Thursday, April 28, 2005

Why Republicans Are Better Than Democrats

One word. Denial. Let us compare:

A Democratic President faced with sky-high oil prices, a tanking economy and unpleasantness in the Middle East gets on TV and gives a speech about what's going wrong in the country and what he hopes he can do about it. Loses bid for re-election.

A Republican President faced with sky-high oil prices, a tanking economy and unpleasantness in the Middle East gets on TV and offers up sunshine and hope about said unpleasantness, economy and other stuff. Also pitches plan aimed to enrich campaign donors. Luckily can't run for re-election.

It's Morning In America all over again!

Do You Feel Safer Yet?

I know I do. I guess Tom Lehrer needs to add another verse(well, actually, another three). I propose the following:

We told him nicely: "Please desist."
We even offered an assist
But Kim Jong-Il said, "Screw You, See?"
"We'll make Hawaii DMZ!"
Who's next?

Update: From Alternate Brain, we learn instead of Hawaii it's the Sea of Japan. Yikes.

Yeah, We Know

Someone is giving a press conference tonight. If you want our critique, just wait till he says a complete sentence, gaze at the screen in disbelief, and scream "ARE YOU EFFIN' KIDDING ME?" Guarantee that's all you'll need. But this (from Think Progress) needs to be highlighted.

Though President Bush has announced that tonight’s press conference will be on Social Security and energy, the press certainly will not limit their questions to those two topics. However, there is one question we are unlikely to hear: Why are you ignoring the ongoing genocide in Darfur?

If someone does ask, well, I'll wear my "I'm A Big Fat Jerk" hat all around the Capitol tomorrow(because I'm going to be there anyway). And I'll wear my "Holy Eff! I Heart Our President" shirt if he outlines a plan to stop it.

Update: Holy Eff! He said something with which I totally agree!

Gordon Gives A History Lesson

Getting Medieval On Our Asses

Do people really think like this?

Update: And do people really spell "Medievil" like that?

Something A Little More High Toned

Wednesday, April 27, 2005

Socking It To...

Although you've got give them points for chutzpah, this is still pretty low. What's really cool is that I've actually got secret documents where Sean Hannity admits to sexually molesting choirboys. But I'm not gonna show'em to YOU.

Not In My Effin' Backyard Either

Fixer at Alternate Brain has an excellent (and excellently titled, if I may say so) post about the administration's quest for nukular power; as in they want to make more of it. Fixer's point that the cost+danger/benefit ratio is a little high in post 9-11 terms is right on. However, one thing hasn't been pointed out. Once again the administration is hoping a crisis (this time oil prices) will scare the public into accepting a set of half-baked proposals that have been part of its agenda from the begining. Dick Cheney, in 2001,said new nuclear power deserved a "fresh look" (check the love he sends France too). This is the m.o. of the administration. They don't address a crisis until it's too late(or they manufacture one). Then they dust off an old proposal that wasn't sensible the first time they brought it out and hope the public swallows it. Nice racket. It's hardly what I'd call governing, though.

Tuesday, April 26, 2005

Hey, Person at 69.179.146.#

I'm really sorry that doing this search got you here. We appear in a Fox News search? ARE YOU EFFIN' KIDDING ME?

Pounding In Irritation

No, not Boh, but my keyboard. Yesterday I read on the Franken Show Blog that they were going to have Sullivan on. Stupidly I went and visited his site for the first time since the last time I said I was never going there. After gagging at the usual fare I noticed he had a link(subscription required) to an article on the supposed conflicts within the conservative movement. I know, foolish of me to even click it, but I thought it'd be somewhat enlightening since this appears to be Sullivan's major post-election area of concern. A few paragraphs in and I stopped gagging and started wretching;then the pounding began. Sullywatch didn't really comment on the article. I don't blame them;it was probably more than they could stomach and too long(I had time on my hands yesterday). But The Moose makes the excellent, though far too civil, observation that the article is over-thought. I would say it provides perfect examples of Sullivan's worst tendencies as a writer combined with David Brooks' most irritating stylistic quirk: the non-existent dichotomy. That is to say that it is nothing but an exercise in intellectual masturbation with a few tired jabs at Sully's ill-conceived notion of "the left".

