The Political Neo-Hippie

Linkage Love

2007-05-11T22:59:00.000-04:00

I think it's necessary that I return a link. The Conservative Running Amok gave me some linkage love, calling me "a kid who thinks he knows something about life..." Although, he's "a little doubtful," saying as how my political views "seem to not come from experience..."

Ah. The age-old "you're too young to have a valid opinion" argument. That's gorgeous.

I didn't want to get into this, but you've forced me to rant about my number one issue, and the first issue I ever cared about: ageism.

First of all, that was a low blow (which seems to be the trend in politics lately). You took a stab at me because I'm young with little life experience, but failed to present a valid argument. If you want to take stabs at people, you should present clear, mature, informed reasons for why you feel that way about them.

Second of all, everyone was young once. As you grow old, if your sense of wonder dies, you become bitter and jaded. If your sense of adventure dies, you become depressed and bored. If you become too wrapped up in getting older and being mature, your ability to have fun dies, and you go to work for the rest of your life, trying to get that extra buck, unable to appreciate the great things in life. According to your profile, you are thirty-six. You are not that old yet. If you are too busy being "mature" with your "meetings" you seem to go to all the time, than maybe you need to free up your schedule a little bit. Remember your youthful vitality.

After all, are we not living in a culture that strives, above all, to stay youthful, young, and vivacious? And yet we still look down on our youth so much. We still talk down to our kids. We still kick our teenagers out of malls for no reason. We still tax our sixteen-year-olds who pay income tax, but can't vote. We still call anyone under twenty-five a kid with no life experience.

We all want to stay young forever, and yet we're so jaded and wrapped up in our own maturity and adulthood that we make the exact same mistakes our parents did.

Older people are so angry about ageism, and yet they dish it out so heavily themselves toward us young folk. Ironic.

My point is, don't criticize me for being young. Think back to when you were my age: you were just as opinionated, were you not? You had thoughts, you had opinions. You might have been a Young Republican, I don't know. Maybe you were even a democrat.

Actually, that last theory makes sense. Maybe you were once a fiery, opinionated liberal yourself, but then you fell pray to the high-and-mighty corporate mentality, thus becoming old and jaded. As a result, you think that I made the same mistakes you did, and therefor am as stupid as you were. That's probably it. Too bad you didn't get smarter with age.

Oh damn, that was harsh. I'm sorry.

Well, that was fun.
Peace.

The NeoConservative Agenda Spelled Out

2007-05-07T11:16:00.000-04:00

NeoConservativism is a direct and blatant rejection, even overlooking, of the diversity of mankind and the richness of the worlds various cultures and cultural backgrounds, solely for the purpose of preserving and increasing the enormous military power the U.S. has built up, toppling foreign regimes who resist our corporate interests, ...not to mention to get that oil.

The Bush Administration allowed 9/11 to happen because "they needed a 'new Pearl Harbor' to implement [the NeoConservative] agenda, and they let their guard down until it happened." Here is proof--the top of page 51.

Let's look at that one. According to the Project for the New American Century (read: a bunch of power hungry NeoCons back in '97), the goals of the U.S. in order to create a New America at the turn of the century should be:

1) Increase an already enormous military budget at the expense of domestic social programs
2) Toppling of regimes resistant to our corporate interests
3) Forcing democracy at the barrel of a gun in regions that have no history of the democratic process
4) Replacing the UN’s role of preserving and extending international order

They speak vaguely in Rebuilding America's Defenses of the Cold War (a.k.a. 'Look How Tough I Am, Don't Attack Me') and how they need to "rebuild" the U.S. military after they had "led the West to victory." First of all, the Cold War was a term introduced by Bernard Baruch and Walter Lippmann to describe the growing feelings of tension between the U.S. and the Soviet Union over how to rebuild the post-war world from WWII till the 90s. There was no actual Military engagement, just 2 huge countries showing each other how big and tough they were.

How can we lead the west to victory if there was no war? More importantly, why should we have to rebuild our troops if the entire "War" was an exercise in building ourselves up without ever using our power?

NeoCon to English translation:
The NeoCon agenda is to take the power we build over the last 50 years and use it to go around the world, one country at a time, take their oil, force democracy, and nuke them if they resist. We are America. Resistance is futile. Unfortunately, we need someone to attack us first. At that point, Congress and the People will support any and every military move, regardless of whether or not it's against our attackers or any of their allies (Speaking of which...Iraq and its former regime has absolutely no ties to Al Qaida or Osama Bin Laden. Surprised?)

And so it happened. The Bush Administration, in all their glory, was warned fifty-two times (that's five, two) that Osama Bin Laden was planning to use planes as missiles and attack major population and government centers in the U.S. and they did nothing about it. They needed it to put their NeoCon plan into action. It was their golden ticket. If Bush could have helped it happen, he would've.

And now, back to my original point: The NeoCons, the great fearers of diversity and difference in human society, are taking steps to eliminate what they are afraid of by going around the world and making every country as much like the United States as possible. It's Nazism with an American twist. We're not killing everyone who's not Aryan, we're just making them Aryan instead. We're also similar to The Borg (get our your Star Trek DVDs for this one). We're assimilating anyone we can, and using their technology and resources to create ourselves into an all-powerful, unstoppable force.

