouse has done has been wrong. I hope that 2008 will feature a D nominee with at least a decent campaign staff so we won't have to suffer 4 more years.

Lots of posting today. It's because I have other things that I don't want to do.

The War on Christmas...

2005-12-07T02:31:00.000-05:00

First and foremost, as is clear to anyone with a discerning mind, there is no war on Christmas. It's bullshit and it's not worth wasting my sore fingers discussing it.

But I saw this rather funny yahoonews story about how a bunch of supergigantochurches are closing their doors on Xmas:

This Christmas, no prayers will be said in several megachurches around the country. Even though the holiday falls this year on a Sunday, when churches normally host thousands for worship, pastors are canceling services, anticipating low attendance on what they call a family day.

OK fine, it's not big deal. It even makes sense if the attendance is going to be low. I mean, why should a godly man waste his breath on a few stragglers with no family or something. It's a waste of the electricity needed to run the mic and slideshow.

All kidding aside, I don't care if these churches have a pagan carnival in their halls, they can do what they want. But I do think it's funny that yahoo included this sentence in the story:

Critics within the evangelical community, more accustomed to doing battle with department stores and public schools over keeping religion in Christmas, are stunned by the shutdown.

I mean, when your own church decides to take the day of days off, it's kind of hard to regain any leverage you had with Macy's.

Also I think that this story is a good example of complete journalism. The fact that Xtians all over the place are whining about discrimination and intentional disrespect from anyone who refuses to tattoo "Jesus Jesus Jesus" on their throat is an important peice of this story that would have been left out as little as 4 months ago. Perhaps this would have gone unreported; I mean, the press has recently been praised for "growing a backbone" but I am slightly more cynical. I would say that the actual facts and developments and events that require reporting are so obviously vile and indicative of everything thats wrong with the current admin that any reporting on this at all would appear as though the major media outlets is taking a stand. But in reality, I think that its just that you can't ignore things like Katrina and secret prisons and climbing death toll and no real achievment in Iraq. And becuase the press couldnt get away with not reporting any of these things, they begrudgingly did. Which took everyone by surprise.

We weren't used to being told the bad things loudly. So we praised them and their refreshing and reasserted journalism. And luckily a few of them took it to heart and began doing it in earnest, but I think any journalist who didn't cover these stories would have been guilty of gross negligence. So, not to give yahoo too much credit, this story is relevant solely because of the O'Rileys and Gibsons and their attentionwhoring ways rousing up simple minded house fraus with nothing better to do but yell at the minum wage secretary manning the phones at Sears.

This is getting a little too unfocused rant-y for my tastes. SO let my rephrase my point succinctly:

It's all good and well to give credit for journalism where it is due. We are quite obviously in a time where elected officials are committing unethical acts so often to the point of absurdity. Asking questions that are tough and revealing in light of all that has happened is easier now. The fact that it'e easier now makes todays important questions less newsworthy.

What I'm saying is I wish journalists would have asked the tough and revealing questions when it was tough. Perhaps we wouldn't be stuck in a shitty Iraq situation, perhaps we wouldn't be stuck with 4 more years of the worst president in our nation's history.

Some brief felating...

2005-12-07T02:30:00.000-05:00

OmglmaoROFFLES!

How great is the Colbert Report. I mean, honestly, I've seen nearly every episode so far (not including tonight's) and have yet to be dissapointed.

I am thoroughly impressed and convinced of its lasting power.

Jon Stewart and Steve Colbert (should the latter keep his game sharp) as fast becoming important political figures in the greater context of our contemporary political history. There will be books written about them.

Too good to resist...

2005-12-07T02:27:00.000-05:00

Narnia Targeted To Christians

The film adaptation of The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe, the first installment of the Chronicles Of Narnia series, is being marketed strongly to a Christian audience. What do you think?

Marta Osburn,
Travel Agent
"Do they realize this movie is all about people coming out of closets?"

I mean, wow. Talk about the perfect joke about Narnia-related stories.

Well done, sir.

And so it goes...

2005-12-06T06:11:00.000-05:00

Yeah, things have been slow here at the Talking Lion. I'm just drowning in so much of my own personal shit that even when I have time to blog I would rather sulk in a corner somewhere and pretend that I was someone else.

Luckily, my magazine (Left Hook) is coming out this week here in Pittsburgh. It's free. The website is linked to the side there, but the site is still under construction. If anyone wants a copy that doesn't live in Pittsburgh, you can comment below and I'll send you one snail mail style at my earliest convenience.

Reading over it, I will be the first to admit that it could be a better first issue. But I think that taking into account the inexperience of the writers (all freshmen except Pat and myself), there is much slack to be cut. Also, we've already finished the 2nd issue and it's like 50 times better and my replacement (I retire after the next issue) is much better than me. LEFT HOOK 4E!

As my terrible government teacher always said: "The first pancake is always lumpy"

Anyway, here's the last few of my PittNews Columns I haven't linked because I am ajerk:

Brain Surgery and Bush.

I Have a Secret Admirer, Opinions..

Arun's Global Warming Column, He Is Officially Liberal.

So read those, I hope to have another for you to enjoy this week. And who knows, maybe I'll fill you in on some of my opinions in regards to current events... Wouldn't you be lucky?

Oh yeah I wrote a column the other week...

2005-10-30T12:51:00.000-05:00

I'm trying to un-atrophy my blogging muscles. In the meantime you can read my column for the PittNews.. I should have another column this week. Wednesday.

This column, from last week, isn't political. It's my real reaction to watching Entourage.

I fucking love this show. And just about every fella I've talked to that has seen it is of the same opinion. It's Sex and the City, for guys. As in, just as S&tC had everything the ladies wanted in a program, Entourage has just about everything I look for in my television. That and Jeremy Piven is fucking gold.

But yeah, the column doesn't have much to do with Entourage, except that if life in the Entertainment Industry is as glamorous as portrayed within the show, I am fucking moving to LA.

Yeah, so yeah...

2005-10-27T01:16:00.000-04:00

I feel really unoriginal right now, and I need to deal with that, fella.

So in the meantime read this excellent post by Greg Saunders of Talent Show:

This isn't a partisan game and it's not funny. Treating the indictments of government officials like a holiday is pretty childish coming from a left-wing so politically neutered that we have to rely on a grand jury to score political points for us. So wipe that smile off your face. George W. Bush is going to be President for the next three years. The next chance the Democrats have to regain the Senate and the House is more than a year away, but despite every Republican misstep that's happened lately, it's still doubtful that Democrats will be able to get their shit together well enough to swing either body. You want to celebrate? Try winning an election first. Just because your opponent fell doesn't mean you knocked him down.
You say "schadenfreude", I say "fucking embarrassment".

And I would be lying if I said that I don't feel waves of jubilance. But it's more than schadenfreude, it's a sense of relief that parts of the system seem to be working after 5 years of them not. Its nice, I hope it continues until a few old white men are in jail.

Yeah this isn't much of a post. Baby steps, ya'll.

I just said ya'll, wtf.

OMG, MIDTERMS ARE OVER LMAOROFFLES!!!

2005-10-21T16:40:00.000-04:00

Haha! I emerge victorious! I r00l and midterms dr00l.

Anyway, apart from sitting about 5 ft from the future Democratic Senator from PA, Bob Casey, I have a new column for the PittNews. Read it.

The blogsault will return on Monday, have a great mo'fucken weekend!

I don't hate Halloween...

2005-10-20T07:42:00.000-04:00

...But if I may speak for all that cannot, stop dressing up your pets.

Actually strike that. Keep dressing up your cats. Simply because the resulting vengeful glare is when they are at their most human.

...you can almost hear their oaths of retribution...

Yeah, so last midterm today in less than 2 hours. My good buddy Steven Bonko is in town, so I'm bracing myself for all the awesome and irresponsible things we'll do.

(and by that I mean, read ghost stories to eachother, mom)

The Colbert Report...

2005-10-18T06:24:00.000-04:00

If Steve Colbert can maintain the level of awesome that he presented in the debut of The Colbert Report, Jon Stewart's going to get a run for his money.

I mean, I could watch the gravitas-off for hours on end, it was amazing. Well done, Steve.

I can see the light at the end of the tunnel: 3 papers down, 2 midterms, a paper, a column and a magazine left.

Also, it seems lightning has struck. Welcome back, Pat.

I've decided to return...

2005-10-17T22:32:00.000-04:00

Words move, music moves
Only in time; but that which is only living
Can only die. Words, after speech, reach
Into the silence. Only by the form, the pattern,
Can words or music reach
The stillness, as a Chinese jar still
Moves perpetually in its stillness.
Not the stillness of the violin, while the note lasts,
Not that only, but the co-existence,
Or say that the end precedes the beginning,
And the end and the beginning were always there
Before the beginning and after the end.
And all is always now. Words strain,
Crack and sometimes break, under the burden,
Under the tension, slip, slide, perish,
Decay with imprecision, will not stay in place,
Will not stay still. Shrieking voices
Scolding, mocking, or merely chattering,
Always assail them. The Word in the desert
Is most attacked by voices of temptation,
The crying shadow in the funeral dance,
The loud lament of the disconsolate chimera...

I said to my soul, be still, and wait without hope
For hope would be hope for the wrong thing; wait without love
For love would be love of the wrong thing; there is yet faith
But the faith and love and the hope are all in the waiting.
Wait without thought, for you are not ready for thought:
So the darkness shall be the light, and the stillness the dancing.

- T.S. Eliot, "Four Quartets"

One of the reasons I haven't blogged in a while is that I haven't been satisfied with my ability to represent with language the sudden, spontaneous, intuitive thoughts I have. However, I've decided that I need to write every day in order to get better at it. Frequently I won't write about politics, at least not in the way Arun and Sean write about politics, because quite frankly I hate politics and politicians. Anyway, just announcing my return.

Breaking radio silence...

2005-10-17T01:40:00.000-04:00

Yeah, the first half of The Silenced Lion is over, only one more week until I resume assaulting the internets with my unfiltered opinion.

I break this silence only to mourn the loss of an icon of progressive blogging, Jesse Taylor. He's left Pandagon to do some nonsense about a governor's campaign. I'd rather he stayed to entertain me, but I suppose his life is his own, or something.

Fare thee well, Jesse.

::over and out::krrrk

Fucking midterms...

2005-10-10T02:26:00.000-04:00

Yeah, as you may have noticed the postings have been sporadic at best recently. That's because of stupid midterms. I have a bunch of papers due this week and a bunch of tests the following week. Also, I am trying to finish the first issue of Left Hook Magazine to be published in a couple weeks as well as write a column for the paper every week.

So, I am taking a break from the blog until the smoke clears. I might post, I might not. I will, however, link to my columns so check back here on Wednesday!

The Silenced Lion bids you all a good two weeks (unless lightning strikes and Sean or Pat decide to post). I hope I see you on the other side.

UPDATE: The column I wrote this week was a peice of shit and I told my editor not to publish it. I'm in a slump and its all school's fault. It'll get better.

The funny returns...

2005-10-05T13:06:00.000-04:00

You look glum, friend. You know what'll cheer you up? Reading my latest column for the PittNews. It's swell.

Piling on Delay is the most fun.

Happy day...

2005-10-04T09:23:00.000-04:00

Delay has been indicted again! This time for money laundering. How gangsta!

A Texas grand jury indicted Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) yesterday for alleged involvement in money laundering related to the 2002 Texas election, raising new and more serious allegations than the conspiracy charge lodged against the former House majority leader last week.

And he'll need every bit of that newfound street cred when he's trying to avoid the beatings he'll receive by every minority in his cellblock.

The surprising new indictments followed by a matter of hours a motion by DeLay's Texas legal defense team to quash last week's charge on grounds that the Texas prosecutor in charge of the case lacked authority to bring it. The lawyers alleged that the crime of conspiracy was not covered by the state election law at the time of the alleged violation.

So his lawyers have implicitly admited he was involved in the acts in question. Which is nice.

DeLay, who had earlier accused the prosecutor -- Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle -- of partisan zealotry, promptly issued a statement accusing him of stooping "to a new low with his brand of prosecutorial abuse." DeLay said Earle "is trying to pull the legal equivalent of a 'do-over' since he knows very well that the charges he brought against me last week are totally manufactured and illegitimate." The congressman added: "This is an abomination of justice."

Well, I mean you'd think Delay would be better able to discern "abomnations of justice" considering his, you know, being one. Obviously his perception is failing as he gets closer to donning prison garb. Do those come in Armani?

Hear hear...

2005-10-01T03:36:00.000-04:00

I am at home in DC for my grandmothers service. She would have been 86 today. I miss her so much and I wish I was a better grandson. I've never been to a funeral and I don't want to make this a habbit. So. Stay put, all of you.

Furthermore, since I won't be blogging this weekend I will leave you with what I would have said if Ross hadn't beat me to it a-goddamned-gain:

Look, We all knew Roberts was going to be confirmed. The people of this increasingly sick and depraved nation seem perfectly happy to turn power over to quasi-fascist dicks who promise them blood, glory, and food. I don't know what's worse, the twisted, lazy sociopathy that defines the modern American middle class voter, the "what are you going to do about it, faggot?" attitude towards corruption displayed without shame by our Feudal masters in Washignton, or the fact that millions of poor and middle class morons listen to the endless chatter of the rich parasites who are ruining this country, and believe themselves to be a part of their club.

Where was I? Oh yes, Roberts. We knew he was going to be confirmed, but couldn't the spineless pussies who call themselves Democrats at least try to put up a perfunctory fight? If only to be on record fighting for what's right? How fucking difficult is it to do the right thing? It's not like the democratic traitors who voted to confirm this sexist pig will gain any advantage from having done so. Seriously, how fucking hard is it to act on principle?

Who else wants to get pass-out drunk instead of thinking about that donkey tattoo on their ass*? I'll be the one in the corner booth weeping into a glass of scotch.

* I thought it was clever.

PS. HAPPY BIRTHDAY CARRIE MOFUCKIN' SHAFER, HERE'S TO 21 MORE YEARS OF YOUR WHITE BREAD FACE!

Empathy for the Devil...

2005-09-28T13:51:00.000-04:00

Hey y'all.

Other than my bomb-ass column in the PittNews today I don't have much to say. So I'll just link farm like a camp:

Amanda(gon) Marcotte got a strange flyer.

Giblets of Fafblog! pitches my dinosaur idea but in a different direction. It's good to see my plans get some traction though.

The Heretik from yesterday on our articulate orator-in-chief.

I will be back to blogging as soon as I can add something. Read my column.