Those jabs are tired, but worth comment. The best example is this one:

One reason for conservatism's endurance in the face of such contradiction, of course, is the extreme weakness--intellectual and organizational--of the opposition ... The left never recovered from the collapse of communism, the dismal failure of social democracy across Western Europe, and the demise of Japan's command economy in the 1980's.

ARE YOU EFFIN' KIDDING ME? Yes, I know it's Sullivan. We're supposed to expect this type of nonsense from him. But I cannot stand it that he gets flattery from the left for supposedly being an independent thinker. Yet whenever he addresses the left he trades in the lowest talking-point-style non-sequiturs. Sure, he presents them as reasonable common knowledge, but that doesn't mean they're true or make any sense. How is the fall of communism related to liberalism in America? What the hell does the collapse of Japan's economy have to do with liberalism at all? And did social democracy really dismally fail across Western Europe? And what, if anything do these events have in common besides being things the left "never got over"?

The answer to the first question is "not at all". There's been a small but vocal communist left in the US for generations, but the mainstream left in America has been anti-communist since at least the 1950's. Even far leftists such as Sully's punching bag Noam Chomsky referred to both Cuba and the USSR as tyrannies. The only difference between how the left and right viewed the fall of communism is this: the left cheered the triumph of human freedom, applauded the power of a mass population to liberate itself from tyranny and were proud our country had lent a hand;the right viewed it as a victory for Ronald Reagan, Capitalism, and God(in that order). The answer to the second questions is, of course, "nothing". The left had no stake in Japan's economic success or failure except as it pertained to the interest of US citizens and perhaps the economic health of the rest of the world. On to the third question. Last I checked, social democracy is working fine in Western Europe. The only "failure" is its failure to go away like Sully would like it to. The fourth question is also easy - they are unrelated except in Sully's mind.

So why did he bring these things up as "things the left never got over"? Because he's engaging in good old fashioned red-baiting. It's never enough to admit that the reason the left isn't as powerful as the right is the right, these days, is better at attaining and retaining power. No, he has to paint the left as a bunch of closet commie sympathizers who's very ideological core and purpose were destroyed when communism or - in Sully's mind - its cousins failed. Never mind that his description of "conservatives of doubt" actually applies to modern liberals(or moderates like Krugman who Sully can't help but smear since they actually have skills and understand complicated structures like economies). This is just bald pretension covering up for a lack of insight or honesty. This is just Horowitz with a jolly-ol' English accent and a Harvard degree. It stinks just as bad and is just as dishonest. And it makes me pound my keyboard in irritation.

Friday, April 22, 2005


Via Mipe at Think Progress we find a quote from some jerk at NRO. The best part is not the riff about IPods and Hitler Youth Rallies, but the last sentence Mipe quotes:

And if there’s no sense of sin, then there’s no need for a Redeemer, or for the Church.

As proto-RUFNKM'er W.C. Fields* once said, "I don't write these, folks, I just read'em." Finally someone is willing to cop to it. Sin is the essential mechanism to create artificial demand for the Church. Or did I misread that?

* A Conversation between WC and a bartender:
Bartender: I'm sorry sir, but I can't serve you burbon. This is election day, partner, and the bar is closed. It's the law.
WC: Who made this law?
Bartender: The people voted for it!
WC: That's carrying democracy too far!

Blowin' In The Wind

Big news! The left/right distinction is an inadequate method of categorizing political beliefs! Turns out a graph of two dimensions provides more accuracy. Sure, plenty of us learned this in high school civics 15 or more years ago, but part of the joy of living in America is how old news is always new. For what it's worth, here's where I end up. I note, in comparison to the first time I took a similar test in 1987, that my economic beliefs have moved "down" while my social beliefs have stayed in exactly the same place.

Update: Grammar correction(normally not allowed, but see following clase) and let this be a warning to never read me after I've been taking antihistamines.

Thursday, April 21, 2005

Speaking of Public

Today PZ at Pharyngula has a post discussing what he views as the failing of the scientific community at large to "popularize" their views and message. I've often wondered why we don't have more "public scientists" these days. I grew up in an era when it was fairly common to see people like Carl Sagan or Richard Feynman on mainstream television. They also had more widespread popular name recognition. Now we have, uhm, Michael Crichton, or even worse Michael Behe, neither of whom are really scientists(although one does play a scientist for the ID movement). Luckily, scientists like PZ have blogs and are willing to spout off about anything that suits their fancy, including their area of expertise. It's not great, but at least it's a start.