Final point: The United States, and indeed the entire world, is in greater danger now than it was before we went to war with Iraq. We attacked them under the ruse of "weapons of mass destruction," which was soon found to be a lie.

This means that any country with a military in the entire world can look at any other country and say "I think they might be planning to get weapons with which to attack me and/or my allies...PRE-EMPTIVE STRIKE!"

One day, China decides that they don't like how big and powerful the U.S. is because we might use our power against them. They use good old-fashioned Bush logic and attack us pre-emptively in order to "preserve the Eastern way of life" and "keep the world safe for the People's Republic of China." China attacks the U.S. They topple the current regime, and set up a new, Communist government in the U.S. They appoint leaders and set up a new government. Sound familiar?

Yeah, thought so.

The entire world now has a license to attack anyone they want and change their government, take their resources, and occupy them with no reason.

Good thing nobody is as militarily HUGE and executively STUPID as the U.S.

Are We Even Surprised By The Sliminess Anymore?

2007-04-04T20:20:00.000-04:00

Oh, how I love the Daily Kos.

Here we go again with Bush and his attitude that nothing will stand in the way of what he wants to do, including basic concepts of right and wrong.

Bush appointed Republican fundraiser Sam Fox, the man who paid for the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth's ads about how John Kerry exaggerated his military record, as US ambassador to Belgium. I don't necessarily like creepy, somewhat shifty Massachusetts Democrats with odd haircuts, I just don't like Bush, or most of the people he appoints.

But here's where Bush got tricky: Congress didn't like Sam, and wasn't letting George appoint him, so George just withdrew his nomination and just said "Well played, guys, you win! Haha!" He then waited until nobody was looking and whispered to Sam, "Don't worry, I'll get you the job..." He proceeded to appoint this guy during a Congressional Spring Break. That's right, while the white-collar politicians were kickin' it in Aruba, Bush was busy sneakily appointing his buddy Sam as an ambassador during a time when he could do so without congressional approval. I was scared when Bush could act through congress and still get his way (due to the blindly agreeable, mostly republican congress), but now he has a Congress that actually checks his power, so he's finding ways to work around them, probably illegally.

Chris Dodd (D, Connecticut) put it best when he said "This is underhanded and an abuse of Executive authority — sadly this behavior has become the hallmark of this administration."

Oh, I can't wait for this investigation to get on.

You Can't Make This Stuff Up

2007-03-31T16:42:00.000-04:00

Today at work, something happened that I'll never forget.

I was standing at my register as usual, and this guy walked up and said "I've been sent by Steven Spielberg to get some history here and do some writing. He's making a movie with Tom Hanks about the Civil War, and I'm doing some writing for it. Where can I find some good history, not the crap-shops either. There's all these crap-shops...the wife loves the crap-shops, but I'm looking for some good legit old stuff around here."

So I pointed him across the street to the artifact shop. He thanked me and I wished him luck.

A few minutes later, he came buy to purchase a Confederate flag. As odd as that may seem to some, it's pretty commonplace among tourists from the south, or with southern heritage. He purchased it along with the things his wife had gotten, I rung them up, wrapped them up, and bagged them up, except the flag which he grabbed. His wife grabbed the bag and walked to glance around the shop a bit more, and he stood at the counter and gave a speech which I will never forget.

Warning: Some may find this little soliloquy offensive. If you don't...why not?

"My ancestors--the Carpenters from Kentucky--my name is Carpenter--they had this old huge log cabin and a whole lot of land--it's still in the family--they had two hundred and ninety three slaves. Can you believe that? They didn't do a thing for themselves. It was all done for them. Can you imagine how nice it would be to have 293 slaves? They were very very rich people, living on all that land with that huge log cabin...it's still in my family, and it's my second home, now. They had all those slaves...even now, I can't stand the people. I mean, I was down at the hotel--the Hilton the other night and some black people sat at the table next to me...I moved. I mean, when you're family is like mine, 293 slaves, they're not human. It's a part of my heritage. Sooner or later, the white man will take over, whether we gas them or nuke them, or whatever, we'll take over. I mean, all these people are useless. These third world countries, India...Africa...these people are useless. They serve no purpose. Just think of how much money we spend to keep these people alive. Just kill them. They serve no purpose. I mean, those Iraqis...they're a white people, sure, but they don't speak our language. That log cabin in Kentucky, I have a picture of Adolf Hitler above the mantle, and this (he holds up the Confederate flag) will go right next to it. These people are useless. Just kill them. I don't have time for these--I don't have time for weak people, and I don't have time for stupid people. I got into an argument with Steven Spielberg, because he's a Jew, but I told him we're wasting money and time on them, and they're a plague to society. You're a young guy, but you're a smart kid. That's how it is."

He then walked away.

You can't make this stuff up, people.

I felt like Spider-Man when the Green Goblin's giving his speech in the first movie: "Think about it, hero!!" I felt like the guy should put on a creepy mask and fly away on a glider whilst throwing pumpkin bombs, laughing maniacally

I don't even know what to say about this story. All I can say is, the next time there's a Spielberg movie about the Civil War with Tom Hanks, don't buy a ticket, because you know who the writer is.