Oh Lordy...

2005-09-26T20:35:00.000-04:00

Is anyone else nervous about this?

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush said he wants to make it easier for the military to take charge after a disaster like Hurricane Katrina, but the White House acknowledged Monday the proposal raises "a lot of issues" that need resolution.

Critics argue that putting active-duty troops on American streets would violate a long-standing tradition that keeps the military out of domestic law enforcement.

But Bush said he wanted to improve the federal response to a "catastrophic" event like Katrina, which left more than 1,000 people dead after it struck last month.

"I want there to be a robust discussion about the best way for the federal government, in certain extreme circumstances, to be able to rally assets for the good of the people," he said.

Making it easier for the facists to fascist. Why should I be worried?

Thats right, I just used fascist as a verb. Do something.

There is more to this story, I am just feeling really lazy. I'm sure it'll pass.

Executive energy talks...

2005-09-26T08:10:00.000-04:00

...and yet not one mention of my brilliant transposaurus plan.

Also, it seems I am going to have a column every Wednesday under the title of "What Can Brown Do For You" or "Brown Like Me". So don't touch that dial.

One of the creepiest stories I have ever read...

2005-09-25T22:12:00.000-04:00

The New Republic has a story about College Republicans and their elections for chair of the national organization. It is goddamned scary how cut-throat this election is.

HUNDREDS!!! I MEAN HUNDREDS!!!!

2005-09-25T21:36:00.000-04:00

If ever there was an example of public disapproval of the administration, it showed today.

Saturday's anti-war protest brought 100,000 people. Today's pro-war rally brought out about 400. Thank you, and good night.

The best sign. The most telling sign was as follows (in bold):

One sign on the mall read "Cindy Sheehan doesn't speak for me" and another "Arrest the traitors"; it listed Sheehan's name first among several people who have spoken against the war.

These are the people that support the war, those whose actions tell the Constitution to "fuck off."

Never am I prouder of my beliefs than when I see the anemic attempts at challenging them by idiots like these. It's good times.

Hot Catholic Love...

2005-09-22T09:06:00.000-04:00

Some needs to explain this to me:

Homosexuals, even those who are celibate, will be barred from becoming Roman Catholic priests, a church official said Wednesday, under stricter rules soon to be released on one of the most sensitive issues facing the church.
The official, said the question was not "if it will be published, but when," referring to the new ruling about homosexuality in Catholic seminaries, a topic that has stirred much recent rumor and worry in the church. The official, who has authoritative knowledge of the new rules, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the church's policy of not commenting on unpublished reports.

He said that while Pope Benedict XVI had not yet signed the document, it would probably be released in the next six weeks.

First of all, I think it's funny that reporting has gotten to the point where even stories about the Catholic church has anonymous sources. More to the issue at hand, why the hell would this church go out of its way and ban homosexuals from being priests? It seems to me that the only way gays sin differently than heterosexuals is when they sin "gayly". But if they are bound by oaths of celibacy they wouldn't be kissing dudes and would be effectively in the same boat as the hetero's (in that sexual acts are forbidden of both, the gender of the partner seems really superfluous). Right?

Also, this ban on teh gay isn't retroactive. So, if gay-you are ordained sometime in the next six weeks it's all good, but after this piece of paper gets the signature, suddenly there's a ban on a group of people that if they cared about papal rules isn't necessary in the first place.

PRIESTS WHO FUCK ARE BREAKING THE RULES! So, the ones who care about the rules won't have sexual relations. The ones that don't will. All this new rule does is say that gay people are weaker and cannot possibly control themselves, not even when their god requires it of them. And though this position sounds ignorant and crazy to you and me, it seems to be exactly what they are thinking and saying:

But the church official who discussed the expected new rules said the document called for barring even celibate men who considered themselves homosexual because of what he contended were the specific temptations of seminaries.

"The difference is in the special atmosphere of the seminary," he said. "In the seminary, you are surrounded by males, not females."

Adding, "The gay has a voracious sexual appetite rooted in evil that cannot possibly be curbed by God (read: the self-loathing that accompanies being a cog in the machine of a gay-hating faith.)"

OK, I made that last bit up, but check this real quote out:

Mike Sullivan, of Catholics United for the Faith, a conservative advocacy group, said his group would favor a ban because putting a homosexual in an all-male seminary environment subjects that person to too much temptation, and increases his likelihood for failure.

"It's not appropriate to put an alcoholic in a bar either," he said.

Because gays don't funtion like not-gay-you and not-gay-me, all they think about is anus.

This ruling is motivated by the urge to purify the churches ranks. But all this is going to do is make prospective candidates for priesthood become less honest in the interest of self-preservation. And dishonesty and secrecy within the church is the real problem (and the true seeds of the past decades of scandals).

"People would do what they used to do, which is not be honest," said a gay American priest and professor at a Catholic college who did not want to be identified because he fears he could lose his church position if his sexual orientation was known.

"The irony is, if you look at the exact ages and seminary graduating classes of those priests who were convicted of sexual abuse in the past few years, they were not on the whole people who entered seminaries in the 1980's, when there began to be more openness about homosexuality," he said. "These were people from the old closeted days.

"So what the church is doing is repeating, in a weird way, the conditions they had before that gave rise to the abuse crisis."

This is probably for the best, seeing as this might awaken the remaining gays in Xtian churches across the land to the fucking obvious fact that despite disingenuous claims to the contrary, the xtian establishment (if not xtianity itself) hates homosexuals. And this new papal bull(shit) will serve as the beginning of a mass exodus of people from the church (gays and people that still believe that God speaks through a person with such ridiculous results).

Hmm. And people wonder why I thank my parents nearly everyday for not raising me hypochristian.

Logic 0500 beats Literalism...

2005-09-22T09:05:00.000-04:00

I've been meaning to post this for quite some time. I can't find the quote online so I'm going to paraphrase this argument against a literal interpretation of the Bible said by a Catholic official several centuries ago (I had to break down into symbols and prove is veractiy as homework for my Logic class a year ago):

1. The sun was created on the 4th day by God.
2. Days are defined by the period between the risings of the sun.
3. Therefore days are meaningless before the sun is created.
3a. The term "day" is used for the first 3 days of creations despite this.
4. Therefore literally interpreting Genesis is misguided.
5. Therefore literally interpreting the Bible is misguided.

It was worded better, but thats the gist.

I think those who stand by the literal interpretation of the Bible is silly because the book has been translated so many times. Jesus didn't speak english; taking every english word literally is just dumb (read: willful ignorance (see: religious faith)).

Also "literally interpreting" is a oxymoron that acknowledges that interpretation is involved. Once acknowledged, who can say which type of interpretation is most worthy since all the interpreting is being done by extremely fallible creatures.

Hey, more funny

2005-09-21T10:42:00.000-04:00

Um, if you have run out of internets, you can read my latest PittNews effort. It might just help you get that raise you've always wanted!

Come on, Obscenity squads,,,

2005-09-20T12:48:00.000-04:00

Fucking idiots.

The FBI is joining the Bush administration's War on Porn. And it's looking for a few good agents.

Early last month, the bureau's Washington Field Office began recruiting for a new anti-obscenity squad. Attached to the job posting was a July 29 Electronic Communication from FBI headquarters to all 56 field offices, describing the initiative as "one of the top priorities" of Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and, by extension, of "the Director." That would be FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III.

Mischievous commentary began propagating around the water coolers at 601 Fourth St. NW and its satellites, where the FBI's second-largest field office concentrates on national security, high-technology crimes and public corruption.

The new squad will divert eight agents, a supervisor and assorted support staff to gather evidence against "manufacturers and purveyors" of pornography -- not the kind exploiting children, but the kind that depicts, and is marketed to, consenting adults.

"I guess this means we've won the war on terror," said one exasperated FBI agent, speaking on the condition of anonymity because poking fun at headquarters is not regarded as career-enhancing. "We must not need any more resources for espionage."

And we're not talking about kiddie pr0n; the FBI is already working on that stuff. This FBI squad is going after and prosecuting pr0n that they deem obscene. So basically Al Gonzo (which is what we should call him from now on) has turned the FBI into pr0n critics who happen to carry sidearms.

Now I've never watched a second of pr0n so this won't affect me. But my good friend "not me" is devastated.

I can't see how any of the arrests will stick. This seems like a clear First Amendment stuff and any lawyer worth his attache case will be easy-off. But we're wasting the resources of the FBI and the federal judiciary on something as fucking trivial as consenting adults fucking on film when we have so much more to worry about.

It seems horribly medieval for our government to legislate and prosecute "obscenities" that are legally produced. It smacks of providing the initial inertia that eventually leads to playful activities like book burning. But we already do prosecute this stuff.

Obscenity laws are to be put in place to appease conservative Xtians, and the Miller Test seems to be just that. The problem with prosecuting using this test seems to be that its so undefined that any lawyer can make any film fit those standards. The test outlines three criterion to determine obscenity:

Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,

Whether the work depicts/describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable state law,

Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

This average person mentioned in the first bit is the average person from the community in which the porn was made. So the holiest roller in Alabama doesn't get to decide what is not allowed. And with the movement to the mainstream of hardcore pornography to the point where porn-stars have legitimate celebrity status makes satisfying the first bit harder and harder (pun most assuredly intended).

The second bit seems harder to wriggle out of no matter how much legal lubricant used. State laws made to prohibit certain types of pornography makes it incumbent on the person defending the pornographers to outline why the whole law should be overturned. This is more difficult than arguing that your porn is legal, I imagine.

It's the third where the Miller Test drops the ball(s). Artistic merit/value is something that can never be defined quantitatively or qualitatively. It's fucking art. And as in the first bit, any lawyer can argue this point effectively.

As I've said, it is a waste of money that we could be spending on , say, victims of Katrina; and a waste of time that FBI agents could be spending finding who put anthrax in those letters 4 years ago or, you know, sniffing out terrorism.

Forget me not...

2005-09-19T14:20:00.000-04:00

ARrrrgh. I be sick t'day, sicker than a salt-sodden scalawag of a cuss. Leeches dinae work so I be lying in me bunk and will for the rest o'the day.

So find yer politics elsewhere or by the bottom of Davey Jones' locker I'll make ye wish ye did.

This be me fav'rit show as a wee tike. And 'tis of this that I'll be dreamin'.

I hate when I'm a hypocrite...

2005-09-17T11:04:00.000-04:00

I am a huge Redskins fan. And I hate that I agree with this article by Mike Wise about the team's name being more than slightly racist:

Which brings me to the Washington Redskins and every other professional franchise or school vowing to never retire their American Indian names, logos and mascots, to make things right with a culture and a people.

As you're drinking out of your Redskins mug Monday night while wearing your Redskins T-shirt -- supporting your make-believe Indians against those reviled Cowboys -- think long and hard about what a sweet way to "honor" a people that is. And, please, enough with this, "We're paying homage to the bravery and warrior mentality of the Native American." That's the same tired excuse Florida State University uses to continue the tradition of a student on horseback in full Hollywood regalia, chucking a flaming spear into the ground at midfield before football games, while thousands of people participate in the Tomahawk chop and the accompanying war chant also popular at Atlanta Braves games. The truth: The indigenous people of this continent were almost all hunters, gatherers, craftsmen and craftswomen before some of our ancestors nearly exterminated them and turned them into B-western caricatures.

I just hate to think that one day I'll be a fan of the Washington 'not Redskins' because I absolutley dread the fact that it'll be Dan Snyder's call as to what the new name will be. Changing the name is the right thing to do, but it doesn't mean I have to like it. And Wise ends his column perfectly:

When parents buy their children bedspreads and rain ponchos with the team's insignia on it -- as Snyder's parents did for him -- it becomes part of your life experience, a piece of personal history.

But it's not your history. It's not your cultural symbol. It never was. You co-opted it, seized someone else's identity and made it part of your own. When Native people try to explain that, you should listen -- just as you would listen when a black person tells you they don't appreciate the term "colored," just as you would listen when a well-educated person from Morgantown tells you it's no longer funny -- it never was -- to paint West Virginians as toothless, moonshine-sipping hayseeds.

If you'll please allow me to be silly for a moment....

2005-09-16T18:57:00.000-04:00

I was watching Predator yesterday on AMC or Encore or something. Great flick. But I was wondering. With all the "VS" horror movies (you know, Predator vs. Alien, Freddy vs. Jason) why doesnt Hollywood make the "VS" movies that I want to see. Here are some suggestions:

Predator Vs. The Mighty Ducks. Triple deek this, motherfucker. Emilio's coaching would be tested like never before because this time they're playing for blood. Also, they're not playing hockey. They're doing battle with a badass alien thinger. Hopefully Carl Weathers will make a cameo.

Freddy Vs. Who ever made U Got Served. U Got Served is one of the worst movies ever made. I would truly enjoy hearing Freddy telling the producer just before he lops of his head, "U got severed!"

Austin Powers vs. Michael Myers. Mike Myers vs. Mike Myers. This one writes itself.

Grab-bag of Horrifying Monsters and Serial Killers Vs. The Cast of Mtv's Laguna Beach. This one also writes itself.

OK Hollywood, get crackin'. I want to see at least 3 scripts on my desk by 2 o'clock or you'll never work in this town again.

A few snark-filled asides...

2005-09-15T12:32:00.000-04:00

Bush is requesting more funding for the relief/rebuilding effort:

President Bush will call tonight for an unprecedented federal commitment to rebuild New Orleans and other areas obliterated by Hurricane Katrina, putting the United States on pace to spend more in the next year on the storm's aftermath than it has over three years on the Iraq war, according to White House and congressional officials.

With the federal tab for Katrina already nearly quadruple the cost of the country's previous most expensive natural disaster cleanup, Bush plans to offer federal assistance to help flood victims find jobs, get housing and health care, and attend school, according to White House aides.

[...]

The president will call on Washington to resist spending money unwisely, but some in his own party are already starting to recoil at a price tag expected to exceed $200 billion -- about the cost of the Iraq war and reconstruction efforts. As emergency expenditures soar -- with new commitments as high as $2 billion a day -- some budget analysts and conservative groups are warning that the Katrina spending has combined with earlier fiscal decisions in ways that will wreak havoc on the government's finances for years to come.

Resist spending money unwisely? Oh you mean like on needless tax cuts? Like on gaudy re-inaugurations? Like on companies that almost pathologically overcharge? Like on missle defense systems that don't work? Like on privatizing Social Security which won't help anyone but the brokers? Like on a million other things I don't have the finger stamina to enumerate?