That Poor Whiny Oppressed Majority

One of the things that makes me a "bad liberal" is my rejection of identity politics. First off, freedom and justice for everyone is a universal value. If it is denied anyone for any reason then that's a wrong in itself. The notion of groups oppressed in similar ways is useful and important, but if people decide that it's membership in the group that matters, not the oppression itself, then it's counter productive. The other problem is if you give preference to identity over rights, you get garbage like this. ARE YOU EFFIN' KIDDING ME? Yes, fanatical theocrats in the most religious - also most religiously diverse - country in the world are screaming: "Help Help! I'm being oppressed!"

Sure, the old "liberal assault on people of faith" trope has been with us at least as long as the Scopes Trial, with a more recent incarnation by David Limbaugh(Rush's even more disgusting brother) and now is echoed by plenty of phony populist rich boy and girl pundits. I've even heard someone claim that Christians are living under a "tyranny of the liberal judiciary". This has now culminated in a bunch of whiny crybabies going on television to bemoan the fact that their own narrow view is being suppressed in the form of rejection of 10(yes, only 10) judges. Cry me an effin' river.

There is no "tyranny of the judiciary" and these people are about as oppressed as I am. If there were actual religious persecution going on the churches would already be closed down by heavily armed black suited agents of the government(please, do not mention Waco; that was not religious persecution). Oh, but some of their notions aren't universally accepted? Too bad. As Alan Simpson once said at the National Press Club, we live in a common culture, and if you want to have a civil society, then when you're in public there are some things you're just going to have to abide. For instance, if my dog craps on your lawn, or anywhere else in public, I'm bound by duty of civility to remove it from that space and put it in the trash. Same goes for them and their Ten Commandments in the public space. Guess what? No one is trying to stop anyone from practicing their faith. The only problem is when that faith preaches the infringment of the rights of others. No, no one can make anyone shut up. But there's no law that says anyone has to take anyone seriously either.

I've heard people say "I've got no problem with gays. I just wish they wouldn't be so gay in public. It makes me uncomfortable." Well, I say the same about theocrats. Why do they have to be so violently oppressive and hateful in public? And before anyone calls me a bigot, I'd like to point out that some of my best friends are theocrats.

I Knew There Was A Reason

I just re-bought a bunch of early records by the House of Love. I was wondering what, other than non-existent nostalgia for high school, could compell me to do such a thing. Now I know.

The Dante's Inferno Test has banished you to the Second Level of Hell!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Purgatory (Repenting Believers)Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo (Virtuous Non-Believers)Moderate
Level 2 (Lustful)Very High
Level 3 (Gluttonous)Moderate
Level 4 (Prodigal and Avaricious)Very Low
Level 5 (Wrathful and Gloomy)Very High
Level 6 - The City of Dis (Heretics)Moderate
Level 7 (Violent)High
Level 8- the Malebolge (Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers)High
Level 9 - Cocytus (Treacherous)Moderate

Take the Dante Inferno Hell Test

Link via Fixer and Gordon at Alternate Brain.

Wednesday, April 20, 2005

The Answer To Our Question

This post at Sadly, No! made me laugh. A whole bunch.

Tuesday, April 19, 2005

The Little Old Man From Traunstein

It's so nice to see that, after a prolonged attempt at slight modernization to attract new listeners, Holy Mother Church has decided to enter her back to the roots period. I look forward to the new record: "Re-Inquiring(Are You Good Enough?)".

Update:Comrade Cooper sees things a little differently.

Notes To L: An Air Of Superiority Born Of Slight Frustration

Tonight is the second time in two months someone has complimented my rendition of "Angie" with the phrase "I loved that Nick Drake song you played!". To some people those Scots and Irish all sound the same. But I want to shout: "Bert Jansch wasn't in a Volkswagen commercial. Neither was Dave Graham!" Ah well. It's good to be appreciated, eh?

Monday, April 18, 2005

Sweet Sweet Victory

This makes the weekend sweep that much more satisfying.

Awww Yeah!