Update Edit: The closest thing I could find is Lincoln, a movie coming out some time around around late 2008, although Tom Hanks has nothing to do with the project. It's a possibility the guy could've been a total liar, or Spielberg could be telling him slight untruths in order to keep the confidentiality of the movie. Also, the writer is a woman, but Spielberg could be working with several writers. This guy could be Spielberg's 'confederate viewpoint' writer, only there to write from the perspective of the Confederates...or he could just be a total liar and slimeball, which I'm not really doubting. If anyone has any information, speculation, or otherwise, please drop me a line.

Woah! Attack of the Ravenous Right!

2007-03-29T17:34:00.000-04:00

Go Figure said...
"I posted anonymously because of the hatred that comes from the leftists who want my children to be slaves to socialism.
You will notice....or should have already noticed that the right wing (as you call it) bloggers have not been active lately.
I can only speak for myself and Sanity's Bluff......we are busy working......(try it sometime)....saving all we can from our overtaxed paychecks....and buying bullets.
SHHHHHHHH......
The right wing is not silenced, we are preparing for the hell the leftist, commies, socialists and perverts, and same sex couples bring upon this once GOD BLESSED NATION.
We are marksmen too.
You see, we don't have to make every thing pollitically correct.
We are going to correct politics in America....for we love it, and hate to see you leftists hating what we love. Not to mention.....supporting the perversion of America....you have turned this great nation into a cesspool of political correctness.
The clean up crew is preparing.
We won't let liberty be spit at.
We will not give up our right to bear arms.
We will not allow you to call our speech....hate speech.
And we don't like your buddies the islamafacists.....because we don't beat our wifes, or ridicule them publically........
No, I won't give up the date of the redemption of America.....
You deserve what you will be receiving."

Wow. I must say, that is the most impressively hateful patriotic soliloquy I have ever seen. A bunch of really low blows. It's good to know that the patriots still have some fight left in them against us "islamafacist"-loving America-hating leftist pigs, saying as how the conservative movement is slowly dying for lack of anything uniting it. Although, politics is cyclical, so I can't wait for the "Rise of the Right" when the liberals end up taking over the government.

First, I think it is infinitely hilarious that you preach about not allowing us to call your speech "hate speech," and at the same time you hint that there will be some sort of violent cleansing of all of us liberal scumbags and that we liberals "deserve what you will be receiving." That's a good lesson to teach the new generation: kill those who disagree with you. Violence is always the answer. But I suppose it's consistent with the lessons that the commander-in-chief is teaching the world.

"I posted anonymously because of the hatred that comes from the leftists who want my children to be slaves to socialism."
No, you posted anonymously so you can hide behind your computer screen...but that's a good opportunity to stab at the liberals, nonetheless.
When have I ever said I was socialist? Let me explain a little bit of the politics of economics to you here. Sit down, it's complicated. Politically, we all know what is left-wing and what is right-wing: liberal and conservative, respectively. Economically, however, not many people have much of an idea. First of all: Socialism and Communism on a large-scale (say, an entire country) are, economically, very very conservative--statist. They emphasize enforced economic equality of everyone. Capitalism is very economically liberal--that is, libertarian. Anyone can start any business they want, provided they have the resources. Anybody can take any job they want, provided they have the skills, and anyone can become anything they want if they set their mind to it. Everyone, in reality, has a standing on two different facets of the political spectrum: the political or personal one, and the economic one. A political diamond, if you will.

"I can only speak for myself and Sanity's Bluff......we are busy working......(try it sometime)....saving all we can from our overtaxed paychecks....and buying bullets."
Wow! That is heavy! Let me get my bearings and see if I can dissect THIS whopper.

From what I understand, you have drawn the following conclusions about me: I gain without working and I'm overtaxing your paycheck, and you're gonna shoot me because of it. First of all, I'm a student. I work an exceedingly crappy job giving tourist information and being a cash register monkey. I drive around 360-375 miles a week going to one of the best and most conveniently accessible and affordable colleges I can find, and can barely afford my own gas (occasionally, I cannot). The town I live in has very few employment opportunities and almost no good career options. I work how I can, when I can. I am eighteen and have very little job experience because nobody wants an inexperienced kid working for them. It's a paradox: in order to get into the job market, you have to have experience. In order to have experience, you have to get into the job market. I'm going to school right now to learn the skills necessary to start a good career. Nobody has the right to tell me that I don't try to work. Don't you ever judge my work ethic without knowing anything.

Second of all: any federal taxes that are being taken out of your paycheck have been because of the Republican majority congress combined with George W. Bush. Democrats have not been a majority long enough to pass any tax bills that will have been effective long enough for you to truly notice. If you are complaining about your taxes, complain to your leaders, not me.

"The right wing is not silenced, we are preparing for the hell the leftist, commies, socialists and perverts, and same sex couples bring upon this once GOD BLESSED NATION."
My God! Just when I though you couldn't be any more harsh! Okay, let me get this straight: the "leftist, commies, socialists, and perverts, and same sex couples" are going to bring "hell" upon "this once GOD BLESSED NATION." If you mean "hell" as in "huge reforms, repairs, and changes," than yes, there will be hell. You are also correct, this nation was once God-Blessed. Unfortunately, the lies, the hatred, and the endlessly bloody war have brought this nation into something of a hateful, divided funk. Thank you for illustrating the hatred so eloquently. By the way, I'm a Catholic Christian. Thanks for thinking you can take a stab at me with the "God" word because Democrats are stereotypically secular. Also, thanks for confirming the stereotype that Republicans think church and state are a match made in heaven.