He has a knack for transforming me from a functioning student into an apoplectic, angry mess.

As far as the money needed to rebuild the places effected by Katrina, never have those tax cuts (you know, the ones before and after we went to war) looked more idiotic and short-sighted. And I hope Bush blushes a bit when he's in front of that podium tonight asking for 200 billion, becuase if we repealed all of his tax cuts the federal government would have that 200 billion without skull-fucking the deficit any more.

But you know, thats just my opinion, man.

In case you're bored...

2005-09-14T11:20:00.000-04:00

Here's a column I wrote in 30 minutes for todays PittNews (University of Pittsburgh's student paper). I think it's funny. Whatever.

Get Your War On...

2005-09-14T07:12:00.000-04:00

I forgot about how much I love Get Your War On. I hadn't read it since before May because the author, David Rees was slow with updating his site. Lucky for everyone, I happened to check it this morning. This strip is so funny that I cried a little (of course, the crying was a healthy mix of laughter's tears and weeping):

Floating Corpse 1: I like it when President Bush hugs people. It's heart-warming. He's a really good hugger
Floating Corpse 2: Totally. It's chicken soupd for the abandoned, poverty-stricken corpse's soul.
Floating Corpse 1: Umm... You can only be poverty-stricken if you're alive.
Floating Corpse 2: So I'm not poor anymore? Well I'll be drowned -- I guess those tax cuts really did work!

Hahaha... sigh, my heart hurts.

Um. What? No way...

2005-09-13T16:22:00.000-04:00

George Bush has taken responsibility for something in his life ever:

WASHINGTON -President Bush said Tuesday that "I take responsibility" for failures in dealing with Hurricane Katrina and said the disaster raised broader questions about the government's ability to respond to natural disasters as well as terror attacks.

"Katrina exposed serious problems in our response capability at all levels of government," Bush said at joint White House news conference with the president of
Iraq.

"To the extent the federal government didn't fully do its job right, I take responsibility," Bush said.

Wow. I can't help but remain cynical in my belief that this is a new tactic to nip the growing inertia of reform in the bud by denying it its fuel: righteous anger at a classless, blame-anyone-but-us administration. But as Ross (ThisSpaceForRent) said today:

I am at the very least willing to admit that it's heartening to see something resembling assumption of responsibility coming from this adminstration, even if I remain convinced that nothing will change. No matter how appropriate (or inappropriate... 'what went right' anyone?) this is, it does not change the fact that Bush constantly fucks up and constantly fucks up even worse on the rebound. No matter how he handles it from this point onward, he should not have been in charge in the first place, and he should not find himself or his party rewarded for it next year.

And that about nails how I feel about the whole affair. If something real happens as a result of this, if for example he is so shamed by his failure that he resigns, I'll have a completely different opinion of the man.

Oh, wishful thinking...

Maybe we should outsource FEMA to India too...

2005-09-13T06:46:00.000-04:00

On July 27th, 2005 many parts of Maharashtra , India flooded thanks to more than 37 inches of rain (8th heaviest rainfall in history, Noah). Despite the risk of telegraphing my pass, so to speak, the metropolis of Mumbai (formerly Bombay) was almost completely flooded.

Despite technological disadvantages in public communication, no Doppler radar to give warning, an antiquated drainage system for which funds never existed to fix/replace, and other various examples of disparity in resources that accompanies being poorer than America, 48 hours later Mumbai was up and running.

The Indian Army and Navy were in Mumbai in 12 hours evacuating more than 10,000 residents and restoring order to the city (there were no cases of violence analogous to what happened in the wake of Katrina). And the death total (406) looks like it's going to be many, many times less than what we'll eventually tally in New Orleans.

What I am saying is obvious. Despite the differences in magnitude between Katrina and the Maharashtra floods, there is no question that the so-called developing nation of India handled its similar crisis exponentially better than the asshats that run our 1st world country.

And that sickens me. No disrespect to India (I am half-Indian), but what the hell is wrong with the US if it can't live up to the example of a nation that is striving to live up to ours? Quite simply, our government is an embarrassment and something drastic needs to change.

We need to keep screaming at the top of our lungs about this mess. We've learned that to let the commotion die will result in no accountability. There are heads that need to roll for this, and I figure if we start high enough, those rolling heads will snowball taking the rest of this repulsive administration with them.

200th post, I only wish it was less depressing

I'm just not feeling it today...

2005-09-08T14:22:00.000-04:00

Yeah, I just can't do much thinking today. A close relative passed away so I am unable to muster up the requisite snark and fury to post. So instead I'll just link farm and you'll be damn grateful.

This post by Amanda(gon) is stunning. It's an ad from wayback advertising Lysol for feminine hygiene. The ad is amazing, and Amanda is at her best when taking down misogyny.

Ross of ThisSpaceForRent fame is blog-sitting at The Talent Show. This post has a killer pun in it. Also it has some great stories.

The Heretik is always fantastic. Read his post on Time's woman of the year.

That should tide you over until tomorrow.

"Cheer up, tomorrow's Friday," my professor said today.
"But you just assigned us a 7 page paper due next class. We don't have time to be cheerful," I reply.
"Oh yeah... Well, it'll be Friday again next week. I'll remind you to be cheerful then."
"Awesome."

2005-09-07T14:28:00.000-04:00

Just a little reminder. Vacations are super duper.

Pressing Roberts

2005-09-07T04:34:00.000-04:00

There are those on the left that have been frustrated at the Democrats' lack of scrutiny on Bush's latest court nominee. I don't count myself among them.

As far as Republicans go, Bush nominated a moderate who is generally well-respected among his colleagues. I mean, this guy isn't anything close to someone like Janice Rogers Brown. Is he my ideal of an ideal justice? Hell no. Far from it. But the way the system works, the president gets to nominate his guys to the Supreme Court. Making a fuss about Roberts is just antagonizing Bush for the sake of antagonizing Bush. There's about a million other things the Democrats should be making a fuss about instead of prodding Roberts for the hell of it.

But then, a disaster struck New Orleans that left the entire nation shocked and saddened. Not only was one of the nation's major cities underwater, but thousands upon thousands of poor residents were left stranded, with no way to get out of town. The death toll gets larger and larger each day and the federal govt. refuses to accept any signifficant responsibility for the disaster. The rescue effort was seriously botched. Our nation should be appaled and should be demanding answers.

This is why I think what Ted Kennedy said in this morning's Washington Post is very appropriate for these times:

"What the American people have seen is this incredible disparity in which those people who had cars and money got out and those people who were impoverished died," Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) said in an interview . The question for Roberts, he said, is whether he stands for "a fairer, more just nation" or for "narrow, stingy interpretations of the law to frustrate progress."

Some may criticize Kennedy as using a national disaster as a political asset. I have no way of knowing what Ted's motives are, all I care about is the fact that someone has decided to make this an issue that is discussed in the highest levels of our government.

There is no issue that is more pertinent right now, and the American people have a right to know how Roberts would respond to questions along this line. Even more than that, the Senators have a duty to the American people to ask these questions and consider his responses when looking at whether or not to confirm.

I'm tired...

2005-09-06T06:43:00.000-04:00

John Tierney is in severe need of a beating. His column in NYT today is a vile piece of rat shit. It can be summarized in one paragraph:

The Federal Emergency Management Agency, often criticized for ineptitude, became even less efficient after it was swallowed by a bureaucracy consumed with terrorism. The department has spent billions on new federal airport screeners - with no discernible public benefit - while giving short shrift to natural disasters.

Of course, he does not mention that the reason FEMA hasn't been able to devote resources to defense against natural disasters, such as strengthening certain levees is because BushCo slashed their resources, preferring to waste them instead on Halliburton contracts and tax cuts. He also blames local officials, and liberals.

Here's something you should read instead. My Pet Goat -- The Sequel by Greg Mitchell:

While a rising chorus in the press has taken the White House, FEMA and the Pentagon to task for performing miserably in their response to the human disaster on the Gulf Coast, few have focused on the most telling aspect of the entire failure. It’s not just incompetence. It’s a shameful lack of concern: The 9/11 “My Pet Goat” dithering on an administration-wide scale.

Simply stated, the president and his top advisers chose vacation over action.

While the media has done a good job in portraying the overall deadly failure of leadership, it has not focused enough on this deadly dereliction of duty.

President Bush, in his weekly radio address on Saturday, said: “In America, we do not abandon our fellow citizens in their hour of need.” But Bush, and his top aides, quite frankly, did just that.

[...]

This follows Bush himself remaining on vacation for more than two days after the storm hit, despite acknowledging this was the worst disaster in the nation’s history. He did take a trip during those days, not back to Washington but out to San Diego to deliver a political speech comparing his Iraq war to World War II. It got little play because nearly everyone else in the country, beyond his inner circle, was focused on New Orleans instead.

What that trip did produce was a picture of Bush laughing with a country singer and strumming a guitar. But at least the president did start heading home late Wednesday. As he did, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice was still enjoying her vacation in New York.

Yep.

It's time to strech...

2005-09-04T06:22:00.000-04:00

...we need to be limber for the upcoming fight.

We aren't fucked. He died. George gets another judge. But we are not fucked. He is unpopular. He has fucked up. We'll be ok.

But only if we fight.

So. Let's fucking get ready. I'm looking at you Senate Dems.

Moderate Creationists

2005-09-04T04:33:00.000-04:00

I had the unique experience today of spending the afternoon at a military-style prep school for young men out near Palmyra, Va. On assignment to cover the Fork Union Military Academy football team for the Charlottesville Daily Progress, I sat in a sction full of the fans and family of the Fork Union players. To my right were all the cadets in uniform sitting orderly. There were older students who seemed to be monitoring them -- it looked like they were allowed to cheer for the team, but any sort of friendly interraction with fellow students must be kept to a minimum. The fun police were in full force.

In front of me in the middle section of stands was the family of one of the football players. The mother was wearing an American flag visor and the father was wearing a baseball cap and t-shirt that both made reference to the fact that he was an Army Ranger, or at least used to be. In the middle of the first quarter, their daughter arrived, driving down from Birdgewater College to watch her brother play football and spend some time with her parents. It really was a nice little scene. Then the mother asked the daughter how her profressors were.

"Oh, they're pretty good," the daughter said. She then paused, before speaking again: "My biology teacher was talking about evolution the other day and he presented it to us like it was fact, like he didn't talk about any alternatives." Apparently, this was upseting to her.

At this point the mother asked the daughter if she had challenged the professor and his secularist world view in any way. The daughter reluctantly replied that she hadn't, claiming that she couldn't think of anything that would have made up a good defense against this evolutionist.

The mother comforted the daughter, and began to explain the "Christian" alternative perspective to evolution. "Some of the extreme creationists believe the earth is only 4,000 years old," the mother said. "But the more moderate creationists put the age of the earth at around 12,000 years."

Well, thank goodness for those moderate creationists. They provide a much more reasonable perspective than those 4,000 year lunatics...

Yeah. Anyway, the daughter still expressed some frustration, saying she would need some more information to help her defend the creationsit view against her biology professor's secularist assault. It was at this point that the mother pointed her daughter to a website: www.answersingenesis.com. "This site will give you the information you need," the mother said.

My curiosity piqued, I decided to check out the website myself. If I didn't hear the personal recommendation of the American flag visor woman to her daughter, I would have thought it was a joke. Like a Landover Baptist thing or soemthing, that was just a parody of the Christian fundamentalist movement. But no, this was no joke. This was as real as it gets. Here's my favorite sample from the website:

A ‘young-Earth’ view admittedly receives the scoffing from a majority of the scientists. But Paul warned us in 1 Corinthians 8:2, ‘And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.’ Compared to what God knows, we know ‘next door to nothing!’ This is why we should be so careful to let God speak to us through His Word, and not try to impose our ideas on God’s Word.

So, the lesson here is don't listen to scientists. Ever. Unless it is in clear accordance with the Bible. Awesome.

The fact that anyone would consider this website to be a source of information that a college student could use to arm themselves intellectually against a biology professor is beyond ridiculous. It would be easy to dismiss this website as the work of a couple of extremists that is ignored by all but like eight people. But no, this website is being recommended by a real live person as a resource for a college student looking to argue for a viable alternative to evolution. Scary.

Wow. You know shit's tough when even Russert is on top of things...

2005-09-02T13:03:00.000-04:00

Well is seems Tim Russert has finally removed Li'l George from his mouth (from Atrios):

President George W. Bush said the other day that no one expected the levees to break.

Well, with all respect, study after study, including FEMA's own tabletop exercises last year, all included the breaking or the giving of the levees. Everyone who had studied the issue knew that with a Category 3, 4 or 5 storm, that was a very strong likelihood.

So, again, it’s very difficult in the midst of a crisis for people to be critical, but I have not talked to anybody, underscore anybody, in official Washington who believes the government at any level has done a good job.

Yep. It's very tough to be critical in the midst of a crisis, he's right. However. There never seems to be the "right time" to expect accountability from those who are responsible for the lack of preparedness. The Army Corp of Engineers had to slow any flood protection project around the country because of the war in Iraq and the TAX CUTS! Of course, thousands of National Guard can only watch from across the world their homes and their families wade in water.

It's a shit time. And blaming someone sounds so crass, even when blame's due. But there is time to expect some fucking contrition from these assholes. Not guitar playin' vacations and tennis-n-broadway NYC shopping sprees.

And, yes, it seems like BushCo is in the process of actually doing something about this crisis. That's good; that's their fucking jobs. All this concern is coming a week late. All of this could have been prevented. The levees didn't have to break, Mr. President. You could have made sure of that, sir.

My biggest problem is that their their eyes are as dry as their suits. Although I can't help but chuckle darkly (and weep openly) at how much these warnings as early as 2001 strike me as analogous to the infamous "Bin Laden determined to strike in US" intel memo. Of course, the analogy is complete with how much we did to prepare for this.

UPDATE: Dr. Myers of Pharyngula has a great post about this. It's pretty much what I wrote here. But, he's much cooler.

UPDATE II: Agitprop has specific info on the warnings I mention above.

Today is going to be busy for me...

2005-09-02T03:48:00.000-04:00

In the mean time, read Paul Krugman's column. It's a dead-on assesment of the situation in NOLA.

Also, check out this post by Amanda at Pandagon:

Apparently, some men are posting offers of shelter on Craiglist--if of course, you're a young woman willing to fuck them. Now the motivation behind the men who troll refugee camps looking for rape victims has an American face.

Well the good news is that any of the asshats behind this shit will soon have the karmic equivalent of a bus dropped on them...

