Left in the mountains...

Bolton' outa the UN

2006-12-04T19:42:00.000-05:00

So, rather than be made to look as ridiculous as he is before the Senate, Ragin' John Bolton will leave his U.N. assignment when his term expires. Pardon a bit of artistic license in paraphrasing one of Ragin' John's most oft-quoted rants, redirected at the man himself:

"The United States needs the U.N. to work, and not just when it wants it to work. That is exactly the way it should be. And the only question, the ONLY question for the United States Senate was what makes you think you're so damn qualified. And if you don't like that, I'm sorry, but that is the fact."

Well, not to worry about our boy, Ragin' John will just ride off into the sunset and rejoin his fellow inmates at the Project for the New American (World Domination) Century (pronunciation note: "World Domination" is silent), and continue his important work of attempting to destroy the planet, exploring new methods of negotiation cleverly disguised as intimidation and military intervention. Too bad it's unlikely he'll consider anger management therapy -- before we all pay the price "in the form of a mushroom cloud", thanks to his concepts of diplomacy.

==============================================

Meanwhile, War Of The Words continued today, centered on Ragin' John's departure. On Google News, the following two items literally were next to each other (emphasis added):

From the Wall Street Journal:
Bush Statement on Bolton Leaving
"Below is the text of a statement from President Bush regarding John Bolton's resignation..."

From CBS News:
White House Contests Claim That Bolton 'Resigned'
"The headlines this morning announced that United Nations Ambassador John Bolton would be resigning from his position. CBSNews.com initially headlined its story 'U.N. Ambassador John Bolton Resigns.' The Washington Post went with 'Bush Accepts Bolton's U.N. Resignation.' MSNBC had this: 'John Bolton resigns as ambassador to U.N.' And CNN.com noted that 'U.N. ambassador Josh Bolton will resign within weeks after temporary term ends.'

"The White House quickly took issue with that characterization. 'It is not a resignation,' Deputy Press Secretary Dana Perino told CBS News. She noted that Bolton would be leaving his post when his recess appointment expired at the end of the 109th Congress. After an email with Perino's comment was passed around CBS News, the headline on the Bolton story was changed to 'U.N. Ambassador John Bolton To Step Down.'

"Why is Perino stressing that the word 'resign' isn't right? Because, as we saw with the 'civil war' debate, there is a widespread belief that the words used to describe a particular situation can have an impact on public opinion. To 'resign,' in the minds of many, is to leave a post early, often for having done something wrong...
...It's no surprise, then, that Bush did not use the 'r' word in his statement today on Bolton."

OK, got it. He didn't actually resign...

...er, this just in from the White House web site:
President Bush Accepts Ambassador John Bolton's Resignation as U.S. Representative to the United Nations

?? Um, hello? Anyone home at the Press Secretary's office??

My word, these people aren't even competent enough to manage their own spin.

=============================================

Now let's move on to what El Presidente had to say about Ragin' John's confirmation process:

"I am deeply disappointed that a handful of United States Senators prevented Ambassador Bolton from receiving the up or down vote he deserved in the Senate. They chose to obstruct his confirmation, even though he enjoys majority support in the Senate, and even though their tactics will disrupt our diplomatic work at a sensitive and important time. This stubborn obstructionism ill serves our country, and discourages men and women of talent from serving their Nation."

Oh, puh-lease. "A handful of... Senators" may have blocked his confirmation last time, but if Ragin' John "enjoys majority support in the Senate", George, why isn't he going before the Senate for confirmation this time around? Because you know, and he knows, and everyone knows that your proclaimed "majority support" won't exist in January; it didn't really exist a year ago, either.

Also, Mr. President, I think your press office should consider terminology other than "stubborn obstructionism" as we close in on the release of the Iraq Study Group's report... or that White House of yours will become a glass house.

