Question and Answer Time

Chimpy McDumbass, January 11, 2000 - "Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?"

The Giggling Murderer, September 26, 2007 - "As yesterday's positive report card shows, childrens do learn when standards are high and results are measured."

On Bill O'Reilly

At first glance, this is just fun. We can enjoy watching a Fox News blowhole makes some idiotic and racially ridiculous remarks, and then tries to bluster his way out of his self-inflicted head shot.

If you look a little deeper, though, you may see something more disturbing.

Bill O'Reilly is a jerk, a blowhard, a sexual bully, hypocrite, and an arrogant self-promoter who never let the facts get in the way of one of his silly tantrums.

But is he a racist? Well, what he is not, I presume, is the simple, evil, ugly racist, the vile creature that can drag a man to death behind a pickup truck or burn crosses on a family's yard. That kind of racism is vulgar, simple--and obvious.

O'Reilly, though, demonstrates a much more subtle, and I fear pervasive form of racism. It is the prejudice of ignorance and the bigotry of low expectations. Admittedly, Bill is not the sharpest knife in the drawer and a rather repulsive person, but what is shocking is not what he said, but what he thought about it. He thought he was sharing some kind of enlightening observation with his audience, that black people are, what do you know, just like "us."

This is the racism that allows many to say, "I'm no bigot," but would shudder at having a black boss, neighbor or son-in-law. This is the racism that allows home buyers and real estate agents, without saying a word between them, to only visit houses in certain parts of town.

It isn't shocking that Bill O'Reilly said that Sylvia'a Restaurant and its patrons were like any other. What is shocking and sad is how many Americans would, like Bill, be surprised at such an obvious "revelation."

Solidarity

The student editor of the Colorado State University newspaper is taking some serious heat for a controversial headline he wrote recently. In the interest of supporting our fellow Americans in advocating for freedom of speech and in telling the truth, we here at The Thinker would like to join CSU in saying:

FUCK BUSH.

That is all.

The Wrath of Khangress

The Senate still can't get it's collective thumb out of it's ass about Iraq - the GOP killed James Webb's amendment to require that troops stay home at least as long as they're in the field (the RNC considers it disrespectful to the troops to do such a horrible thing) -- but they can make sure that no wacky leftists can say mean things about generals without feeling the lash from an angry bunch of do-nothing bastards. I can be glad that neither of my senators joined the moronity, but 77 senators did.

Here lies: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

B: December 15, 1791
D: September 20, 2007

A Sun-Times Dumbass

I usually read the Chicago Tribune letters, but this is a classic from The Bright One

Got O.J.?

White America can finally re-hang the banner "Mission Accomplished" on the deck of the aircraft carrier. The threat of terrorism exists no more. Our troops can finally come home, Osama bin Laden can come out of hiding and 9/11 can finally be put behind us. Why? Because they got O.J.

William L. Bowman, Loop

Yep, William. It is "white America." That damned "white America" has been after O.J. ever since he nearly beheaded two people while slaughtering them was railroaded by the white establishment.

Good work, Bill, and

Politics Makes Strange Stall-Fellows

State of Minnesota, Plaintiff v. Larry Edwin Craig, Defendant
MEMORANDUM OF LAW OF AMICI CURIAE

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION

AND AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES
UNION OF MINNESOTA IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT..

http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/freespeech/craig_v_minnesota_acluamicus.pdf

Ladies and Gentlemen - your Republican Party in action

I am as annoyed as anyone that the Democrats in Congress haven't been more effective at doing, well, anything, but there is the unfortunate reality that the GOP is still stuck in lockstep mode and would rather go down on the USS Chimptanic than pretend they're Americans. Specifically, after bitching for years anytime the Democrats utilized the filibuster (remember the whole discussion about the "nuclear option"?), they can't help themselves, and filibuster everything so that every vote essentially has a 60 vote requirement to pass. Of course, it's more civilized than that, so the Senate just has a cloture vote to end debate and proceed to a real vote, and unless the cloture vote gets 60, the bill or amendment stalls. Counting Bernie Sanders (I-VT), but not Joe Lieberman (Jackass-CT), the Dems have 50 votes, and that's unfortunately not enough.