I mean, what the hell...

2005-09-01T17:40:00.000-04:00

This is beyond fucked up. I don't even know what to fucking say about this shit:

Sniper fire halts hospital evacuation
Gunmen fire at medical workers and patients at Charity Hospital

NEW ORLEANS, Louisiana (CNN) -- The evacuation of patients from Charity Hospital was halted Thursday after the facility came under sniper fire twice.

A physician at the hospital said that despite the incidents staff members and patients were eager to get out after three days with no water and electricity and sparse food rations.

"A single sniper or two snipers shouldn't have to shut down a hospital evacuation for two hours now," Dr. Ruth Berggren told CNN. "I look outside, I'm not seeing any military." (See a video report on the sniper's attack -- 1:06 )

Berggren's husband, Dr. Tyler Curiel, witnessed both incidents.

"We were coming in from a parking deck at Tulane Medical Center, and a guy in a white shirt started firing at us," Curiel said. "The National Guard [troops], wearing flak jackets, tried to get a bead on this guy. "

The first incident happened around 11:30 a.m. (12:30 p.m. ET) as Curiel and his National Guard escorts headed back to the hospital after dropping off several patients at nearby Tulane Medical Center to be evacuated by helicopter.

What kind of sicko do you have to even think about doing something so heinous. Good god.

I'm motherfucking syndicated...

2005-09-01T17:39:00.000-04:00

Yeah, I'm helping Pitt College Dems get their blog off the ground. So my post's on this site will be republshed on their blog site. It's pretty cool.

Also, if you look at the sidebar, you can see I added a new section: Lion Cubs. Under it there is a link to something called Left Hook Magazine. That is the new print magazine that I am starting. It's going to be awesome. If you follow that link now you can read a super-sweet article by AWOL Talking Lion Patrick Kirts. Also gaze at the awesome flyer I made (luckily I have yet to be sued by DC comics).

Enjoy!

Sometimes I can't help but punch through walls...

2005-08-31T13:08:00.000-04:00

Greg Saunders has a great post at The Talent Show on what Bush is did instead of being there for the people of Louisiana. He compares it to what Bush did during the attacks on September 11th, 2001 (he ran away and hid, like the macho man he is).

With that situation, of course, you could make the argument that Bush was being held back by the Secret Service or that there was enough uncertainty to make the case that traveling to New York or Washington might put the President in danger. (Besides, why rush back when Giuliani is doing a better job for him?) But this is a different matter entirely. The full potential of the levee breaks in New Orleans has been known for almost 24 hours now (3-4 days if you count the warnings over the weekend), yet the President has still been mostly M.I.A. Curious about how he's been spending his day??
Speaking to a crowd of sailors and Marines near San Diego, Bush described the Iraq war and World War II as crucial tests of American resolve in the face of evil. He also painted a grim picture of the consequences of failure, warning that Iraq could turn into an oil-rich haven for international terrorists.
. . .
The president's visit to Naval Air Station North Island was part of a White House effort to shore up support for the war. Recent polls show widespread unease over the war. An Aug. 5-7 Gallup Poll, for example, found that 54 percent of Americans thought the war was a mistake. Still, most Americans said they opposed a quick withdrawal.
And this was all after the levees broke. Thousands of people are missing or dead in what's being called one of the worst natural disasters in the nation's history, but the President is still worried about his poll numbers?

Well, Greg, I have good news. Bush does have Louisiana on his mind. I have the proof thanks to CNN:

WACO, Texas (AP) -- President Bush held a video conference about Hurricane Katrina with his top advisers from his Texas ranch Wednesday and then flew over the disaster area en route back to the White House to oversee federal relief efforts.

Bush, who may visit the area later in the week, cut short his working vacation in Texas by two days -- even though aides have long contended that his duties are uninterrupted when he spends time at his ranch in nearby Crawford, which has White House-level communications capability.

...

On his way back to Washington, the president's plane, Air Force One, descended to an altitude of about 5,000 feet to allow Bush to view some of the worst hurricane damage. White House spokesman Scott McClellan told reporters that Bush was examining the destruction below from the front left side windows of the plane.

You can't make this stuff up. I bet the people whose houses, businesses and, you know, relatives are submerged are enormously comforted that the president got a chance to take it all in from a very dry 5,000 feet. Filthy motherfucker. Once again, he should be down there, at this new ground zero. As Greg said:

The news coming out of Louisiana has been growing steadily worse since last night and the country could really use a leader right now. Delaying your return to work for something as unimportant as a stump speech isn't gonna cut it.

This all of course, leaves the same taste in my mouth as when he told press that he won't speak to Cindy Sheehan because "it's also important for me to get on with my life".

Have I told you how much I love you, The Onion?

2005-08-31T00:03:00.000-04:00

So good:

Genie Grants Scalia Strict Constructionist Interpretation Of Wish

August 31, 2005

WASHINGTON, DC—A genie freed from a battered oil lamp by Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia granted the conservative jurist a strict constructionist interpretation of his wish for "a hundred billion bucks" Monday. "Sim sim salabim! Your wish is my command!" the genie proclaimed amid flashes of light and purple smoke, immediately filling the Supreme Court building with a massive herd of wild male antelopes. When Justice Scalia complained that the "bucks" had razed the U.S. Supreme Court building, trampling and killing several of his clerks and bringing traffic in the nation's capital to a standstill for hours, the genie said, "Your honor, your wish is a sacred and unalterable document whose interpretation is not subject to the whims of society and changing social context."

I mean, duh...

2005-08-30T22:35:00.000-04:00

Mr. Art Garfunkel got caught with marijuana. Is anyone surprised? No, especially since this is the second time he was caught with it. What is funny is that CNN added this to the end of the story:

Garfunkel's hits with Paul Simon include "Bridge Over Troubled Water," "The Sound of Silence" and "Scarborough Fair."

Thanks CNN, that's good journalism.

Hmm. I'm speechless...

2005-08-30T17:27:00.000-04:00

Well, not exactly. I just don't have anything new to add to what's been said today. Which usually doesn't stop me from posting, it's just I don't feel like it either. So, here are the posts I think are spectacular and wish I wrote first:

Lauren at Feministe makes a great point about a new Texas law that would charge doctors with murder for performing abortions.

The great Dr. PZ Myers has a fantastic post on yesterday's idiot pro-ID column in the Washington Post. More like Intelligent Des-owned. Am I rite?

Greg Saunders at The Talent Show has a quickie that's worth more than the 3-seconds it'll take you to read it.

Anyway. There seems to be a talk-about-music bug going around the blogs I read. And I hear that imitation is the best form of flattery, so I think I'll talk a li'l bit about teh musics.

The year is '99, the last few months before all the computers in the world were supposed to explode. I was a lowly high school sophomore from Fairfax, VA with a penchant for shitty gangsta rap (there are few things funnier/sadder than a suburban brown kid who nods his head to the tin-can bass response of his $20 boombox). I had been into Biggie and Tupac since middle school and after they were killed there was basically nothing redeeming about mainstream rap (and all I could access was what I heard on MTv, sigh).

I was in Spanish II and was talking to this kid, Chris Ballard. He had a blue front tooth. I never knew why; more importantly, I never knew how to ask him about it...I digress. One day for some reason he and I were chatting about music. I had nothing to offer. I liked...sigh...the new Ja Rule song (It's Murdaaaaaaaaaah), he was listening to demo tracks of this and that band I had never even heard of. I didn't even know what the hell a demo was. He told me about Napster.

Free music! Free songs! I got on my family's shitty computer and downloaded Napster. Of course the first things I downloaded were Rage - Guerrila Radio and DMX - Party Up. Sigh. But Napster had a great feature where you could look at the libraries of the people you were downloading from. "Blue_Zebra2342 likes this song I like, maybe I'll like this other song he has by this band I've never heard." And I traveled those libraries for a few months, mostly downloading shit like P.O.D. (sigh) and 311 (not as bad, but they need to stop putting out records). Then I stumbled upon Operation Ivy.

I downloaded Unity by Operation Ivy. I had no idea of what war they wanted to stop or anything else they were talking about. But the music fucking touched me. I fell in love with punk rock, and Napster allowed me to gorge on these new fucking awesome sounds. Fucken. I downloaded everything I could get my digital hands on that sounded like it could be punk. I could throw away shitty music and keep the good stuff. I could, without spending a cent or depending on VJs or DJs, build and hone my musical taste.

I transformed from a kid who was obsessed with basketball and desperately wanted Air Jordans, into someone who was essentially freed from being told what to like by corporate higher-ups in charge of mainstream media. I mean, to a large extent, thats not true (are any of us truly free from them?) but I felt liberated.

Hmmm. This is all a tad self-indulgent (hmmm, I've said "a tad" twice now, does anyone still say that phrase anymore?). Whatever. Let me just end this by thanking Napster and Operation Ivy for my musical rebirth. I would also like to thank Radiohead but that's a story for another time, kids.

DOD is a bunch of jerks...

2005-08-29T14:36:00.000-04:00

Ok. A high level civillian contracting official in the Army Corp. of Engineers has been removed from her job.

Lt. Gen. Carl A. Strock, commander of the Army Corps, told Bunnatine H. Greenhouse last month that she was being removed from the senior executive service, the top rank of civilian government employees, because of poor performance reviews.

Poor performance reviews. Ok. That sounds like a legitimate reason to release someone. If she's doing their job poorly, she should go, right? Who is this Greenhouse lady anyway?

Apparently she is a high ranking civillian who is in charge of contracts and she didn't play ball. And in this administration, if you don't play ball (see: bend over and say thank you after), you're are taken out.

Greenhouse came to prominence last year when she went public with her concerns over the volume of Iraq-related work given to Halliburton by the Corps without competition. The Houston-based oil services giant already had a competitively awarded contract to provide logistics support for the military in the Middle East and was awarded a no-bid contract to repair Iraq oil fields on the eve of the war there in 2003.

Greenhouse complained internally about that contract. Last fall she started giving interviews to national publications. And in June she testified before a Democrat-sponsored Capitol Hill event on contracting in Iraq.

"I can unequivocally state that the abuse related to contracts awarded to KBR represents the most blatant and improper abuse I have witnessed" in 20 years working on government contracts, Greenhouse said at the Democratic forum.

She said the independence of the Corps' contracting process was compromised in the handling of the contact. "I observed, first hand, that essentially every aspect of the [Restore Iraqi Oil] contract remained under the control of the Office of the Secretary of Defense. This troubled me and was wrong."

And there you have it, the real reason she is being demoted. The Pentagon when asked about the event has remained mute. And of course, the desicion is being appealled.

Greenhouse's attorney, Michael D. Kohn, appealed the decision Friday in a letter to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, saying it broke an earlier commitment to suspend the demotion until a "sufficient record" was available to address her allegations.

The Army said last October that it would refer her complaints to the Defense Department's inspector general. The failure to abide by the agreement and the circumstances of the removal "are the hallmark of illegal retaliation," Kohn wrote to Rumsfeld. He said the review Strock cited to justify his action "was conducted by the very subjects" of Greenhouse's allegations, including the general.

So yeah, the appeals are being heard by the same people that want her gone. I'm surprised the DOD waited this long to axe her, perhaps they're thinking about new contracts and can't afford pesky do-gooders with a penchant for blowing the whistle on every wrong thing they do.

Motherfucking Lynksys

2005-08-26T15:22:00.000-04:00

Buy a vowel, you motherfucker Lynksys (shh, for the purposes of this post there is no "i" in lynksys). Basically I havent had the internets for all of this week (thanks to a malfuntioning wireless card and shitty tech support(at least, being Indian, I'm used to the thick accented english)).

I have posts to write (Scalpel Kinch awaits fingers ever-ready to respond (with paragraphs and paragraphs that usually completely miss the effing point, but hey, (s)he's a sweetheart) to my response to his/her response, I'm sure). Let's get started shall we?

Oh wait. I have to enjoy my last weekend before classes. I'll post in a second, hold your horses.

(what(are (we (doing (algerbra (here))))))?

First Day of Classes

2005-08-24T14:59:00.000-04:00

For U.Va. and maybe some other places, today marks the beginning of the fall semester. Those of you who are returning to the classroom for the first time since May should check out Eric Cunningham's column in today's Cav Daily

It is awesome and hilarious, as usual.

Also, Cav Daily comics are pretty strong today. Silly Pocahontas, she thought it was just herpes...

The real number of Iraq casualties

2005-08-24T10:40:00.000-04:00

The number everyone is throwing out there is 1,800. But that's just the number of soldiers who die in Iraq. There are over 6,000 others who die ont the way to or at a German military hospital after being wounded in Iraq, according to this story:

There is excellent reason to believe that the Department of Defense is deliberately not reporting a significant number of the dead in Iraq. We have received copies of manifests from the MATS that show far more bodies shipped into Dover AFP than are reported officially. The educated rumor is that the actual death toll is in excess of 7,000. Given the officially acknowledged number of over 15,000 seriously wounded, this elevated death toll is far more realistic than the current 1,400+ now being officially published. When our research is complete, and watertight, we will publish the results along with the sources In addition to the evident falsification of the death rolls, at least 5,500 American military personnel have deserted, most in Ireland but more have escaped to Canada and other European countries, none of whom are inclined to cooperate with vengeful American authorities. (See TBR News of 18 February for full coverage on the mass desertions) This means that of the 158,000 U.S. military shipped to Iraq, 26,000 either deserted, were killed or seriously wounded. The DoD lists currently being very quietly circulated indicate almost 9,000 dead, over 16,000 seriously wounded and a large number of suicides, forced hospitalization for ongoing drug usage and sales, murder of Iraqi civilians and fellow soldiers , rapes, courts martial and so on.

There's really not much you can say other than this is another example of the Bush administration blatantly misleading the American people. Ted Rall's comic gets at the heart of how inapproriate and disrespectful it is to make that distinction between dying in Iraq and dying somehwere else after being shot in Iraq.

The 15,000 wounded number is not talked about enough as it is, and it's almost like the message is if you're just shot in Iraq and survive, your not worthy enough to be acknowledged. Or, at least, the fact that you were wounded and survive should not be a cause for concern among the American people, because after all, you did survive.

But also, I think we need to consider how many Americans killed in Iraq is too much? What about when 10,000 Americans are killed? Will that be enough to make Americans call for soemthing to be done?