Limp Baugh Disease

2006-10-29T11:05:00.000-05:00

Anyone recently paying attention to U.S. politics is aware of the Michael J. Fox vs. Rush Limbaugh flap. Like anyone with at least half a brain (a descriptive which apparently excludes most of Rush's faithful "Dittoheads"), I find Limbaugh a useless, pathetic, loathsome, wasted old heap of methane-exhausting pig waste, nothing more than a typical junkie incapable of functioning without meds to lift either his spirits or whatever passes for his schlong (presuming it can be found under the evidence of the last thousand bovine feasts he's consumed). He's just another (albeit unbearably loud and boorish) member of the Right-Wing Freak Show now playing nightly in our formerly great country, the same carnival funhouse that's brought you such acts as "Virginia Rick" Santorum's Man-On-Dog Show, Reverend Ashcroft's No Boob Left Uncovered House of Oil-Anointed Wacks, Doctor Flip-Flop Frist's Amazing Video Diagnosis Theater, Abraham Jackoff's Magic Money Tree and Marianas Island Massage Parlor, Darth Cheney's Electroshock Heart Chamber and Shotgun Range (extra prizes when you hit the Lurking Lawyer!), Rhetorical Rummy's Don't Call It Torture Waterboard Ride ("Is it fun? You bet!"), "Tranny Annie" C's Laughing Widows Burlesque and other grotesque attractions.

But I digress. Back to Fox vs. Pig: the most enjoyable tidbit of media reportáge I've seen on this saga comes from Linwood Barclay of the Toronto Star. Without further ado, let's "bring it on"...

Everyone knows Rush Limbaugh's just faking
Oct. 27, 2006

Now, I know this may offend those who suffer from this particular condition, and these individuals might not like it much when I suggest that a certain person with this diagnosis is exaggerating his symptoms, but I have to say, I think Rush Limbaugh is just pretending to be a dick.

While the right-wing radio host does exhibit most, if not all, of the common characteristics of this behaviour, it's so rare for all of them to coalesce at a single moment that one can only conclude Limbaugh's most recent performances are nothing short of fraudulent.

I'm no expert diagnostician, but nobody could be this big a one. Limbaugh must be acting.

Consider what Rush Limbaugh said this week about Michael J. Fox.

The Canadian-born actor did an ad for a U.S. politician who supports stem cell research, a controversial field that many believe could lead to a cure for Parkinson's disease. Fox suffers from Parkinson's, and anyone who has seen him in television interviews in the last few years is aware of his symptoms. Awkward, involuntary movements, occasional speech difficulty, tremors.

Those symptoms are much in evidence in the ad.

Said Limbaugh on his radio show: "He is exaggerating the effects of the disease. He's moving all around and shaking and it's clearly an act." Limbaugh also suggested Fox probably went off his medication before filming the ad.

It's difficult to imagine that anyone could say anything so amazingly uninformed, so incredibly moronic, and actually believe it. That's why I'm so convinced Limbaugh was acting.

At this point, it's probably useful to review the most common symptoms exhibited by a person with EDS (extreme dick syndrome) for those not up to speed on them:

1. Exhibits a level of arrogance rooted in a feeling of superiority, without having any attributes to feel superior about.

2. Is capable of achieving levels of hypocrisy (railing against drug addicts when you are one, for example) previously thought unattainable.

3. Blow-hardedness.

4. Is indifferent to the woes and misfortunes of the disadvantaged.

5. Lies his ass off.

6. Goes to the "6 items or less" checkout with a dozen things.

7. Never lets ignorance of a subject keep him from shooting his mouth off about it.

8. Believes facts are overrated.

9. Chews with his mouth open.

10. Always finds some little thing the waitress did wrong to justify not leaving a tip.

Anyone who has four or more of these symptoms is very likely suffering from EDS. Sadly, at the moment there's no known cure for this condition. Researchers are still debating whether you're born with it, or it's a lifestyle choice. The real problem is, people with this condition don't make for a very sympathetic cause.