Go here for a link to video of a reportedly rousing speech from our man Wes. It's technically an "announcement", but sounds like he may be hedging. I am in the midst of download, so I won't know what to think till I see it. Of course this one writer on this one blog would love Clark to run again. I do agree with young wonkish fellow that he must emphasize something more than a resume, but I defy those who say he's not a powerful enough "populist" speaker to review his speech at the Democratic Convention last year, where fire, brimstone, and a big fat glob of patriotic grandeur rained down upon the crowd.

Friday, April 15, 2005

Liberally Incorrect Politics

Is Wolcott a South Park Conservative in disguise? Or is it Rush? no matter what my friends told - and continue to tell - me I always thought South Park was secretly part of the vast right-wing conspiracy. All that Jesus talk, you know. I'm so confused. Someone remind me which side is the all-uptight side so I can get to mocking it for its sad, repressive, petit bourgeois morality. In the mean time I can only hope, in this particular case, Rush is right. A network devoted to that particular fine art would only be a good thing. Too bad I don't have cable.

A Class Of Allocation Strategies

MaxSpeak wonders how far the current crop of fundamentalist plutocrats wants to regress our society's economic policy. Isn't the answer self-evident? The economic policy is a means to an end. That end has a lords and vassals feel to it. They keep letting us know where they stand. The bankruptcy bill in combination with permanent removal of the estate tax is yet another blatant display. But they are Christian so it makes it all right. No class war? ARE YOU EFFIN' KIDDING ME? Just because one side doesn't realize it's under attack doesn't mean there isn't a war on.

Blow Up Your Media

Fair and balanced? ARE YOU EFFIN' KIDDING ME? Also, god bless Harry Shearer. We need more "investigative comedians." Could be a more satisfying racket than being a think tank worker bee...

Thursday, April 14, 2005

They Must Put Corruption In The Water

After my first visit to Texas I used to joke that I finally understood why there isn't strong environmental protection regulation in Texas. Who the hell would want to protect such an inhospitable and ugly environment? It would be better to lay the entire thing to waste and build office parks and oil refineries in its place.

Unfortunately, one thing that clearly needs cleaning up is Texan Business Ethics. Any time I hear a congressman from Texas talk about ethics or governmental reform or the "temple of mammon of DC", I always have to ask "ARE YOU EFFIN' KIDDING ME? Fix your damn state before you come telling the rest of the country how to act." The only thing holy in Texas is the writ of corrupt business;from Enron to Haliburton to the Bush family, there just ain't no escape. It even infects non-natives who end up living there. When do we let Texas out of the Union again?

Update:Night Light clues us in to an unsuprising link between Saddam and a Texan politician, but with a twist.

Update II: Hampden's own Mobtown Shank has a three part series of more things the matter with Texas.

Wednesday, April 13, 2005

I Think They Call This A Pile-On

From Digby we find a former symphony member requesting that he be added to the Horowitz Uber List. Limericks, devestating in their accuracy, included!

Positive Thinking

It's been said that we all have to meet certain basic needs before we can concentrate on anything else.

We have to be well-rested and full(as in not hungry and having a place to sleep) before we can devote our energy to gun control and nuclear proliferation.

We have to feel safe and comfortable before we tackle any "deeper" thought.


My big, fat, white ass is 'EFFIN comfortable because I got all kinds of "deeper" shit on my mind!

Anybody else notice that "faith" is everywhere?
-the grocery store
-the tv news

It's on the tip of everyone's tongue...FAITH.

Presidential Mandates....ha ha ha ha!

Shiavo and stem cells...
Abortion! For Christ's sake!

We're all so 'effing fat we don't know what to do with ourselves.

Soon we'll all be dead.

Skinny and tired...
or dead.

And then, the only thing god's going to ask is, "Were your eyes open?"!

And we're all gonna say NO!
Christians! eyes closed
Jews! eyes closed
white, black, yellow
Muslims! eyes closed
Intellectuals! eyes closed
'effin hillbilly's...

We're all so full of shit! None of us gives a good god damn about anyone else.

We are not the meek. We will not inherit the earth.