Regardless, the Bush administration continues to pretend that everything is a-ok. Meanwhile, the American people are beginning to snap out of it. Bush's approval rating has fallen to 36 percent and more and more Republicans are speaking out against the war, with Chuck Hagel from Nebraska being the latest to do so (story). It's enough to give me hope that maybe the American people aren't as dumb as Karl Rove thinks they are, and the Orwellian tactics of the Bush administration will be something that future generation look back on in disgust.

The shit hit the fan long ago. It's just only recently that the American public realized that it was being sprayed onto them.

Yeah. If you like righteous fury...

2005-08-19T06:05:00.000-04:00

You should probably read this great post by Ross (not Rossle) of ThisSpaceForRent. It's about this dipshit, Ben Shapiro over at townhall.org whining all over the place about being called a chickenhawk. Here's the beginning of his Ross' post:

Ben Shapiro, You're a Goddamned Pussy. A lying sack of powderpuff shit who spends several thousand wasted minutes shitting your pants, trying to justify your cowardice. Your refusal to serve in the military during a war you support enthusastically, and your desperate attempts to make this cowardly decision sound like patriotism make you a wretched, venal coward of the worst sort, but that's fine, you're only emulating your beloved president.

And it only gets better. I mean, nothing makes me smile more than furious swear-sodden polemic that is so fucking right.

I hate Fairfax, VA...

2005-08-19T03:28:00.000-04:00

I don't really, but I've been home (in Fairfax) and it's the most boring place on earth. That's right. On. Earth.

While I was home I stumbled across an interesting piece on the IB program in the Washington Post. I myself am a recipient of the the IB Diploma (short for International Baccalaureate, it's kind of like a harder, writing-intensive AP program, but all your classes are IB; go here for more info on the program).

The story is on how the introduction of the program has benifited schools with largely minority populations:

"The biggest benefit of IB to Mount Vernon High School is that now minority students have the same opportunities for an excellent high school education as the white students from more affluent homes," said Calhoon, recently retired and helping another struggling IB school near her home in Beaufort, S.C. "Any student who wants to excel can do so."

It's a great program and did an excellent job preparing me for college courses. The workload is tough but it made my 1st year at Pitt that much easier. However the program is not without its critics.

Here's one bright bulb:

Some say IB does not align with some of the college courses for which it, like the much larger Advanced Placement program, was designed to substitute. Others say it puts too much emphasis on international understanding. One Fairfax County parent went so far as to say IB "promotes socialism, disarmament, radical environmentalism and moral relativism while attempting to undermine Christian religious values and national sovereignty."

Sigh. I wish I was at this meeting so I could laughed loudly in the face of this concerned parent.

I feel sorry for every teacher that had to deal with that parent complaining that the book that was assigned was too pinko-feminist. I especially feel sorry for the science teacher who has to waste their time defending the teaching of evolution to this schmuck's kid.

They don't pay teachers enough as it is.

Radical environmentalism?...sigh...

Hahaha...YES!

2005-08-17T14:35:00.000-04:00

Apparently the Washington Post reads The Talking Lion!

Democrats Feel Heat From Left On Roberts
Groups Say Fight Should Be Stronger

Major liberal groups accused Democratic senators yesterday of showing too little stomach for opposing John G. Roberts Jr.'s Supreme Court nomination, saying newly released documents indicate he is much more conservative than many people first thought.

The response was quick and pointed, as two key senators unleashed their sharpest criticisms yet of Roberts and sought to assure activists that the battle is far from over.

They don't credit me specifically, of course... but like jazz its the notes they don't play, as it were.

John Roberts...

2005-08-16T13:34:00.000-04:00

Now, I consider myself to be a Democrat despite my party doing nothing but shaming my choice to be affiliated with them. But sometimes I read the news and say to myself, "Arun, perhaps the D's aren't for you, maybe you should resign yourself to some marginal third party, because your 2nd party loves to marginalize itself." Then I think, "Mmm. I think I'll have some toast and margarine.."

The Dems have totally unofficially thrown in the the towel on the fight to keep John Roberts off the SCOTUS.

Democrats have decided that unless there is an unexpected development in the weeks ahead, they will not launch a major fight to block the Supreme Court nomination of John G. Roberts Jr., according to legislators, Senate aides and party strategists.

Proving that the Washington Post has a sense of humor:

Although they expect to subject President Bush's nominee to tough questioning at confirmation hearings next month, members of the minority party said they do not plan to marshal any concerted campaign against Roberts because they have concluded that he is likely to get at least 70 votes -- enough to overrule parliamentary tactics such as a filibuster that could block the
nominee.

"No one's planning all-out warfare," said a Senate Democratic aide closely involved in caucus strategy on Roberts. For now, the aide said, Democratic strategy is to make it clear Roberts is subject to fair scrutiny while avoiding a pointless conflagration that could backfire on the
party. "We're going to come out of this looking dignified and will show we took the constitutional process seriously," the aide said.

Really. Tough. Questions... sigh. We're not going to look dignified, you assholes, we're going to look like wimps. There is a time to show opposition even when the fight is unwinnable, damn it. And for the record, there is no way wussing out on fighting Roberts will do any more damage than the Dems are doing to themselves.

The Democrats' decision to hold their fire -- less a formal strategy than an emerging consensus -- has allowed conservatives to husband their resources for future battles. Progress for America, a political group working closely with the White House, had planned to spend $18 million to promote the confirmation of Roberts but now may spend less than half that, according to Republican aides.

See. I mean, we should be unleashing unshirted hell on these people to show the American populace that the Democrats have something to fight about. All they've seen is capitulation after capitulation.

"But, Arun, we can show them that in our super tough questions during the confirmation!", says unnamed Democratic aide.

Democrats said that instead of mounting a headlong assault on Roberts, they plan to use the hearings and the surrounding attention by the news media to remind voters of their party's values, including the protection of rights for individual Americans. The plan calls for emphasizing rights beyond abortion in an effort to appeal to a broader swath of the electorate.

No one. I repeat. NO. ONE. is going to give a shit about the hearings if they already know that the Democrats have given up. If there is no story, the questions in the hearings (barring revelations that Roberts is a puppy-sodomizer) won't make front-page ink and NO ONE WILL CARE! The only values you'll remind the public about is that D's scare away from fights that are tough.

Democratic silence is not, by itself, a guarantee of support. The opposition to the failed nomination of Robert H. Bork in 1987 was evident from the start, but protests of Clarence Thomas in 1991 were slow to build. In early August 1991, a month after President George H.W. Bush nominated Thomas, no senator had yet announced opposition.

Pointing out the obvious: Bork, not in the Supreme Court. Thomas, member of the Supreme Court, to my continual dismay.

I know anything I say on my tiny-ass blo..,er, magazine will do nothing to change the mind of anyone in the DNC or on the Hill. But even though I know that, it's not stopping me from agitating for change via this site (and my various other political activities).

In conclusion, STAND UP FOR IDEALS OF THE PEOPLE WHO ELECTED YOU, YOU FUCKING CHUMPS.

Holy hell...

2005-08-16T13:14:00.000-04:00

Gas is friggin' expensive.

I mean, I thought the whole idea of invading Iraq was to extract their black stuff.

I guess the mark-ups in gasoline has been necesitated by the wide-spread systematic overcharging by the dutiful folks at Halliburton.

pwnt.

Fucking Liberal Hippie Anti-War Protestors...

2005-08-16T01:33:00.000-04:00

They don't know anything about what it means to be a true American. There are United States military out there on the ground doing the best they can and these treasonous elitist liberal bastards try to do everything in their power to make their lives difficult and put them in more danger. They don't even support the troops that are fighting the war, how can anybody take their pleas seriously?

Yeah. Not really.

Cindy Sheehan is the mother of a fallen American soldier. Cindy Sheehan wants some answers from the president. Cindy Sheehan doesn't plan to leave Crawford, TX until she gets to speak with the commander-in-chief. Her protest has helped ignite a struggling anti-war movement, according to the Orlando Sentinel.

Still, that hasn't stopped some "patriotic" Texans from being disrespectful and obnoxious. And I quote,

More than 150 flag-waving marchers made their way toward Sheehan's camp to show their support for the war. Also, a lone demonstrator drove a pickup blaring country music with a large American flag flying from its bed. A sign on his door read: "Texas Is Bush Country."

That's just great. The mother of a man who gave his life for his country is getting harrassed by some redneck in a truck. I love this country.

But I mean, I guess I can't blame the guy. It must be hard for people like him to wrap their head around the idea that military members and their family would oppose the war. It actually complicates the issue of who is truly "patriotic" and contradicts the talking points that the Bush adminsitration has been throwing out since the reelection campaign. And nobody wants to live in a complicated world. It's easier just to ignore things that conflict your simplisitic worldview.

This article, publsihed Monday in the Philadelphia Inquirer, details wo the protestors are, why they are there, and what they hope to accomplish. Basically,

We have now in Crawford an invaluable collection of ordinary Americans who can speak a plain and irrefutable truth about the reality of the Iraq War. If the President, and the rest of America, had the patience for these stories, we might find the capacity to stop this unending tragedy.

Patience. Is that too much to ask? I sure hope not.

Is it just me...

2005-08-15T18:25:00.000-04:00

...or does this shit make you claw out your eyes too?

Harry R. Jackson Jr., senior pastor at Hope Christian Church in College Park, Md., said the "Christian community is experiencing a new unity around the moral values that we share because of common faith." Jackson, who is black, said that appointing judges who will strictly interpret the Constitution is advantageous to blacks. "If justice matters to anybody in America, it matters to minorities and to people who have historically been at the bottom of the barrel" who will not have "to deal with a maverick judge changing the law at the last minute."

Since when has conservatives, on the bench or elsewhere, done one positive thing for African-Americans or any other minority in this fucking country?

Never, thats when.

WMD found in Iraq...

2005-08-13T18:02:00.000-04:00

US forces have uncovered a chemical weapons plant in Iraq:

U.S. troops raiding a warehouse in the northern city of Mosul uncovered a suspected chemical-weapons factory containing 1,500 gallons of chemicals believed destined for attacks on U.S. and Iraqi forces and civilians, military officials said Saturday.

Monday's early morning raid found 11 precursor agents, "some of them quite dangerous by themselves," a military spokesman, Lt. Col. Steven A. Boylan, said in Baghdad.

Combined, the chemicals would yield an agent capable of "lingering hazards" for those exposed to it, Boylan said. The likely targets would have been "coalition and Iraqi security forces, and Iraqi civilians," in part owing to the difficulty anyone deploying the chemicals would have had in keeping the agents from spreading out over a wide area, he said.

So we were justified in invading after all?

Nope, these weapons are being made by members of the insurgency the invasion created.

Awesome, huh? Just when you think that the worst possible results of our monumentally fucking up Iraq would be 50 civillian deaths every two days, the insurgents are making chemical weapons!

It's a good thing that we found these, but who can say at how many other locations these things are being made. I mean, how vulnerable do you want our troops to be? They already aren't outfitted with the strongest armor available, now they have to worry about dying horrible deaths at the hands of chemical weapons.

We are the champions.

Something We Can All Agree With...

2005-08-13T01:47:00.000-04:00

This has got to rank up there with the stupidest decisions in the history of the federal judicial system. I mean, we're talking Plessy v. Ferguson stupid. Here's what we got:

A district judge has ruled that key components of Virginia's drunken driving laws are unconstitutional, citing a decades-old U.S. Supreme Court decision.
The state law presumes that someone with a blood alcohol content of 0.08 or higher is intoxicated, denying their right to a presumption of innocence, Judge Ian O'Flaherty ruled in dismissing charges against at least two alleged drunken drivers last month...

Patrick O'Connor, president of the northern Virginia chapter of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, said the decision "undermines the efforts of the police and prosecutors to enforce the DWI laws, puts drunk drivers back behind the
wheel and potentially denies justice to victims of drunk drivers."
O'Flaherty declined to comment; rulings in District Court are made orally so there is no written ruling outlining his rationale.
Del. David Albo, a defense lawyer, said he sees no difference between a presumption of intoxication at 0.08 and a presumption of speeding at 80 miles per hour.
"So far not a single judge in Virginia has ruled the same way," he said. "It's just one judge."

Yeah, let's make it as difficult as possible to catch people driving drunk. Registering a .08 isn't enough evidence to prove that someone was intoxicated. You can drive drunk as many times as you want, and not worry about having to go to jail until they bring up those manslaughter charges after you hit another car and kill someone. Fantastic.

These are the kind of judicial activists people should be concerned about. As if drunk drivers aren't enough of a problem in this country (According to data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), in 2004, 16,694 people were killed in alcohol-related crashes - an average of one almost every half-hour. See more statistics here), this jerkface has to make it harder than ever to make drunk drivers face the consequences.

I mean, it could be worse. He could be one of those judges that help gay people get married. Ewwwwwwww.

Whatever, She Totally Likes It

2005-08-12T01:04:00.000-04:00

On the main page of washingtonpost.com, I just found this all-too appropriate headline linking to the lead story:

Timing for Pullout From Iraq Remains Unclear

I can just see it now: Back in late 2002 and early 2003 Bush was bragging to his friends about how he's going to fuck this bitch Iraq and they all warned him that he should use a condom. But Georgie Boy was a little too cocky, and told them all to go to hell. He figured he has superb control and could totally bail out of there when he was ready to climax. Besides, condoms are for pussies (no pun intended); any real man keeps it natural. There was no need to think about taking precautions and plan what would happen in case something went wrong, Dubya's got it all under control.

So that fateful night finally came, and things started out really well. She was totally into Bush, screaming "Liberate Me!" at the top of her lungs. It turned out that our commander-in-chief didn't know what he was getting himself into, and after a while, he totally lost it. He had no idea what he was doing anymore and completely lost his composure. The bitch wanted it to end as soon as possible, but Bush was in over his head. There was no way he was going to pull out when he wanted too, and he was stuck with the prospect of knocking this chick up and having to deal with her and her problems for the next few years down the road. All he was looking for was a good freedom fuck, and now he has to deal with all of this.

Don't let this happen to you kids. Use a condom. And also, don't invade other nations when you don't have any semblence of an exit strategy...

Pragmatism at it's Finest

2005-08-12T00:03:00.000-04:00

So, it's easy to talk about how things suck down there in Africa. Most recently, it's been Sudan and Niger that have been hit pretty hard. Spreading awareness about the situation is one thing, but actually coming up with some ideas that will help solve some problems -- now that's something to write home about.