"We are marksmen too."
Isn't that terroristic? I mean, current laws and all...that's gotta be some sort of terrorist threat. Oh, and thanks again for proving my point about the Right slinging fiery, hateful threats about not hating them.

"You see, we don't have to make every thing pollitically correct."
Well, no. We don't have to do a damn thing in this country except die and pay taxes.
That's why this country is so gosh darn awesome: I can disagree with violently totalitarian people like you. And apparently, we don't have to be "grammattically" correct either.

"We are going to correct politics in America....for we love it, and hate to see you leftists hating what we love."
Hm, that's funny. If the rightists have been in power for the past six years, how are you going to correct the politics of this country? By turning it over to the terrorist left? I don't hate America. I love America because I can disagree with you. Not to mention I can be absolutely anything I want to be. It's a great country. I, however, do not support the war. You people have it in your heads that we leftist pigs hate America because we disagree with how this war is being conducted. I'm not going to get into the individual failures of the commander-in-chief, the defense department, and homeland security, because they are numerous. I will say this however: I want this war to end because I support the troops, their lifestyles, their lives, and their families. Why put them in more danger and cause them more injuries and pain if we don't have to? I support the troops, I do not support this administration's abuse of them. Also, you accuse leftists of hating America for having a differing opinion, while you turn around and hate us with threats of fiery damnation. I don't hate the country, I disagree with the government. You hate the country, because you hate the country's people for disagreeing with the government. So allow me to pose to you the question you pose to me: Why do you hate America?

"Not to mention.....supporting the perversion of America....you have turned this great nation into a cesspool of political correctness."
What? Perversion? Oh, this is about the gays! Well, why didn't you say so?
Look, the bottom line is, you want a certain group of people, that is homosexuals, to have fewer rights than the rest of the country. The simple fact of the matter is, you are saying that they deserve less than we do because of something they have no control over. I have gay friends and family members. I respect them far too much to say that they deserve any less than I, or you for that matter.

"We won't let liberty be spit at."
When you say "liberty," I always assumed you meant personal freedom. I see now that you mean liberty of the government to do whatever it wants. I stand thoroughly corrected.

" We will not give up our right to bear arms."
Wow. You're serious aren't you? I guess it's a good thing you remained anonymous, otherwise you'd be arrested for terrorist threats. Besides, you can own a hand pistol or hunting rifle if you want, but what on earth would anyone ever need an automatic rifle or machine pistol for if not killing another human being? But if that's what you want, to kill all the commie fag liberals, then by all means. Bear those arms.

"We will not allow you to call our speech....hate speech."
You sound pretty darn violent and hateful to me. If it's not hate speech, what official euphemism would you prefer I use?

" And we don't like your buddies the islamafacists.....because we don't beat our wifes, or ridicule them publically........"
Wow. I beat my girlfriend? Liberal men beat their "wifes" and girlfriends? "Islamafacists"? What the hell is an "islamafacist"? Is that even a word? If so, shouldn't it be hyphenated? Sorry for all the questions, but I just can't think of any answers on this one. I suppose the next time you see a man walking with an Islamic woman (you'll know by the headscarf) you'll be 100% positive that he's beating her and "publically" ridiculing her, and you'll whip out your .22 and shoot his "facist" brains out, right? Way to fight for liberty.

" No, I won't give up the date of the redemption of America....."
You sound like you have a date in mind. Is it, by chance, September 11? How long have you been planning this attack? Does homeland security know about this, young man?

It's a good thing people like you are few and far between.

Peace.

They're Clinging To Anything They Can Get

2007-03-27T20:39:00.000-04:00

This is tasty.

WARNING: extremely bias and distorted propaganda ahead!
Okay, fine, so this blog is nothing but biased propaganda, but this time, it's REPUBLICAN. Yes, some YouTube elephant has made a clever little slide show of everything the Repubs have been telling themselves for the last six years. Some of it is in bad context. Some of it is distorted. Some of it is simply wrong, or a blatant lie. All of it is misleading.

Be warned.

Wait, don't leave this blog in a fit of new found right-wing fury just yet. I'm going to break down the misleading bits of this...which is most of it.

"George Bush's economy plan is working. The economy is booming."
First, let me say that I know very little about economics. I do know this, though: The economy is far from booming. The 90s was an economy boom. When you can fill up on $10, then you can say we have an economic boom. Besides, the exchange rate of the dollar is farther down with the rest of the world than it has ever been. Ouch.

"President Bush has increased funding for black colleges by a full 30 percent. Bush appointed more blacks to high-level positions in his cabinet than any previous president. Bush proposed $15 billion Aid to Africa"
All I see is a bunch of 'I have a lot of black friends!' crap set in response to an out of context quote. If Bush cares so much about black people why hasn't he done a single thing to help the dire situation in Darfur? Not a single dollar of aid for this troubled land. Why hasn't George put a single plan in action to help low income families get the health insurance they need? Why has George given multi-billion dollar tax cuts to the upper 10% of Americans (a class which includes him and his friends, by the way) and far less, if any, to the lower classes?