Case in point: Arlen Specter, one of the more moderate Republicans, introduced an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act of 2008. The amendment would strike the staggeringly offensive portion of the Military Commissions Act, passed last year, which revoked the Great Writ of Habeus Corpus for those detained by the US. This really should be a no-brainer, except for those who think that anyone arrested is guilty by default and, as such, gives up all their human and civil rights. Hey - who thinks that way? Republicans!

In the cloture vote yesterday, the amendment got 56 votes, including 6 Republicans (but not Fascist Joe), so of course it failed. I'm sure the whiny brat who plays President would have had a temper tantrum, and might have even pulled out the old veto pad, so it might not have mattered (unless they could get 67 votes).

Sigh.

Of course, they're consistent, these Republicans who claim to love America but hate everything the country once stood for. The other vote yesterday was about granting congressional representation to the US citizens living in the District of Columbia (and giving one more seat to Utah). And it failed. No taxation without representation, indeed.

For once he told the truth...

It was refreshing, wasn't it, that for the first time, the president actually told the truth about Iraq?

He said "In the life of all free nations, there come moments that decide the direction of a country and reveal the character of its people. We are now at such a moment. "

How true. The moment here was to decide--should the U.S. resume its role as a decent and honorable member of the community of nations or continue its course as a rogue outlaw nation occupying and destroying sovereign states?

The answer? The latter of course, as he offers Iraq "an enduring relationship with America." An enduring relationship of occupation, war and death.

President Jabberwock

There was a book lying near Alice on the table, and while she sat watching the White King (for she was still a little anxious about him, and had the ink all ready to throw over him, in case he fainted again), she turned over the leaves, to find some part that she could read, ` -- for it's all in some language I don't know,' she said to herself.

It was like this.

"In the life of all free nations, there come moments that decide the direction of a country and reveal the character of its people. We are now at such a moment."

"In Iraq, an ally of the United States is fighting for its survival. Terrorists and extremists who are at war with us around the world are seeking to topple Iraq's government, dominate the region, and attack us here at home. If Iraq's young democracy can turn back these enemies, it will mean a more hopeful Middle East and a more secure America."

"The success of a free Iraq is critical to the security of the United States. A free Iraq will deny al Qaeda a safe haven. A free Iraq will counter the destructive ambitions of Iran. A free Iraq will marginalize extremists, unleash the talent of its people, and be an anchor of stability in the region. A free Iraq will set an example for people across the Middle East. A free Iraq will be our partner in the fight against terror -- and that will make us safer here at home."

She puzzled over this for some time, but at last a bright thought struck her. `Why, it's a Looking-glass book, of course! And if I hold it up to a glass, the words will all go the right way again!"

Half a century down..

Happy AARP Day to Me!

If I could banish one phrase..

Let's assume I could forever banish just one phrase from the lexicon of the Great Miscommunicator. What should it be? Hard work? Makin' progress? Freedom? Folks? September THE Eleventh? All good candidates, but no, the winner is:

"Young Democracy."

I cannot stand the sound of that obnoxious phrase. Iraq is not a "democracy." It never has been and never will be. The same holds for Afghanistan. Neither are even functional states, let alone democratic states. These governments lack the attributes of sovereignty and statehood. We do not see the emergence of relatively permanent and impersonal political institutions, and most certainly no fundamental transfer of loyalty from tribe, faction, religion or locality to the new state, and it will never happen.

Elections do not make a democracy. In Iraq, the so-called "elections" were nothing more than an ethnic census. Democracy is organic. It emerges not from staged elections but from the commitment and desire of a people with a respect for and an understanding of both the positive and negative aspects of "demos kratous."

These aren't young democracies. That is an old lie.

Is neo-conservative a synonym of sociopath?