WashPost, please tell the people:

HUMANITARIAN crises are seldom just humanitarian: Almost always, the malnutrition and the misery have political causes. The brutal wars in Sudan and Congo account for those countries' appalling civilian death tolls. Political repression explains the hunger in North Korea and Zimbabwe. Even the HIV pandemic reflects the failure of politicians to challenge gender inequality and sexual taboos.
Niger's food crisis has its own political dimension. The government has been criticized for playing down the crisis -- it speaks of a food shortage rather than a famine -- and for resisting calls to distribute free food. International financial institutions, which urged a value-added tax on food and imposed budget controls that discouraged the government from maintaining emergency food stocks, also deserve some of the blame. Even so, Niger's crisis is less political than many. This landlocked country of about 11 million is a democracy. There is no war going on there. Some 2.5 million people need emergency assistance because of natural disasters more than politics: a swarm of locusts that ate much of the millet harvest, followed by a drought.
Usually, natural disasters attract a generous response. The tsunami last Christmas was a prime example, and earthquakes and hurricanes generally prompt individuals and their governments to open their wallets -- or at least to pledge generously, even if they don't always deliver. But Niger has not even been that fortunate. As early as last November, the government and the U.N. World Food Program appealed for mergency food aid and money; only Luxembourg responded. The United Nations followed up with a second appeal in March and a third in May. Only recently has the money begun to come.

Okay, so what should we do? how can we actually help these people in the future?

If Niger's largely unpolitical emergency cannot trigger prompt sympathy, it's time to rethink the way relief is organized. The world depends on an ad hoc, pass-the-hat system; there's no standing ability to respond quickly when the first signs of disaster appear. This raises the cost of action. In the Sudanese province of Darfur last year, donors didn't provide enough relief before the onset of the rainy season, so part of their belated assistance had to be airlifted into the region at enormous expense. Similarly in Niger, the United Nations estimates that saving a life would have cost a dollar of aid back in November but may cost $80 or more now.
To avoid this waste of cash and lives, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan has proposed an emergency fund of $500 million from which to finance rapid response to future famines. In the wake of the oil-for-food scandal, the onus is on the United Nations to show that it can manage that sort of money without corruption; perhaps it cannot. But whichever institutional home one favors for it, the idea of a global famine fund makes sense.

Hmm, that actually sounds like a good idea. A pool of relief money that is ready to dole out when a crisis develops. That might actually make some sort of difference down there.

I understand the difficulty of determining what exactly should be certified as a real crisis, but I believe that figuring out crisis status will be a lot easier and take a lot less time than raising lots of money after the fact. If we're looking to save lives and help improve the way these people are living, I think this plan makes a lot of sense.

This could be somehting that the general public could contribute too as well, and it would give people a chance to donate money when they are better able to instead of shelling out whatever they can when the latest crisis hits. I may be naive, but I think that the U.N. can handle such a repsonsibility and this "famine fund" could really do a lot to help things.

It's far from a cure-all, but it's certainly a step in the right direction.

Look I can explain...

2005-08-11T23:39:00.000-04:00

I just want to apologize for the lack of postage this week. I mean, the lack of substantive posts from me. I'm currently trying to put together a print magazine and it takes like a buhzillion hours a day to organize. Getting ducks in rows is a bitch! Don't worry, things will get back to normal. This week was just silly.

So, yeah. Look for my resuming of tTL on Monday morning!

Thanks for your patience. Also, I'm going to try to get Pat to start posting again. So, thats good.

Sean, pick up my slack.

Hey man...

2005-08-11T13:23:00.000-04:00

So, I hope you all remember Sean's post a few days ago about that $286b pulled-pork..., er, highway bill. Well, our fearless leader has signed that bill into law:

Three years ago, President Bush went to war against congressional pork. His official 2003 budget even featured a color photo of a wind-powered ice sled -- an example of the pet projects and alleged boondoggles he said he would no longer tolerate.

Yesterday, Bush effectively signed a cease-fire -- critics called it more like a surrender -- in his war on pork. He signed into law a $286 billion transportation measure that contains a record 6,371 pet projects inserted by members of Congress from both parties.

At a short bill-signing event in Montgomery, Ill., Bush said the new law will allow the United States to modernize highways and roads in a fiscally responsible manner. "I'm proud to be here to sign this transportation bill, because our economy depends on us having the most efficient, reliable transportation system in the world," Bush said at a Caterpillar Inc. manufacturing plant.

I mean, it's not unexpected that Bush didn't use his veto here. If you take it out of the box you can't get nearly as much on eBay. Also, Bush is a capitulating jack ass.

It seems to me that all you need to do to get him to support your legislation is give him a surreptitious wink so he thinks your advocacy has some sinister ulterior motive and he'll gladly sign on.

Talent Show beats me to it.

Weekly Onion Lovefest...

2005-08-10T22:22:00.000-04:00

The Onion continues to deliver perfect-pitch criticism of the war in Iraq and the BushCo foriegn policy in general:

'Humor In Uniform' Submissions At All-Time Low
PLEASANTVILLE, NY—Reader's Digest editors reported Monday that submissions to their "Humor In Uniform" feature have fallen off sharply since 2001. "The submissions that are trickling in are just not making me laugh," said Jackie Leo, an editor at the magazine. "I'm looking for amusing send-ups of peeling potatoes on KP duty, not another vignette about a soldier waking up screaming because he accidentally shot a pregnant Iraqi woman." Leo said she almost published one soldier's story about being financially devastated by shrinking veteran benefits "just to help him out with the $300 publication fee, but it just wasn't funny enough."

Yep. It's amazing that there is a single soldier that supports Bush after what his cronies have been doing to the Veteran's budget. Not to mention the whole backdoor-draft thing...

This is the kind of story I enjoy to read...

2005-08-09T12:29:00.000-04:00

Because its so cool!

SAO PAULO, Brazil - Thieves tunneled nearly 300 feet to a Central Bank vault in northeastern Brazil and stole about $65 million, police said Monday, in what has been described as the biggest such robbery ever in Brazil.

The money was stolen from the Central Bank's vault in the city of Fortaleza, about 1,550 miles northeast of Sao Paulo.

The thieves built a 13-foot deep, 262-foot-long tunnel from a house near the bank to the vault, federal police said in a statement.

The elaborate tunnel had electric lights and walls reinforced with wood panels and lined with plastic sheeting, police said.

I mean, bank robberies are so cool. And ones that have elaborate executions with tunnels and vault drilling are SO COOL!

I hope they are all attractive and have great teeth like in the movies.

Bank Robbery. Crazy.

These people just can't let it go...

2005-08-08T12:36:00.000-04:00

So Rummy has emerged from where ever BushCo has been hiding him the last few months to be a jerk all over the place. First he openly lied about the motivations of the London underground bombing:

"Some people seem confused about the motivations and intentions of terrorists and about our coalition's defense of the still young democracies in Afghanistan and Iraq," Rumsfeld said in a speech to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council.

"They seem to cling to the discredited theory that the recent attacks in London and elsewhere, for example, are really in retaliation for the war in Iraq or for the so-called occupation of Afghanistan," he added. "That is nonsense."

Now this is obviously false. The bombs weren't planted to protest London getting the Olympics. The bombs were detonated as a response to British involvement in the Iraq War.

But that lie is not as bad as the next thing he says:

Rumsfeld also paid tribute to the 21 Marines killed this week in Iraq, including the 14 killed Wednesday by a single roadside bomb near the city of Haditha in western Iraq.

"Patriots, they were determined to stop the terrorists from reclaiming Iraq and from launching more attacks on our people," he said. "Our nation needed them, called on them in battle, and mourns them now in death."

Reclaiming? Iraq was previously run by a person that launched "attacks on our people"? That smells an awful lot like Donald's trying to dust off (or wax sumbliminal on) the rotting corpse that was Al'Qaeda-Iraq-9/11 talking point that helped get us into this Mess O' Potamia (my apologies, Jon) in the first place. What's more sickening is that he trots out two huge lies while paying a "tribute to the 21 Marines killed this week in Iraq".

As I said in a recent post, these people have no fucking shame.

First things first...

2005-08-08T12:25:00.000-04:00

We at The Talking Lion do not appreciate the insults that have been slung at us from Fafblog and their slanderous tale about lions. We are looking into possible legal action, or perhaps a duel.

PISTOLS AT DAWN!

haha.

Teach The Children Well

2005-08-06T01:14:00.000-04:00

A couple of spot-on columns in Friday's WashPost and NYT from Eugene Robinson and Paul Krugman on the politics of ignorance and the right's political strategy of winning votes by either dumbing down the nation, making up facts, or doing both.

Robinson's main concern is that the policies of the Bush administration is holding this country back when it comes to education and technology. He lists the "trifecta" of restricting stem-cell research, ignoring global warming and categorizing intelligent design as an appropriate alternative to the theory of evolution. Preach, Eugene:

The much-maligned Kyoto treaty isn't the point. Treaty or no treaty, it looks as if sooner or later the world is going to have to find a way to prosper without spewing so much heat-trapping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Other nations are busy trying to develop technology and coping mechanisms to prepare for that day. When it comes, we'll be at or near the back of the line.
Maybe we'll line up all our obsolete SUVs along the coast to try to hold back the rising sea.
To round out the trifecta, the other day Bush reiterated his support for teaching "intelligent design" in America's schools along with evolution, as a way of exposing students to different points of view. This really borders on madness.
Intelligent design isn't a scientific theory at all; it's a matter of faith -- Creationism 2.0. Faith is a different kind of truth. Charles Darwin's landmark discovery of evolution, with a few minor modifications and additions over the years, has proved to be one of the sturdiest and most unassailable scientific theories of all time. To the extent that science can say anything is true, evolution is scientifically true. Done. Settled. As Walter Cronkite used to say, "That's the way it is."
To teach American children in science class that intelligent design is an alternative explanation of how birds, anteaters and people came to be birds, anteaters and people is simply to make American children less well educated than children elsewhere.

But I guess it's okay to give our children a poorer quality of education than other countries in this world. That's just the way politics goes sometimes. It's a dirty buisness, right? On some occasions, though, I think it gets too dirty. Like in this case, when our nation is not properly informed of the dangers of global warming and legitimate scientific theories have little credibility in our schools. That's not politics. That's poo-litics. Dirty and smelly and a huge waste.

Also, there's Krugman. Not only is he a sexy man, but he also gets at the heart of this Republican strategy of "creating doubt about inconvienent research results" and how, unofrtunately, it seems to be working. What do you have to say about it, Paul?

There are several reasons why fake research is so effective. One is that nonscientists sometimes find it hard to tell the difference between research and advocacy - if it's got numbers and charts in it, doesn't that make it science?
Even when reporters do know the difference, the conventions of he-said-she-said journalism get in the way of conveying that knowledge to readers. I once joked that if President Bush said that the Earth was flat, the headlines of news articles would read, "Opinions Differ on Shape of the Earth." The headlines on many articles about the intelligent design controversy come pretty close.

Hahahahahaha, that's a good joke. Excuse me while I repeatedly walk into this brick wall. But wait, there's more:

Finally, the self-policing nature of science - scientific truth is determined by peer review, not public opinion - can be exploited by skilled purveyors of cultural resentment. Do virtually all biologists agree that Darwin was right? Well, that just shows that they're elitists who think they're smarter than the rest of us.

Exactly. Don't forget about what gary Bauer said, a moajority of Americans believe in this theory, and the opinion of a majority of Americans is far more important than the opinion of a bunch of scientists with their crazy book-learnin'. But speaking of Intelligent Design:

Some of America's most powerful politicians have a deep hatred for Darwinism. Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, blamed the theory of evolution for the Columbine school shootings. But sheer political power hasn't been enough to get creationism into the school curriculum. The theory of evolution has overwhelming scientific support, and the country isn't ready - yet - to teach religious doctrine in public schools.
But what if creationists do to evolutionary theory what corporate interests did to global warming: create a widespread impression that the scientific consensus has shaky foundations?
Creationists failed when they pretended to be engaged in science, not religious indoctrination: "creation science" was too crude to fool anyone. But intelligent design, which spreads doubt about evolution without being too overtly religious, may succeed where creation science failed.

Conservatives may achieve some short term victories, but "creating a widespread impression that the scientific consensus has shaky foundations" could lead mean the future of our nation is flushed down the toilet. But that's what happens when you practice poo-litics...

I am finally back...

2005-08-05T16:12:00.000-04:00

Moving apartments and wrestling with Comcast for internet access. That's where I've been. Posts will resume in the AM.

It turns out the Iraq War was justified after all...

2005-08-05T02:15:00.000-04:00

... because Ayman Zawahiri is encouraging insurgent attacks there. What more evidence do you need? Al Qaeda likes the fact that terrorists in Iraq are killing Americnas, that means that we did the right thing when we went into Iraq to overthrow Saddam. End of story. Tell 'em, George:

President Bush, speaking in Crawford, Tex., said that the comments "make it clear Iraq is a part of this war on terror, and we're at war. He's saying, you know, leave. . . . People like Zawahiri have a ideology that is dark, dim, backwards. He's threatening. They have come up against a nation that will defend itself."

Oh, it's clear Dubya. Crystal clear. Iraq is only a part of the war on terror now because we invaded and apparently don't have plans of leaving anytime soon. Al Qaeda is simply using the Iraq invasion against us and it seems like its helping them get new recruits. Now our president is trying to use the fact that al Qeada is growing in strength and using the Iraq War for its own benefit as evidence that there was an Iraq-al Qaeda connection during Saddam's regime. Absolutely not. But it's good to know that we're still on the offensive in this war on terror, as Bush likes to say, because maybe one day we'll actually find and capture Zawahiri or maybe even Osama bin Laden. Maybe one day...

In the meantime we'll just have to settle for mounting American casualties in Iraq and a growing list of enemies across the globe.

Mushroom Cloud Nine

2005-08-03T17:44:00.000-04:00

It's been just about 60 years since the United States dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, and this country remains the only nation to use the terribly powerful weapon.

Most people try to justify the thousands of Japanese civilian deaths that the attack caused by claiming that the bombing hastened the end to the war. There is a growing amount of evidence that suggests that this wasn't the case, however, and the United States had other viable options.