But in Limbaugh's case, it's probably a moot point, since he's just putting on a show.

My guess, in fact, is that Rush Limbaugh is a liberal plant. A Democratic plant. The Democrats, who appear to be on the verge of winning back both houses of Congress, don't want to leave anything to chance. What better way to turn things their way than for a prominent spokesperson for the right wing (nudge nudge, wink wink) to say something so astonishingly and despicably vile that it will make fair-minded Republicans vote Democrat, or at the very least, stay home.

I know these statements of mine are going to enrage genuine sufferers of EDS everywhere. "How dare he say that!" they'll say. "We know we're rude and insensitive and total jerks 24/7, and he's got a lot of nerve suggesting otherwise.

I will say this, however. If it can be determined by an independent panel of experts that Rush Limbaugh is, in fact, a dick, I will apologize, unreservedly.

-- Linwood Barclay, Toronto Star

Cracks in the Veneer

2006-10-09T20:27:00.000-04:00

The GOP strategy for handling The Scandal Of The Week (Foley and the Pageboys) is more of the same old rubbish: Blame The Democrats. "They must have known, and held onto the info until this close to the election..." - a charge they level without a shred of evidence. And they dredge up Dem sex scandals of the past, regardless of validity, relevance, or veracity - Studds, Frank, Clinton (of course - the GOP's AntiChrist); they've even dusted off the ancient Ted Kennedy saga.

Good for them! Rather than accept responsibility, their ever-so-adult response is to point fingers and sputter "but lookit what they did!!" Not a big surprise, that's what schoolyard bullies do. Amazingly, though, this time their tried and true technique is failing. Here's a little tidbit from Reuters, dateline today:

... a new CBS News/New York Times poll showed 79 percent of respondents thought Republican leaders were more concerned with politics than the well-being of the teenage congressional assistants...

This time, it seems that the populace has seen through the hype. They've realized that whatever scandals have occurred in the past, whether Republican or Democrat, are completely irrelevant in this matter; the real debate is, and should be, why THIS sexual predator - who happens to be a Republican - was, by his party's leadership, shielded from prosecution, protected from scrutiny, even allowed to continue associating with the minors in the Page program. It even seems possible that much of the public is aware of the irony - and hypocrisy - of the protected predator being the sponsor of legislation that he then violated.

Perhaps the general public finally is discovering that the current crop of Republicans in the government care about one thing, and one thing only: POWER. From the President on down through the ranks to the chief aides in Congress, there is scarcely any shred of caring for people - not for families, not for the troops and for veterans, not for the individual, not for children - not even for each other. Finally, the party that claims to uphold moral values has been proven to be the party of anything but.

Perhaps the general public may soon realize that this same party cares little for national security, either (there's certainly plenty of evidence as to their neglect on that score). It's a logical extension: if they don't care about you, why would they care enough to protect you? The unraveling of the shiny Republican cloak, tarnished by evidence of rank indifference to our children, may reveal a core of similar rank indifference to all the citizenry.

Scale Model

2006-10-05T20:51:00.000-04:00

George W. Bush: "I like to tell people when the final history is written on Iraq,
it will look like just a comma..."

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

As of this writing, there have been 2738 U.S. servicemen and
servicewomen killed in action in Iraq.

The Ones That Don't Matter

2006-10-05T17:21:00.000-04:00

For nearly a week now, the media's been All Foley Scandal, All The Time. We've heard about the smarmy instant messages sent to underage pages, the cybersex during a House session. We've heard about Hastert, Boehner, Reynolds, Blunt et al, pointing fingers at each other and playing Hot Responsibilitato. We've heard Hastert start to drool some conspiracy theory crap about Democrats, George Soros and so on (set your watches on how soon they drag Michael Moore's name into the mix).