Tuesday, April 12, 2005

Warning:Guy Talks About Feminist

Via Sisyphus Shrugged we discover the sad news that Andrea Dworkin has died. Although I am the living embodiment of what she saw as the problem for women - whiteish, middle class, heterosexual horndog male - I always found her rhetoric convincing and her criticism worthwhile. She said things that absolutely needed saying; even though I would read her feeling like there was a loaded gun pointed right between my eyes I couldn't help thinking "she's right-on." With a few paragraphs she could demolish an entire set of bogus notions, and then do it again a few paragraphs later. Her dissection of the "sexual revolution" stands as one of the best "I call bullshit!" pieces ever. I haven't read her in years, but her work still informs my sense of what is appropriate and inappropriate in relationships between women and men.

Monday, April 11, 2005

Damn Right It Was Good Day

It's 70 degrees F, with a clear blue sky and flowers blooming, and I just ate a great buritto. Oh yes, and David Horowitz gets exposed as a lazy old phony. Next they'll tell me Texas has finally seceded.

We Tried To Warn You

Via Badtux we discover that my people have just about had enough.

Update for Clarification: Yes I am of Hebraic descent, but that isn't the faith I practice.

Update II: Wait, is Wolcott one of us?

Update III:My Unitarian Jihad Name is: Brother Neutron Bomb of The Short Path. Get yours.(via Pharyngula).

Friday, April 08, 2005

A Swell Bash

Back when she was a media darling - 1991 to 1998ish - I could never understand why anyone took Camile Paglia seriously. She displayed every terrible quality of an over-educated pretentious loudmouth with nothing to say. References to slightly obscure ("I read about it in Art History!!!") cultural artifacts as evidence of erudition? Check. Irritating high-style? Check. Low-risk contrarian pose? Check. Advertising alternative lifestyle? Check. Constant self-reference? Check. Complicated paradigm for cultural analysis that meant nothing unless you were an acolyte? Check. Scrape away all of the academic posturing and you'd discover she wasn't actually telling you anything. Perfect American Intellectual Superstar! Well, she's gone and made some comments about bloggers. Good for her!

Even better is that Amanda at Pandagon bashes her good and proper.

Forgeries, Phonies and...

Now hold on just a second. Some lefties are leaping to the defense of the wretched Michelle Malkin because of this little outburst in comments at Political Animal. ARE YOU EFFIN' KIDDING ME? Have we learned nothing from how the right handles this stuff? Quick hint: it's staring you right in the effin' face in Drum's post, where the comments originated.

Instead of chiding anonymous commentors for their obvious sexism let's utilize Powerline style reasoning: No real liberal would ever stoop to using such language. That commentor is obviously a Republican plant sent there to change the subject. The real story here isn't that someone said something mean about Michelle Malkin. The real story isn't Kevin Drum not deleting the comments. The real story is which right-wing blog, thinktank or Senator the commentor works for. I'm calling on Hindrocket, Malkin, Andrew Sullivan, Bill Frist, the Heritage Foundation and AEI to repudiate this drity trick. I'm also calling on them to apologize to all women for using that kind of language. We can assume their silence only means complicity. Have they no decency?

Just One More Reason

I've got friends who do not understand why I hate traveling and why I never want to go anywhere that requires getting on an airplane. No, I do not harbor a secret fear of flying. Air-travel is a huge pain in the rear, and it's only getting worse.

More Money and Blog

Just found this link to the Genocide Intervention Fund. I've blogrolled their news briefs page.

Thursday, April 07, 2005

Let The Punishment Fit The Crime

Of course, he cries "Fascist!!!!". What en effin' dullard blowhard whinny sack of useless...Never mind. It's a nice day here in Bmore, and this news is even nicer.

Update: MaxSpeak has a, ahem, more mature take on this. I agree with him, actually, but my lower self wields more influence these days.

I'm Confused

He's supposed to be a conservative? ARE YOU EFFIN' KIDDING ME? Could someone please explain which empty piece of rhetoric this falls under? Is it "compassionate", is it part of the "Culture of Life", or is it part of the "Global War On Terror"? It certainly can't be "It's Your Money", because he's busy wasting my money on this modern day high-tech snake-oil sales show. "Get you personal accounts here! Cures what ails yah!"

Wednesday, April 06, 2005

Notes From The Culture Bunker

I really wish Dave G. weren't so damn busy getting his PhD. because he's got a very informed take on this subject. He might even come along and tell me I missed the point. In any case...