In a recently released Harvard University Press volume drawing upon the latest Japanese sources, for instance, Professor Tsuyohsi Hasegawa concludes that the traditional “myth cannot be supported by historical facts.” By far the most important factor forcing the decision, his research indicates, was the Soviet declaration of war against Japan on August 8, 1945, just after the Hiroshima bombing.
Similarly, Professor Herbert Bix–whose biography of Hirohito won the 2000 Pulitzer Prize for general nonfiction–also writes in a recent article that “the Soviet factor carried greater weight in the eyes of the emperor and most military leaders.”
Many Japanese historians have long judged the Soviet declaration of war to have been the straw that broke the camels back–mainly because the Japanese military feared the Red Army more than the loss of another city by aerial bombardment. (They had already shown themselves willing to sacrifice many, many cities to conventional bombing!)
An intimately related question is whether the bomb was in any event still necessary to force a surrender before an invasion. Again, most Americans believe the answer obvious–as, of course, do many historians. However, a very substantial number also disagree with this view. One of the most respected, Stanford University Professor Barton Bernstein, judges that all things considered it seems “quite probable–indeed, far more likely than not–that Japan would have surrendered before November” (when the first landing in Japan was scheduled.)

So why did we do it?

Why was the bomb used? The conventional view, of course, is that it was to save as many lives as possible. But if this is so, several historians now ask, why did President Truman and his chief adviser Secretary of State James Byrnes make it harder for Japan to surrender? Specifically, why did they remove assurances for the Japanese emperor from the July 1945 Potsdam Proclamation warning Japan to surrender? The assurances were strongly recommended by U.S. and British military leaders, and removing them, they knew, would make it all but impossible for Japan to end the war.
A traditional theory has been that the President feared political criticism if he provided assurances to the emperor. But, other historians note, leading Republicans were for–not against–clarifying the terms to achieve a surrender, and were calling for this publicly. Moreover, American leaders always knew the emperor would be needed to order a surrender–and, of course, in the end they did agree to an understanding which allowed such assurances: Japan still has an emperor.
Hasegawa believes the assurances were taken out of the Potsdam Proclamation precisely because American leaders wanted to have the warning rejected so as to justify the bombing–and, further, that they saw the bomb as a way to end the war before Russia could join the fighting. There is other evidence suggesting that policy makers, especially Secretary of State Byrnes, wanted to use the bomb to “make the Russians more manageable in Europe”--as he told one scientist.

The tragedy that was these bombings is not talked about enough. It is a chilling example of a powerful nation taking away the lives of innocent civilians in order to bolster its status in the international power struggle. This weekend should be a time to reflect about the serious damage these bombings caused and think about how this sort of chilling realist political philosophy continues to reign supreme among Bush adminitration officials, leaving the civilians of this country less safe. Because unlike 1945, there are plenty of civilian groups around the world that can gain access to dangerous weapons and seek revenge...

Science > Bush

2005-08-03T14:43:00.000-04:00

The greatest pseudo-scientific theory since eugenics -- intelligent design -- is receiving support from our president. Remarks to a group of reporters from texas at the White House yesterday:

"Both sides ought to be properly taught . . . so people can understand what the debate is about," he said, according to an official transcript of the session. Bush added: "Part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought. . . . You're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, and the answer is yes."

I don't think I need to explain to all of you how intelligent design has no scientific merit, and is based on little more than faith in God. It may very well be true that some sort of all-powerful entity had a hand in creating the universe, or our world. The problem is that there is minimal scientific basis on which to base that claim, so there is no reason to teach it alongside evolution in the classroom.

Unfortunately for the scientific community, the educational system, and the future of our nation's children, these words will help give these anti-evolution advocates more credibility.

"With the president endorsing it, at the very least it makes Americans who have that position more respectable, for lack of a better phrase," said Gary L. Bauer, a Christian conservative leader who ran for president against Bush in the 2000 Republican primaries. "It's not some backwater view. It's a view held by the majority of Americans."

Sorry Gary, but just because a majority of Americans hold this view (which I contend is an exaggeration) doesn't make it science.That's not how we decide what is taught in school, we don't take a poll and ask people what they believe. There are experts in the different fields that do research and experiments and come to conclusions and make theories and those theorires come under scrutiny within the scientific community. Only then are these theories taught in schools and universities. That sounds like a better system than teaching what the majority of Americans believe.

Nonetheless, Intelligent Design proponents are winning the battle against science thanks to a handful of professors teaching in this country's universities. This article from The Chronicle of Higher Education goes into their stories and the reaction of the greater scientific community as a whole:

For the vast majority of scientists, evolution through natural means is as much a fact as the earth's revolution around the sun. Yet a small but vocal number of biologists, chemists, philosophers, and mathematicians are determined to change that view. They believe that an intelligent agent -- most rigorously avoid the word "God" -- has guided the earth's history, and that scientific research can prove its existence. While most scientists are quick to dismiss the idea as religion cloaked in academic jargon, advocates of the concept, known as intelligent design, are making inroads into academe, thanks to their unconventional approach, sophisticated arguments, and scholarly credentials.
Intelligent-design theory has been greeted most warmly at evangelical Christian colleges, where it is sometimes taught as a viable alternative to Darwinian evolution. Other institutions have been far less sympathetic. Although intelligent design has advocates in some science departments, no secular or mainstream college teaches it as a legitimate theory. Scientists who do support intelligent design have been relegated to teaching it as a nonscience course, as at the University of California at Berkeley and the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
Advocates have also organized conferences at such universities as Baylor and Yale, and have assembled a group of more than 100 scientists to criticize Darwinian theory in full-page advertisements in national publications. The New York Academy of Sciences and the American Association for the Advancement of Science have sponsored debates on intelligent design, and three academic presses are publishing books on the subject.

Of course they're publishing books, because these kinds of books will sell. There are plenty of people out there who are desperately trying to justify their beliefs and will take anything they can get.

People have every right to believe what they want, that's part of what makes this country great. But trying to pass of a belief in God creating the world as science is dangerous. The fact that our president would be advocating such a practive is just scary.

The Black Ice Highway

2005-07-31T02:55:00.000-04:00

So, Congress passed a lot of legislation in the last couple days before the August recess. Some bills were more controversial than others. Possibly the least controversial bill was the transportation bill, which was approved 412 to 8 by the House, and 91 to 4 by the Senate. But something's not right here...

Reading the Washington Post story about the bill revealed to me some interesting details concerning the bill. Consider, for example, that "California, Illinois and New York received the largest sums, with Alaska ranking fourth."

Alaska is fourth? Out of the 50 states Alaska gets fourth-largest sum of money. How much money you ask? $941 million for 119 special projects. This seems kind of excessive, especially considering the fact that only 112 people actually live in Alaska. So why did they get all this money when there are other states with many more people who have more of a need for the transportation money? Do I smell pork?

The chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Don Young a Republican from, you guessed it, Alaska. Here's some of the stuff that Don Young is spending American tax dollars on, according to the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense who actually read these bills and let people know what is really in them:

The group found that Young helped to secure $231 million for a bridge in Anchorage to be named Don Young's Way; $223 million for a bridge to Ketchikan; and $15 million for a Juneau access road, dubbed the Black Ice Highway by group analyst Erich Zimmermann because "that's all you'll see in the winter if this project is built."

So, that's great that he set aside all that money to build a highway in honor of himself. And an access road in Juneau is a great idea because I know the traffic in Juneau has been hell for the past few years, like totally a million times worse than I-66 outside of DC. Totally. As far as Ketchikan goes, I don't even know where the fuck that is. So I looked it up.

Here is the official website of the "city" of Ketchikan, where is a balmy 53 degrees on this summer evening. I also found this website, which has a picture of a native Ketchikanian wearing a funny hat. It also has some more information about the "city."

Ketchikan is known throughout Alaska as a friendly, hard-working town. Tucked into the mountains, and spilling down to the shores of the Inside Passage, this regional hub of 15,000, makes its living from the surrounding forest, from the abundant fish runs, from the thousands of visitors that flock north each year, and other entrepreneurial ventures.
The first Alaska port of call for northbound cruise ships, commercial vessels and state ferries, Ketchikan is 680 air miles north of Seattle and is located in the nation's largest national forest, the Tongass, which totals 17 million acres.

So 15,000 people live there. And it's in the middle of a forest. There are more students currently attending the University of Virginia than there are citizens of Ketchikan. Why the fuck is the government spending my money there? Is it because of the "thousands of visitors" that flock north there" each year? How about the places that have millions of people who actually live there and need to get around.

What other states were able to get a lot of money through this bill? Well,

Next were Texas, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Florida, Ohio and Oklahoma -- the latter being the home state of Sen. James M. Inhofe (R), the bill's chief Senate negotiator.

Fantastic. And every Democrat voted for this bill. Some may argue that pork is just a part of politics and you have to just grin and bear it and move on. But I think this shit is disgusting and someone should say something about it. I give mad props to John McCain who actually spoke out against the bill on the Senate floor.

Four Senate Republicans voted against the bill, including John McCain (Ariz.), who decried the thousands of special projects for targeted districts. "I wonder what it's going take to make the case for fiscal sanity here?" he asked his colleagues.

No one is in favor of wasteful spending. Not even liberals. No one, that is, except for a few hundred Congressmen...

This is amazing...

2005-07-31T01:51:00.000-04:00

My home state of Virginia confronts and apologizes for its racist past. Not only that, not only is there an apology, but there is ACTION!

Five decades after Virginia ignored the actions of Prince Edward County and other locales that shut down their public schools in support of segregation, the state is making a rare effort to confront its racist past, in effect apologizing and offering reparations in the form of scholarships.

With a $1 million donation from the billionaire media investor John Kluge and a matching amount from the state, Virginia is providing up to $5,500 a year for any state resident, like Mr. Brown, who was denied a proper education when public schools shut down. So far, more than 80 people have been approved for the scholarships, and the number is expected to rise. Several thousand are potentially eligible, many of them now well into their 60's.

Rita Moseley, 58, was about to go into the sixth grade when the schools were closed. Her mother sent her more than 120 miles away to Blacksburg, Va., to live with an elderly woman and her daughter - "total strangers," she said - just to attend a public school willing to accept black children.

This is a large step in the right direction. Southern states take notice, VA just threw down the gauntlet.

Saturday mornings are for...

2005-07-30T09:55:00.000-04:00

...happy thoughts.

Also, I find it funny that Omaha Steaks is advertising on townhall.com. Conservatives arent the only ones who dig red meat. I like steaks too!!

Omaha advertise HERE!!!! LIONS EAT MEAT!

What's the matter with The New York Times...

2005-07-30T07:22:00.000-04:00

Something must be wrong over there in NYT because they keep paying and publishing John Tierney. Today's column isn't really infuriating as such, its just the regular stupid. He's talking about the recent safety issues concerning NASA shuttles and space missions. His entire column can be distilled into this one paragraph of idiocy:

The real problem with this exploration program is that it doesn't explore anything. Three decades after going to the Moon, NASA is sending astronauts a few hundred miles above Earth to conduct high school science experiments. Can you name anything - besides repairing the Hubble Telescope - they've accomplished?

And because the average citizen might not be able to name anything NASA has done that means we should scrap the whole thing, right? Considering that, even during this uproar about Rove, 1/4 of this country doesn't know who Rove is, I don't think we want to follow Tierney's logic.

Wait...following his logic might get rid of Rove faster than the current course through legal channels. Shit, I seem to be hoisted by my own petard. How very inconvenient.

PZ Myers > my freshman year room mate (sorry, Steve)...

2005-07-30T07:05:00.000-04:00

Um. So yeah you guys should go to Pharyngula and read this interesting tale of Dr. Myers days as an undergraduate student/freelance biologist. It's pretty incredible.

No fucking shame...

2005-07-29T12:46:00.000-04:00

The Senate may pass legislation that makes gun manufacturers free of any liability for their products. This is a pretty blatant purchase by the NRA and other gun-related special interests. And you can read all about it in the WashPost article linked above. What really chaffes my ass is how the R's are trying to sell it. They're telling us we need to support this legislation because its a matter of national security:

Supporters of the bill contend that the lawsuits could bankrupt firearm manufacturers such as Beretta USA Corp., which provides the standard side arm to the U.S. armed forces, potentially compromising the safety of American troops.

"The Department of Defense faces the very real prospect of outsourcing side arms for our soldiers to foreign manufacturers," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.).

Which is bullshit. You know why?

Opponents note that Beretta USA is a subsidiary of the Italian company Beretta Holding SpA.

These fucking Republican bastards have no fucking shame.

They're honestly trying to pass this legislation as though it will fight terrorism and protect our shores from dangerous minorities. Tools.

But that's not even the worst part.

Guess who also supports the bill. Our leaDer in the Senate, Harry Fucking Reid. I mean, honestly, how the hell are we supposed to beat these jerks if our own people, let alone the fucking minority leader of the senate, isn't along for the fight.

What the D's need to do is lock themselves in a room and get a platform together. Then fucking show a unified front. And take it to the R's.

Also, Joementum is not invited to said meeting.

So...

2005-07-29T11:21:00.000-04:00

Bill Frist has decided that he likes stem-cell research now.

The funny thing is that he cited his "medical background" as a reason he changed his mind on the issue.

I guess someone sent him a videotape of a dude in a lab coat holding a petri dish in one hand and a thumbs-up in the other.

own3d.

What I was saying...

2005-07-28T19:07:00.000-04:00

The Onion bring its A-game this week. As I'm sure most of you remember the little shit-storm around this post I wrote a couple weeks ago when Bush callously spoke about his flypaper strategy in London, England (the new addition to the flypaper nations).

Anyway, the Onion weighs in:

Bush To London Bombers: 'Bring It On'

WASHINGTON, DCÂPresident Bush officially responded to the latest round of London transit bombings Monday, challenging terrorists to "do their worst." Said Bush, in a televised statement from the Oval Office: "The proud and resilient people of London can take anything the forces of evil and cowardice can throw at them. They will never live in fear of you. Bring it on." Prime Minister Tony Blair thanked Bush for his comments, inviting him to visit London and ride the Underground in a show of solidarity.

Basically what I was yelling about, just reworded and more awesome.

But there's more.

The "What Do You Think" section is simply amazing:

London subways and buses have been targeted in two subway attacks in recent weeks. What do you think?

"What? Did these madmen not hear the world denounce these acts just weeks ago?" Joshua Banks, Veterinary Aid

"The sad thing is, London may now develop anti-Pakistani racism for the first time in its history." Dalia Lofton, Systems Analyst

"Are the Brits flying into a blind rage and invading an oil-producing country for no reason? Well, why not?" Carolyn Allen, Fire Inspector

Great stuff. Sorry for the mostly link-heavy posts. I'm a little busy today. Everything will return to normal soon.

PZ Myers would be god, if he wasn't such a dangerous atheist...