Meanwhile, we don't hear much about the minors who Foley exploited - while being the "founder and co-chair of the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus." Not to worry, there's plenty of exploiting still to be done. Ask Matt Drudge: "...these kids are less innocent — these 16 and 17 year-old beasts...". Or ask Tom Reynolds; I'm sure there was no ulterior motive to populating the stage at an appearance with young kids, thus making it very uncomfortable for reporters to ask him questions about Foley. Or go back a little further, and ask Tom DeLay about underage garment workers / sex slaves in the Marianas Islands.

When it comes to all these power-drunk slimebags (and the ones named above are not the only ones, by any means), it's perfectly clear -- they don't give a crap for anyone but themselves. No one is too young, too old, too rich, too poor, too disadvantaged, too wounded to be the carpets on their stairs to the top.

Meanwhile, during this myopic focus on the Foley scandal, a little news item fell through the cracks. In a way, though, it's very much related to that disregard for fellow human beings, for fellow citizens, for fellow parents' kids:

For the three-day period from this Monday through Wednesday, October 2-4, nineteen U.S. soldiers were killed in Iraq. Nineteen.

That's the highest three-day total since the war started in 2003.

Oh. You didn't hear about this? Not likely, since the "Mainstream Media" was too busy wallowing in replicating rancid text messages and pondering the futures of dodging, backstabbing Congressmen. News about that Iraq-war-thing just isn't as sexy - literally - as Foley's exploits.

So let's take a brief time-out from the news of the day to reflect on that neglected news item. In spite of what the President and his colleagues say, it doesn't exactly bolster their claim that the Iraq situation's improving, that "we are winning". And, for nineteen sets of parents, siblings, extended families, networks of friends, and perhaps spouses and offspring of the fallen -- their loved ones join the ranks of The Ones That Don't Matter.

Sacrificing Democracy - Profiles in Cowardice

2006-10-01T23:38:00.000-04:00

September 28, 2006 will go down in history as the day that the U.S. government -- the one that supposedly represents us -- vivisected the Constitution they're sworn to uphold.

Nearly two hundred and fifteen years after the Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution, one bill, one single act of Congress, has seriously compromised the Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments; worse, the power to do so has been handed over to one person - El Presidente. Two hundred and thirty years after we declared ourselves independent of a tyrannical king, we've decided to place many of those powers we detested one man holding into the hands of one man.

"...Nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"? How pre-9/11. "...Nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"? Quaint, outdated. "...The accused shall enjoy the right ... to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation..."? Really, now, that's such an old precept (centuries, in fact). Box it up and bury it at Ground Zero.

We've taken major portions of our liberties -- those "freedoms" that we're told the terrorists hate -- and crushed them. Why on Earth would we do this?? Whatever could possess our elected officials to do this??

Fear.

Think about that for a moment. Think about the nature of terrorism...

In the days after September 11, 2001, our leaders spoke mightily of this powerful nation, of how we'd not let the terrorists destroy us. The collective national anger coalesced into a steely resolve that we'd never give in to this mysterious threat from abroad. Yet five years later, we have severely damaged the "freedoms" we're told the terrorists hate. And the reason we're willing to so do is nothing more than fear.

Fear of various mysterious bogeymen drove millions to vote to give an incompetent set of leaders and a willing-to-please set of Rubber-stamp Republican legislators longer terms in office. Fear of those bogeymen is the motivation behind the ridiculous claim that this government "needs" the tools of tyranny -- the power to lock up, for "as long as his lordship pleases", anyone suspected of being aligned with the terrorists.

The people who support this rubbish -- the Senators and Representatives who passed this heinous bill, the voters who did and will again select them in November, the media mouthpieces who second and approve their actions -- all are cowards. Not one of them has the intestinal fortitude that all the "Founding Fathers" -- of whom they so reverently, yet illegitimately speak -- displayed two-hundred-plus years ago. With their complicity, we've moved from "Give me liberty or give me death" to "Screw my liberty, give them death." Fear wins, liberty loses.

And the terrorists succeed.