Yesterday's post from Pharyngula, especially his "liberal heresy" remark, put me in something of a nostalgic mood. Today's update to the post served to amplify the nostalgia and sent me back to the halcyon days of the mid to late 1990's: my time on the "far left" and my unwilling civilian role in the "science wars". You don't get to be a soldier on either side when you're in industry as I have been for the last 13 years; that's a pleasure reserved for academics. My significant other at that time was attending UC Berkeley, majoring in literature and art history with a feminist/deconstructionist skew, so I got to read and hear many of the arguments from that school of thought. It seemed like it the only game in humanities-town and served as a source of constant discussion. I also kept current on the arguments from the other side, best typified by Alan Sokal's hoax on the editors of "Social Text". Needless to say, there were quite a few important points left out on both sides which, if anyone had noticed, would have prepared them for the latest and worst front of all.

First, it's important to note that the "deconstructionist" / "post-modern" / whatever critique was not universally embraced by the left. Noam Chomksy, and much of the entire Z-Net crew, viewed it first with ambivalence, then with skepticism and finally with contempt. I read plenty of posts on the forums, and plenty of articles, which more or less said: "post modernism doesn't make any sense, so we really can't talk about it" or "post-modernism doesn't really help with the cause, so we're probably best off ignoring it". Also, Tom Frank and the Baffler folks spent plenty of ink on the "Cult Studs" as they called them. Frank et al made the crucial point that many of the post modernist ideas were more often embraced by Corporate America(Tom Peters is a perfect example of a "management consultant" who synthesized corporatism with a flavor of post-modernism). Need I point out that, in my view, the Baffler people were prescient beyond all expectation?

Second, the original critique on offer was worth considering before it got blown completely out of proportion and became a thought experiment gone haywire. The point, as I understood it, was that the culture of science might just be a little biased in favor of white middle class males; this might lead to unintended exclusion of women and minorities. The point was worth some serious investigation, but over time it became something a little more, err, quirky. The consequences of the notion that cultural bias was the only "objective truth" available came a little later.

One can really point the finger at "Cult Studs" on two points. First, the right was really busy promoting a completely new form of evil pseudo-science under the noses of the "Cult Studs" whose expertise in social criticism could have proved useful. The same time that saw the Sokal Hoax and the "Science Wars" also saw the rise of Charles Murray and "The Bell Curve", Michael Behe and "Darwin's Black Box"(the first stirrings of the Intelligent Design movement). Instead of bashing away at cultural hierarchy in the academy, these people could have done an excellent hatchet job; instead they left it to journalists already cowed by accusations of "liberal bias". The second is the discovery of a weapon they didn't realize would be far better used by the right.

The attack on the "culture of science" by the "science of culture" managed to create an acceptable atmosphere to reduce empirically verifiable results into a "he said/she said" contest of cultural biases. Need I point out who uses this? It's Ann Coulter, it's Rush Limbaugh, it' get the idea. It's also the same critique that the ID proponents can now hurl at the "evolutionists".

So I think I'd offer the following to Mr. Pharyngula: Being rational doesn't have a whole bunch to do with your ideology. The actual liberal tradition, enlightened reasoned discourse, empiricism, freedom of thought, etc., is the one you belong to anyway.

Update:Need I point out that I use the phrase "Need I point out...?" far too often? As editor, I herewith and hitherto ban myself from using that phrase for at least 3 posts.

Update II:I also rememberd that David Horowitz is using a slightly modified version of the "there is no objective truth, only bias" critique as basis for his academic bill of rights. I thought he was a conservative, and I thought conservatives didn't believe in moral relativism. Jeez, in the post-9/11 world it all gets so confusing. Next they'll be telling me the same conservatives who hated on the MSM for not showing the beheadings of hostages by insurgents in Iraq will be pissed that the AP won the Pullitzer for photographs in Iraq, some of which show insurgents shooting people.

Tuesday, April 05, 2005

Talks So Hip...

The lefty blogosphere buzzes with horror, and in some cases a little delight (true colors and all that), over what Sen. John Cornyn said on the Senate floor yesterday. Then there's the video. A supposedly conservative United States Senator offering a lamely emotional excuse for violent behavior? ARE YOU EFFIN' KIDDING ME? Where's the personal responsibility? In the conservative view, poverty is no excuse for crime. But in Cornyn's view, perceiving psychic warfare perptrated by the courts offers a perfect excuse. This is a truly slippery slope; Cornyn is offering us a new form of "god of the gaps" argument. Did a man pick up a gun and shoot a judge because he's a nut with no respect for the law? No, it was all that Judicial Activism.