2005-07-28T14:02:00.000-04:00

Two great posts from Dr. Myers over at Pharyngula. First one is on his new ideas for museums:

We all know that stupidity sells, especially if it is stupidity with an aura of piety-- take a look at Ken Ham's creation science museum or Kent Hovind's Dinosaur Adventure Land, or the attempt to gussy up a zoo with creationism. Now here's a whole raft of comparable suggestions, all certain to be just as successful.

The Museum of Inferior People: Today, many white heterosexual Christians in America are confused. They know they're better than everyone else, but by exactly how much?
The Divine Invention, Innovation and Industry Institute: Did you know that what many intellectuals or so-called "thinking people" consider marvels of science are, in truth, Marvels of God?
Ripley's Believe It or Suffer Eternal Damnation! Museum: Ripley's Entertainment, Inc., owner of the world famous Believe it or Not! Museums and the most trusted name in the presentation and exhibition of hard-to-believe facts, is lending its authority and time-honored credibility to Biblical miracles.

Hilarity.

And his next is on, well, ants. Dr. Myers discusses a recent article in Nature about how ants find their ways to and from food and their nests. Apparently this question stumped even the great Richard Feynman. But it didnt stump the great PZ:

I'm proud to say that when I first read of the problem I immediately thought of an even simpler solution, and one that the article then goes on to describe as having been demonstrated in one species of ant, Monomorium pharaonis: just make the ant reluctant to make sharp turns. If all branches from the trail home diverge at shallow angles, simply taking the path that is closest to your current trajectory will put you on the right track home. Clearly, that swift insight means I'm smarter than Richard Feynman. Of course, it also means that ants are simpler than Feynman expected, and my superiority is based on my ability to think more like an ant than Feynman, which does sort of diminish the accomplishment.

I doubt anyone else can really make a better joke about ants (certainly not Woody Allen).

He has returned...

2005-07-28T13:08:00.000-04:00

Hello, all.

Sorry about the lack of posts from me. I've been elsewhere on mystical journeys fighting intergalactic (and sentient) billiards cues. Sure.

Anyway, I was home in our nation's capital and came across a print copy of the Washington Post. I'm so used to reading the online version that seeing the actual paper (the first paper I ever read) was an interesting experience.

Of course, the first page I turned to was the comics. I don't have the patience to wait for individual comics to load on the online section so I stopped reading them about 3 years ago. Perusing the page I saw my favs, Boondocks and Non Sequitor, and a few new ones that I didn't recognize. So investigated the new ones to see if they deserved a spot on my comics page. Well. No. They didn't. One was particularly odious.

It's called Candorville by Darin Bell. It is terrible. It's follows a black guy around as he makes terrible one-liners and conservative jokes. Thats right its the anti-Boondocks.

And not only is it's content stupid, its delivery is so cliched and awful that, were it not for my space battlesuit's helmet, I would have stabbed my eyes out.

I just thought the Post had standards. I mean, fine you need a conservative comic, get a good one. Not some I-wish-it-was-still-the-80s-were-I-could-get-away -with-bad-humor-and-tired-three-panel-cliches hack.

But I guess, that aformentioned "good" conservative comic doesnt exist. Because, you know, conservatives don't laugh.

150th post, 3rd month of Talking Lion. WooP!

When the shit hits the fan, change the subject

2005-07-26T02:05:00.000-04:00

I had the pleasure of enjoying the Sunday New York Times on the beach for the second time this summer and although the Jersey Shore is not Bermuda, it was good enough for me.

Frank Rich had a piece in the Week in Review section where he argues that the Bush administration's timing in the Roberts nomination had failed to be the kind of distraction that the White House was looking for.

When a conspiracy is unraveling, and it's every liar and his lawyer for themselves, the story takes on a momentum of its own. When the conspiracy is, at its heart, about the White House's twisting of the intelligence used to sell the American people a war - and its desperate efforts to cover up that flimflam once the W.M.D. cupboard proved bare and the war went south - the story will not end until the war really is in its "last throes."

While I hope Rich is right in the long run, it seems like the Roberts nomination is doing just what Bush had hoped it would do: Turn the attention away from Leakgate and Iraq and onto the merits of Roberts as a Supreme Court. Rich cites the fact that the Washington Post lead story less than 36 hours after the nomination talked about a new memo revealing that Bush administration officials knew that Palme's identity was supposed to be kept secret. The problem is, nobody is paying attention to the new revelations that continue to emerge each and every day.

During this past Sunday morning, I turned on Meet The Press and watched the D.A. from Law and Order spend 15 minutes defending Roberts as someone who should be easily confirmed, followed by another 15 minutes from Dick Durbin claiming maybe we shouldn't be so sure about this Roberts guy. There was no talk of Plame. There was no talk on Iraq. Even the WIR section where Rich's column ran, more than 75% of the front page was dominated by a story by Adam Nagourney on the upcoming nomination battle and the graphic that accompanied it. Only in the remaining space did the Times make room for John F. Burns' eerily fantastic piece on the deteriorating state of affairs in Iraq. A sample:

The first signs that America's top officials in Iraq were revising their thinking about what they might accomplish in Iraq came a year ago. As Iraq resumed its sovereignty after the period of American occupation, the new American team that arrived then, headed by Ambassador John D. Negroponte, had a withering term for the optimistic approach of their predecessors, led by L. Paul Bremer III.
The new team called the departing Americans "the illusionists," for their conviction that America could create a Jeffersonian democracy on the ruins of Saddam Hussein's medieval brutalism. One American military commander began his first encounter with American reporters by asking, "Well, gentlemen, tell me: Do you think that events here afford us the luxury of hope?"
It seemed clear then that the administration, for all its public optimism, had
begun substituting more modest goals for the idealists' conception of Iraq. How much more modest has become clearer in the 12 months since.
From the moment American troops crossed the border 28 months ago, the specter hanging over the American enterprise here has been that Iraq, freed from Mr. Hussein's tyranny, might prove to be so fractured - by politics and religion, by culture and geography, and by the suspicion and enmity sown by Mr. Hussein's years of repression - that it would spiral inexorably into civil war. If it did, opponents of the American-led invasion had warned, American troops could get caught in the crossfire between Sunnis and Shiites, Kurds and Turkmen, secularists and believers - reduced, in the grimmest circumstances, to the common target of a host of contending militias.
Now, events are pointing more than ever to the possibility that the nightmare could come true. Recent weeks have seen the insurgency reach new heights of sustained brutality. The violence is ever more centered on sectarian killings, with Sunni insurgents targeting hundreds of Shiite and Kurdish civilians in suicide bombings. There are reports of Shiite death squads, some with links to the interior ministry, retaliating by abducting and killing Sunni clerics and community leaders.

So things are going to hell pretty quickly out there, but no one seems to notice. STOP! What's that sound? Everybody look what's going down...

Even the new Iraqi forces, hailed by the Bush administration as the key to an eventual American troop withdrawal, seem as likely to provoke a civil war as to prevent one. The 170,000 men already trained are dominated by Shiites and Kurds, in a proportion even higher than the 80 percent those groups represent in the population. Though there are thousands of Sunni Arabs in the forces, including some generals, Iraqi units that are sent to the worst hot spots are often dominated by Shiites and Kurds, some recruited from sectarian militias deeply hostile to Sunni Arabs.
The contempt this provokes was voiced by Dhari al-Bedri, a Baghdad University professor with a home in Samarra, a Sunni town. "The Iraqi army in Samarra is Badr, Dawa and Pesh Merga," he said, citing the militias of the two largest Shiite political parties, and of the Kurds. "The people feel that the army does not come to serve them, but to punish them. The people hate them."
The American hope is that the political process under way will succeed, eventually, in forging a broad enough consensus that hard-liners on all sides will be isolated. The odds on that, though slim, seemed to rise a bit with an agreement this month that added 15 Sunni Arabs to the 55-member parliamentary committee charged with drawing up the constitution. But when two of the Sunni men involved in that process were gunned down in Baghdad last week, some other Sunni members pointed to Shiites as the killers, and said the killings showed that Shiite hard-liners wanted no compromise.

Hopefully, Rich's claim that "two damning story lines emerge [from the Plame affair] and both have legs" will prove correct in the long run, but right now it's not happening. The legs are being undercut by a middle-aged white guy who has been nominated to the Supreme Court.

Rich does make an appropriate observation at the end of his column about what is most important when talking about all of this:

The real crime here remains the sending of American men and women to Iraq on fictitious grounds. Without it, there wouldn't have been a third-rate smear campaign against an obscure diplomat, a bungled cover-up and a scandal that - like the war itself - has no exit strategy that will not inflict pain.

Now if only somebody would be able to pay for that crime...

"...By lunchtime a cake is wheeled out with bottles of champagne, and we all have a lot of fun."

2005-07-25T01:55:00.000-04:00

Although Wedding Crashers was a bit of a disappointment, I throroghly enjoyed Christopher Walken's performance. The man has to try hard in order to not be funny. He is also awesome in real life. From the Denver Post:

Christopher Walken admitted he pretends it's his birthday to get free cake.
"I sit in the make-up trailer very early in the morning and while the lady is patting my face with a brush, I look very sad," Walken told the London Independent. "And sooner or later she'll ask: 'What's the matter? You look a little down today.' So, I'll say: 'I'm all right.' Then she'll finally ask again: 'Come on. What is it?' Then I reply: 'It's my birthday, and I'm sad, because I'm alone ... and I don't have a cake.' ... By lunchtime a cake is wheeled out with bottles of champagne, and we all have a lot of fun."

High five, Chris. High five.

Hey...

2005-07-23T09:44:00.000-04:00

I'm going to be out-of-town this weekend. So it's very likely that there'll be no posts from me until Monday.

It will be a difficult time for everyone, but stay strong. We'll make it.

My Head Hurts...

2005-07-22T12:57:00.000-04:00

My head is splitting open with the fires of a thousand supernovas; I think I may have some sort of head cold or something. I can't provide you with my patented snark and wit. But I can link you to posts of splendor:

Billmon has a chilling post about the upcoming vote on expanding the PATRIOT Act. So does The Heretik.

FAFBLOG! is always great, The Medium Lobster's post today is, well, fantastic. Its about flypaper.

Ross of ThisSpaceForRent and TheTalentShow fame, has a post today on Hillary'08 and her moral crusade:

I have always argued that 3rd party voting is a short-sighted pursuit with inevitable failure written into its destiny, but what choice do we have when the party supposed to represent us obviously thinks we aren't worth their time? Hillary should be ashamed of herself for drumming up this crusade when we're in the middle of a war, and when our very freedoms are under attack from religious fanatics calling themselves "christians."

I'm tired of seeing so called liberals like Hillary and Joementum kiss up to right wing weirdos who can't handle modernity, or the possibiilty that people are doing things they don't understand. Why should they get my supprt now? And why should I give a damn what conservatives think about morality? Conservatives support this war, sexism, the spread of poverty and limiting the freedom of adults to determine their own lives. How moral is that? Conservatives, I posit, are actually immoral and should not be courted or listened to.

I friggin' agree.

The War in Iraq is still going on?

2005-07-21T19:52:00.000-04:00

You might have forgotten about that whole "War in Iraq" thing that's beeen going on for more than two years. But I really can't blame you. The media is barely paying attention to what's going on in Iraq, instead focusing their coverage on the latest white woman to go misssing.

The latest report to come out about Iraqi casualties put the total at almost 25,000. This, of course, is a very consrervative estimate, as other groups have put the number at over 100,000. But this study, compiled from Iraqi and international media reports, puts forth concrete evidence to back up their numbers. But the scary thing about all of this is that the number doesn't seem like it'll be going down anytime soon:

Civilian deaths attributed to US and coalition military forces peaked in the invasion period from March to May 2003 - which accounts for 30% of all civilian deaths in the two-year period - but the longer-term trend has been for increasing numbers to die at the hands of insurgents.
Figures obtained last week from the Iraqi interior ministry put the average civilian and police officer death toll in insurgent attacks from August 2004 to March 2005 at 800 a month.

So, with Saddam Hussein out of power, violence among insurgents has increased. It looks like the American invasion has made Iraq a more dangerous place to live for the average citizen. So has anything good come out of this war? Anybody?

Ok, onto Roberts...

2005-07-21T05:31:00.000-04:00

Obviously there’s been a lot of talk about this John Roberts character. One of the main things being said is that no one really knows too much about the specifics of his beliefs. His work as a lawyer for Republican administrations and big business marks him as a conservative. Being nominated by George W Bush marks him as a conservative. But what kind of Supreme Court Justice he'll make is a big question.

During the hearings concerning his confirmation to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit he was asked many times about his beliefs and how he would interpret the Constitution as a judge. Every time he was asked questions that hoped to shed light on that important detail he answered that he would look first to precedent set by the Supreme Court (via The Talent Show):

Senator DURBIN. Understood. I have been an attorney, represented a client, sometimes argued a position that I did not necessarily buy, personally. And so I am asking you today what is your position on Roe v. Wade?

Mr. ROBERTS. I don’t—Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land. It is not—it’s a little more than settled. It was reaffirmed in the face of a challenge that it should be overruled in the Casey decision. Accordingly, it’s the settled law of the land. There’s nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent, as well as Casey.

So, Roberts said that he would respect the precedent, the law of the land, resulting from Roe v Wade. So as a judge in a lower court he pledged to respect the decisions of a higher court, despite his personal beliefs on the issue. The problem is that not only is he on deck to be placed in the highest court (the court, whose decisions create the precedents Roberts so dearly upholds), no one can be sure of what he thinks about Roe or any issue.

If we throw out evidence of his ideology from his career and clients as a lawyer and focus only on his career as a judge, we don't have much to determine what he would bring to the most important court in our nation. Information we need to know. I personally believe that he is, at the very least, sympathetic to his client's causes he fought for as a lawyer, thus an unsuitable nominee based upon what that says about his ideology.

But, because no one seems to know what this guy is all about (on both sides of the aisle, even Ann Coulter is in the dark and displeased) it begs the question: Why is Bush nominating him?

Bush is determined to leave with a legacy that rivals Ronald "Conservative Godhead" Reagan's. Reagan put Scalia and Rehnquist on the bench, there's no way that Bush is risking his place in history by making the mistake conservatives feel his father (Bush 41) made with Justice Souter. (Sin of the father...)

So the lack of knowledge about Roberts takes on a new ominous air.

We might not know what kind of justice Roberts will make, but becuase Bush is nominating him I fear for the worst.

SORRY: Blogger fucked this post up. I'm not sure what happened to the end of it so I rewrote what was there originally (the original was much snappier, my apologies). I don't know what happened.