At this point, there are three quotes from big name Democratic politicians in support of the war. Allow me to point to one thing: The dates on these quotes. 2002. 2003. 2002. At that point in our history, America saw nothing but buildings exploding on TV. Nothing but terrorism was on our minds. We all thought Saddam had weapons. It wasn't until a few years later when we found out that there were no weapons in Iraq that we decided we were actually there to liberate. Right. I don't know if you realize this, but Bush, when he was campaigning for President in 2000, said that he didn't want to "go around the world sayin' 'This is the way it's gotta be'." He didn't want to "use the troops for what's called 'nation building'." I wonder what happened. He violated the one of the main stances of his campaign. Don't accuse Democrats of being turncoats until you can find yourself a Republican who never changes his mind.

Oh, what's this? You're pointing out Democrats who resigned in disgrace, or were involved in scandal? Hm, that's curious. The Republican party has been involved in far more scandals that I'd care to count. Let's not forget about old Don Rummy who resigned in disgrace after the very core of his campaign in Iraq, a campaign waged on false pretenses, failed miserably. Let's not forget about all those Republicans who molested congressional pages, too.

Another quote from a Democrat. This time, Sen. Ted Kennedy expresses his disgust at being lied to, followed by a quote from 2002. Again, we all believed the lies back in the wake of 9/11. If anything, you're magnifying the fact that Bush lied to us, and then later was found out to be the liar he is. Also, Clinton had a "comprehensive anti-terror strategy" that he wasn't authorized to enact. Neither was Bush, but he did it anyway. Because, you know, Bush doesn't actually listen to the people he works for.

"In the wake of 9-11 Majority Americans [sic] truly believed there would be another attack on US soil very soon."
Okay, I don't even know what that means, "Majority Americans." Shouldn't that read "The majority of Americans"? Oh, well, anyway...
I must once again point to the surge of blind patriotism and fog of lies that followed 9/11. These two things combined resulted in a near brainwashing of most of the country. Besides, the government lies about how many terrorism convictions it obtains annually. Everyone is a terrorist now. I could probably be carted off as a terrorist because I'm liberal.

Cindy Sheehan wants to know why her son was killed. She wants to know why we are fighting this war. Isn't she entitled to that? We're fighting this war to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq to ensure the ongoing safety and security of Americans, right? Oh, wait, no, we're liberating the people of Iraq, right? Oh, no we're stopping a civil war. Right.

"Weapons Inspector David Kay said no analyst said he or she felt pressured to tailor findings so that they would be consistent with Bush's 'expectations'"
I guess that's why they didn't find single weapon o' mass destruction.
"Senate Select committee found no lies. Robb-Silberman investigation found no lies."
The Robb-Silberman investigation was investigating whether or not there was bad intel. So there was no bad intel? But we haven't found a single weapon yet! That must mean they still have them! Don't you think they would've used them by now if they had them? Especially since we are completely on their land and quickly running out of reinforcements. If they used a weapon on us right now, it would give them one heck of an advantage. If they had any, they would've used them by now. Guess they don't have any. Ouch.

"The Dow Jones Industrial Average has reached record highs. 11,727" Great, so the rich people are richer! That falls nicely in line with the president's tax cuts. That's why the tax cuts happened, you know: they make the rich people richer, and the stock market goes up, thus making Bush look good. Plus, they sound good, so the lower class likes you more.

Cutting taxes, then starting 2 wars? Great idea, Bushy.

I'll admit, Hillary's stab at George saying that he was like Alfred E. Newman was low. But saying that a young Hillary looks just like Alfred? That's harsh. She doesn't even look like him. I think that photo shows a young, vivacious Hillary. I'll admit, Hillary isn't the best looking woman, but there have been much uglier. Mrs. Roosevelt was pretty darn ugly. You have to admit, Hillary looks good for her age. But the, so does Bush, so looks aren't anything.

"Gas prices have fallen."
No, they have not. That is the most blatant lie in this video. Gas prices are higher than they have ever been in this country. This video was made around election season, so of course prices were lower. The government always drops prices around election season to stay elected. Both sides do it. When you can fill up your tank for $10 again, talk to me.
"Inflation remains low."
Wrong. The US dollar has lost more value than ever before.

Unemployment might be low, but are those jobs good? If a 60-year-old woman has a job at Wal-Mart or McDonald's, she's not unemployed, but she still has an awful job. She might even have to take a few jobs because she can't live off of the salary she gets at just one of them.

"Most Americans recently polled believe Democrats have a better plan at fighting terror. What is their plan?"
This video was made in October. This explains why the creator thought the Dems had no plan. At that point, we had a Republican majority congress. The Democrats had absolutely no way to get anything done or voice any opinions because they had no way to represent themselves in such a one-sided government. Here's our plan: Slowly pull troops out of Iraq, thus allowing the Iraqi forces to take over their new independent Democratic government, which you are so confident that you have set in place and secured. If you've won, why not pull out now and let them continue winning?