Does Cornyn realize he's just created a whole new category of temporary insanity plea? "Well, you know, the guy cut me off on the Beltway, and I got a little upset, and then I started thinking about all that Judicial Activism, so I pulled out my pistol and started firing at his car." I just hope that when they finally get around to adding the "Temporary Insanity Due to Judicial Activism" plea, they also create the "Temporary Insanity Due to Executive Over-reach" plea. Gotta stay fair and balanced after all.

Monday Night Notes For L

Best non-annoying ironic cover song not done by IGWAD: "You Give Love A Bad Name" played by some guy named Chris.

Best insightful drunken apprectiation of music: "Hey man, all these're gonna make me call my ex-girlfriend."

Monday, April 04, 2005


Wes Clark is testifying about Iraq to the Armed Services Committee on Wednesday. He'd like to arm himself with a bit of netroots opinion. To that end he's asking people to take his survey and pass the url on to friends. Consider this the passing on to friends. There are a number of ways one could criticize the survey questions, but I think it's useful anyway.

South Parc

Jay's post cracked me up enough to send me to the South Park Character Generator. This is my character when I'm in my Undisclosed International Location.

What Makes A Man Start Fires...?

While the rest of the world was on Pope death watch, and then dead watch, I've been more than a little interested in this whole new Minutement business. If I were a true culture warrior I'd point to this being a more significant sign of our decline than, say, Sin City(a review of which is forthcoming since I saw it on Friday). My general response runs like this: "A bunch of lazy bonehead white people who have nothing better to do than play cowboy (in a phony Old-West tourist trap, natch) as a show of nativism disguised as patriotism? ARE YOU EFFIN' KIDDING ME?" Sometimes nuance fails me, but not so with Incoherent Blather and Cooper; Cooper was actually there. The great news is that it turned out to be a bunch of desert-hot air. According to Cooper only about 150 showed up and didn't do much. It also turns out that, much like the Schiavo affair, there were as many media people as there were participants.

The scary thing, though, is the whole "protect our culture" message. American culture has always been an evolving entity. Our culture today is incredibly different from what it was when I was say, 13, and changes will only continue to occur. Like IC, I think there may be problems with illiegal immigration, but media stunts and lawn-chair activism - as well as overt racism from idiots like Malkin - are not apropriate responses. Of course, those kinds of responses have very little to do with addressing what might be the real problems. They're just a way for bigots to let off a little racist steam and get on TV. It'd be a laugh riot except that someone thought it was a good idea to take it seriously.

Update:Ok, so it's become a ragin' full-on laugh riot. Maybe the whole influx of illegals is just manifest destiny in action.

Goin' Down To...

Originally uploaded by jayinbmore.
From Planerium's Southpark Character Generater, here's yours truly.

Link via our penguin friend.

Money Where Your Blog Is Dept

We've just blogrolled The Coalition For Darfur. Despite what's been said, and as many people already know, "never again" is happening again.

Friday, April 01, 2005

Class? Err, no.

Since it's April Fool's Day, I figured it'd be both timely and funny, albiet morbid, to post a parody of this column by Crazy Jesus Lady (nickname courtesy of alicublog). It would have been a letter from Heaven from the recently departed which castigated all those who used a woman's tragedy to advance agendas and get media attention; the list of those castigated would include Crazy Jesus Lady. Determining that it's actually in worse taste than everything else that went down, I decided against it.

Besides, the real aftermath of this whole thing, aside from the aformentioned stuff at Crooked Timber(see one post down), will be the further Luntzification of our dialogue, resulting in yet another stick to poke in the eyes of people who might see some ambiguitiy in the world. I refer, of course, to the Culture of Life/Culture of Death dichotomy. Much like the War On Terror or the Bush Administration's committment to national security, the Culture of Life and the Culture of Death don't exist.

Unless of course this is the Culture of Life and this is the Culture of Death.

Early To Bed...

Means I lost my shot at writing a post just on this topic; something I had planned for this weekend. This week, the battle was already joined on the letters page of the Baltimore City Paper after the BCP did a semi-positive profile of the group. Ah well.