"Wages are going up." ...for politicians.
"Energy prices are falling." if you can fall upwards, then yes, they are falling.
"A stronger economy leads to the best college hiring market in years." May 16, 2006
Mid-May '06? What a coincidence! That's the exact time I was looking for a job and could not find one to save my life! Wow, what a great college hiring market! I only found a job because I knew someone. That's how people get jobs: by knowing people in the business. That's how George Bush has gotten all of his jobs.

The rest of the video is uneducated nonsense. I try to make serious arguments, and I get this immaturity. Awesome.

I don't think we need to worry about it, though. Only 30% of Americans like Bush, and Americans tend to associate the mistakes of a politician with his entire political party (Clinton's sex scandal basically caused Gore to lose in 2000).

Ryan Seacrest Should Host the 2008 Election

2007-03-27T15:29:00.000-04:00

This is simply awesome.

In the 2005 season of American Idol, over 500 million votes were cast. In the 2004 American Presidential Election, 122 million votes were cast.

It's official. America cares more about a bunch of yuppie media-whores more than they care about their country, their lives, and their future.

Bravo, my fellow Americans.

Fed Up With News Newsertainment

2007-03-21T23:37:00.000-04:00

The reason I haven't posted for a few days is simple: news simply doesn't interest me lately. I haven't found any news story that I was interested in, or that didn't have some disgusting slant to it...which brings me to today's rant.

As you well know, I as liberal as John Lennon, but even a heavy leftist slant in news annoys me. Kids, in my day (actually, before my day) there was a little thing we called "journalistic integrity." Journalists reported the important news, they reported it in fifteen minutes or less, and they reported it without trying to stab any sort of slant into it.

Okay, I admit it, that wasn't in my day, it was way before my day. Stay with me here.

First, CNN. Since I'm an America-hating, terrorist-loving, smelly, long-haired, hippie faggot liberal bastard, I tend not to mind their slant as much, but still. Come on, people, lets think of some other way to say it besides "Can the Democrats take back congress? They only need [X] votes to take back congress!" Why don't you just start chanting "Two, four, six, eight, this is worse than Watergate!" Or scroll "BUSH SCREWS COUNTRY, DOES A LITTLE DANCE" across the ticker?

That's another thing, their tickers are really unnecessary. Let's face it: most of the time, there just isn't 24 hours of news to report. Sometimes, a story doesn't need to be treated like an absolutely ground-breaking piece of news. If CNN eliminated half of the tickers, they would be a lot more relevant. They would report more of the news that actually matters.

Next, Fox News, AKA "Faux" News. This station showcases the really-frigging-far-right-wing neocons who love to repeatedly point out things like the fact that Obama went to a Muslim school (which didn't focus on religion, may I add). Fox is so far right, they look to the left and see Rush Limbaugh.

Quite frankly, I don't really care about many other news sources. I get my news from NPR, CNN.com and the main paper from my birth town, the Baltimore Sun. I also grab the occasional story from Wonkette or The Daily Kos, both linked on the sidebar.

How Many Was That Again?

2007-03-16T13:36:00.000-04:00

More, more, more!

How many troops can we spare, for crying out loud? We've gotta be running at least a little bit low by now. There are only so many troop surges we can take.

I know we're running low, saying as how we're sending overworked, ill-trained, injured, and all-around unfit troops by this point.

People didn't like the original announcement of 21,500 additional forces, but the true number is now up to about 30,000 (details). With so many forces already out there, how many can we possibly spare for a surge this big? How many American and innocent Iraqi lives will be destroyed to "keep America safe from terrorists"?

We need someone to do something big about this, and it needs to be done soon before George and his buddies send any more of us over to die for oil. I mean, freedom.

George, listen to the people. You work for us, we don't serve you.

Ah, Politics

2007-03-15T01:39:00.000-04:00

So we've all heard about this by now, right?

US attorneys were facing mounting political pressure on cases that involved, well, politics. If a Republican was being prosecuted, someone Republican would say "Hey, uh, you aren't really gonna prosecute him, are you?" Former New Mexico state attorney David Iglesias said he felt "leaned on" and "sickened" when Republican Senator Pete Domenici and Republican Representative Heather Wilson pressured him about a case involving two Democrats in New Mexico. Presumably, they wanted that liberal bastard to be found guilty of corruption.

Long story short, it appears they didn't cave to Republican pressure in their cases, and eight of 93 US attorneys were fired, mysteriously. Ooh, big mystery. It couldn't be that a certain high-ranking Republican Justice Department official was tired of the dirty Dems winning cases and decided to take care of it, could it? Nah, nobody would do such a thing, would they?

Remember what administration we're dealing with here.

You know Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, right? Well apparently, he performed some sort of "great purge" of Democratic or Democrat-supporting US attorneys by waving his mighty, politically-motivated hand and firing eight US attorneys at once. Obviously, this was suspicious-looking.

Then, when people asked him about it he said "Oops, I dunno. Mistakes were made. I'll make sure it doesn't happen again." He also said that they were the right decision and that the attorneys simply sucked as attorneys. Hmm, slight contradiction there, Al? Then, knowing full well that Bush would back him up, he uttered a very trusting-sounding "I'm not resigning, but my fate is in the hands of the President." Of course, George backed him up despite senate and public opinion.

George is good at ignoring/denying senate and public opinion.

Some People Need To Just Not Speak Their Minds

2007-03-13T18:52:00.000-04:00

You'd think someone these days would be smart enough to keep this sort of thing to himself.

If you're too lazy to read the article, here's what it says. Marine General Peter Pace stated to The Chicago Tribune editorial board that he thought "homosexual acts between individuals are immoral, in that we should not condone immoral acts."

To quote the great Ron White, "Next time you have a thought, let it go." If you have hatred for a group of people, particularly one as hated as homosexuals, don't openly state it unless you want people to give you constant crap about it for the rest of your career. These days, any prejudice remark, no matter how lightly or round-about you say it, will be taken as bluntly as possible. If you say "I believe that homosexuality is immoral," people are going to hear "I hate fags, and they should die." You should at least be smart enough to keep such thoughts to yourself in this day and age.

Also, to openly state that homosexuals should not be allowed to serve their country in the military if they so desire is an implication that they are somehow unfit to serve, or subhuman in some way. The problem here is not the immorality of homosexual acts, the problem here is the fear of homosexuals. You, Mr. Pace, are homophobic. You're afraid of a Sgt. Gayman sneaking into your tent at night and having his way with you. There also stands the hypothesis that Gen. Pace is afraid of his own homosexual tendencies, but I'm personally doubtful of that logic.

Although it wouldn't be the first or last time when a closeted homosexual lashed out at homosexuality. Case in point: former gay porn star and gay escort Cpl. Matt Sanchez (or "Rod Majors") and his lovely pose with Ann Coulter at CPAC(source), right after her now-infamous "John Edwards is a faggot" remarks (another source). Now, that may not be a direct "screw you" to homosexuals, but it's certainly a powerful, if silent, anti-gay remark to be seen smiling, with your arm around Ann Coulter, the fiery-tongued, anti-gay, as-far-right-as-humanly-possible media whore we all know and love.

The debate over having homosexuals in the military is very similar to the same debate involving women. These rough and tough military men are too tough to know how to treat a woman in their midst, so same principle with gays, right? Well, there are around 200,000 women in the military, what's the problem with homosexuals?

If they want to volunteer to serve the country in the armed forces, I say we let them. There's a lesser chance of conscientious objectors like myself getting drafted that way.

Just When I Thought I Couldn't Like Him Any Less

2007-03-13T02:02:00.000-04:00

How much lower can he stoop with this war?
Special thanks to Larry at Let's Talk for pointing me to that story.

Okay, folks, I don't know what you think of President Bush, his policies, his views, or his war. But one thing is for sure: This latest development is nothing short of being, how you say, f***ed up.

President George W. Bush, the commander-in-chief of the United States military, the chief executive officer of our great country, has a no respect whatsoever for the brave men and women who risk their lives and health to preserve the freedoms of this country. This man...well, read the quote for yourself.

"As the military scrambles to pour more soldiers into Iraq, a unit of the Army's 3rd Infantry Division at Fort Benning, Ga., is deploying troops with serious injuries and other medical problems, including GIs who doctors have said are medically unfit for battle. Some are too injured to wear their body armor, according to medical records."

For a man who represents a political party which boasts such infinite patriotism, support, and respect for our troops, this man shows, through his actions, a complete and total lack of respect for these brave men and women. I'm sure you know, or have inferred, how I feel about this war. I don't even think he should be sending more troops at all, let alone injured ones.

Here's my question: Are these troops receiving all the training they should be? I highly doubt it. This wave of troops is not being trained as well as they should be (here's proof, directly from a deployed National Guardsman, former Naval Personel, and Former Marine). Our commander-in-chief is so desperate that he feels the need to send injured, ill-prepared troops into combat, in an unstable country, or as that National Guardsman puts it, "this s**thole called Iraq."

This madness must stop.

More Reasons Why It Sucks To Be In The Army

2007-03-12T20:35:00.000-04:00

So this is how we support our troops.

If you haven't heard the story, the gist is that hundreds of our troops were being held in "dilapidated outpatient housing" at the most iconic of the Army's east coast medical centers, Walter Reed. Who could possibly be responsible for these, as Acting Army Secretary Pete Geren calls them, "failures in our system"?

Well, after waiting for about a week and a half for no apparent reason, the Pentagon fired the guy responsible who had been there for six months, Gen. George Wateman, and hired the Surgeon General, Lt. Gen. Kevin C. Kiley. You know, the guy on the side of every single pack of cigarettes in the United States.

As it turns out, according to John Stewart, Kevin Kiley had run Walter Reed for many years previously "and helped make it what it is today." That explains why they thought he'd be qualified; he'd done it before.

Too bad he wasn't qualified. Or perhaps he just didn't care. He stated, as you can see on that Daily Show video, that the conditions weren't sub standard. Oh no, not at all. There were hundreds of soldiers in rooms with water-damaged, moldy, cracking walls and a rampant cockroach infestation for who knows how long, lying in their own urine, and when Kiley was notified what did he do? Nothing. He didn't do squat for about a week and a half. He was fired after being back on the job for one day. That's how bad he was, the Pentagon took only a single day to act on something. That hurts.

Wow, it's just black mark after black mark on this administration and it's buddies, isn't it? Sucks to be you, George.

How to End a War: Send More Troops!

2007-03-11T21:50:00.000-04:00

Oh good, more abused, half-trained, brainwashed individuals are putting on uniforms being sent to their deaths.

The unfortunate souls include 2,400 for combat support and 2, 200 military police. Do we have to spell this out for you? In order to allow Iraq to become an independent democracy, you have to let them police themselves. The Iraqi police force should be allowed to slowly take over. The best way to do that is to slowly but surely bring home the troops who are currently over there, holding the hands of the new Iraqi government, mucking up the whole situation, and creating general unrest. Bring them home and let Iraq become an independent nation. That is what you want, isn't it? ...Isn't it? George?

What's that you say? Iran and Syria aren't doing enough to stabilize Iraq? Well did you tell them they were supposed to stabilize Iraq? I mean, after all, you only had that "stop violence from engulfing the Middle East" conference in Baghdad on Saturday. Give them some air! Let them get their stuff together, first.

I think you should've had that conference about five or six years ago.

How to stop violence from engulfing the Middle East
Step one: Don't start a war there.
The end.

Bush was saying all this from Latin America while he was on tour there, as if they care about what's happening in the United States. Are we really that big-headed that we really think Latin America gives a damn? How about informing the American people what you're doing, instead of miscellaneous foreign countries? Unless you're afraid of us.

Oh, right, the whole 30% approval rating thing. Forgot about that.

George M. W. Nixon?

2007-03-09T22:39:00.000-05:00

In the last post, I mentioned how similar George W. Bush is to Richard Nixon. Just to finish that thought, I think this video is a necessary watch.

Thanks to my moderately conservative mom, of all people, for pointing me to this video.

One of these days, I want to see a side-by-side comparison of the Nixon and W. Bush administrations. Maybe I'll even create one. In convenient chart-form.

I just don't think people realize how similar George W. Bush is to a president as famously bad as Nixon.

Who'da Thunk It

2007-03-09T15:50:00.000-05:00

Is there anyone who didn't expect this to happen?

In Short: The FBI has been abusing its Patriot Act power to get private information from phone companies, internet companies, libraries, and other sources of private records and information.

They can send a National Security Letter anyone who holds records that may relate to any "investigation to protect against international terrorism or 'clandestine intelligence activities'," as NPR's Ari Shapiro puts it. Let's face it; the FBI blatantly lies and overstates the number of terrorism cases it gets annually (thank you, Russ Kick). Anything could be a terrorism case. They could make up any bogus case, call it "clandestine intelligence activity," and get the records for anything they want. Judging from this DOJ audit, they probably have already. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

So wait, who's responsible for all this corruption, you ask? Oh, look at that! Another member of the Bush Administration's inner circle! No it's not Scooter again, this time it's Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Ouch. Tough break there, Speedy. It's too bad the Bush Administration is the most rampantly corrupt administration in recent historical memory, otherwise he might be a good president. Maybe if they were less wrapped up in their agenda and more considerate of the American people, they'd be a little more popular and just a tad less...really really corrupt.

The Bush years are looking more and more like the Nixon years, as is the Bush war looking like the Nixon war. Anybody know if Bush is taping all his meetings?

If it didn't mean Dick Cheney being in charge, I'd say "Next step, resignation." But we don't want a president who goes around with a shotgun, do we?

Sorry, had to make a reference to his little 'hunting accident.'

The United States of New York?

2007-03-09T00:14:00.001-05:00

Leave it up to The New York Times to kiss the ass of its own city.

What an article. A New York newspaper talking to New Yorkers about New York and saying how great it is. At the same time though, the article does its best to ever-so-delicately (at the risk of pissing off its NYC readers) explain that Rudy G., in his infinite popularity, and New York, in its infinite New Yorkness, are not for everyone.

The repubs don't like him because he's too Liberal. I'm against abortion, but I'm pretty damn sure that the 14th amendment states that every law must be applied equally to all people. That's why neocons are pushing for a quick and dirty anti-gay amendment: they know as soon as a gay marriage case goes to the supreme court, they'll lose (unless the supreme court decides to change the constitution). I see nothing wrong with gay people getting married. Let them get married, who cares.

As for guns, I'm personally not a fan. Let's face it, if guns were harder to get, inner-cities would probably be less dangerous. I respect the right to own a pistol for sport shooting, a rifle or maybe even a shotgun for hunting, but an automatic weapon has very little legal purpose in today's world outside of the military--and don't even get me started on the military. Or war.

I digress. Less leftist bitching on my part, more Giuliani.

New York City is not the entire country. The entire country is nothing like New York City. A 'New Yorker' is noticeably different (culture-wise) from a non-New Yorker in many ways. I don't think the rest of the country understands New York or its culture. Especially Texans. They hate/make fun of/stereotype the very idea of NYC and it's stereotypically trendy urban demographic.

I don't think this country would elect a New Yorker, particularly someone as famously and obviously New-Yorken as Rudolph the red-nosed Governor (Oh sweet Jesus, did I just make that joke?).