I heard an interview with Norman Podhoretz, long-time neocon (and Rudy Giuliani's "foreign policy" advisor, be afraid, be very very afraid!) Norm was in on the Project for the New American Century, in the late 70s and the 80s, he was advocating an attack on the Soviet Union and was one of the loudest cheerleaders for the Iraq debacle. Now, he says it would be "unconscionable" NOT to bomb Iran.

What was remarkable was when the interviewer asked him about being wrong on attacking the USSR and on Iraq, and why should we believe him now, Norm calmly stated that he had been right all along. We wouldn't be in the mess we're in if we'd nuked the Russians, and Iraq is a glorious triumph.

This was a mental illness stew, sociopathy, delusions, paranoia, you name it, he had it.

Tinfoil Hat Time?

I may have to borrow this guy's hat



but is anyone else feeling a "bomb Iran" vibe? There is a lot of chatter in the foreign press, and the president's proxies are everywhere and all mentioning Iran. This will be a disaster that will be Iraq squared.

Thought for the day

From a true liberal:

The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.

Franklin D. Roosevelt

Oh What a Beautiful Morning!

I feel a spring in my step, the birds are making a happy sound, a fresh song drifts on the wind, and all seems right with the world today. Why you ask? Oh, isn't it obvious? It's

THE PETRAEUS REPORT!

Yes, Gen. Petraeus has spoken, he has show us the way, he has come down from the mountain to lead us to goodness and light.

You see, car bombs don't kill people, they stimulate demand in the new car market. And surely it is obvious to anyone that whether someone was killed in sectarian violence can be determined by the location of the bullet wound. It is also apparent that the president's surge-ilicious plan has calmed violence across the country rather than resulting in a de facto ethnic cleansing from mass population displacements.

I just bet that those of who who thought that Gen. Petraeus would sell his soul for a fourth star and serve up the president's tired old talking points in spreading the gospel of truth and glorious success in Iraq are feeling just a little bit silly this morning, aren't you?

Manifest Injustice?

So Tappy McWidestance is going through with trying to withdraw his guilty plea. Under the court rules of Minnesota, that can be done as necessary to avoid "manifest injustice." Manifest injustice? Please.

A step forward

Maybe he listened after all...

When I saw Senator Durbin this summer, I asked him about why he continued to vote to fund the war in Iraq. He gave me an answer about opposing the war, but wanting to support the troops in the field.

This morning, I see this from him:

The No. 2 Democrat in the U.S. Senate said on Friday he could no longer vote for funding the war in Iraq unless restrictions were attached that would begin winding down American involvement there.

"This Congress can't give President (George W.) Bush another blank check for Iraq," said Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin, who has always opposed the war but until now voted to fund it.

"I can't support an open-ended appropriation which allows this president to continue this failed policy," he said in a speech at the left-leaning Center for National Policy.

Durbin, from Illinois, said he and Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold of Wisconsin were working on limits that could be attached to the next war funding bill, such as limiting troops to conducting counterterrorism operations and training Iraqi security forces.

It's progress.

Tell us something we didn't know, Sid.

"On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam's inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again. Nor was the intelligence included in the National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002, which stated categorically that Iraq possessed WMD. No one in Congress was aware of the secret intelligence that Saddam had no WMD as the House of Representatives and the Senate voted, a week after the submission of the NIE, on the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq."

"Bush insisted it was simply what Saddam wanted him to think. "The president had no interest in the intelligence," said the CIA officer. The other officer said, "Bush didn't give a fuck about the intelligence. He had his mind made up." (link)

The world according to der Chimpenfuhrer

Leader of the free whirl breezes by

Misha Schubert - The Age (from Australia)
September 6, 2007

George Bush is a man who likes a short sentence. Which is not to say the President of the United States reduces ideas to bite-sized chunks. Or maybe it is.

Either way, during the course of his first 24 hours in Sydney, there were plenty of efficient exclamations. Like the exchange on the tarmac as Deputy Prime Minister Mark Vaile inquired how things were going in Iraq. "We're kicking ass," he declared. In a similarly thrifty oratory bent yesterday, he telegraphed his lunch order — "I'm a meat guy". Then he buttered up his host — "I admire your courage" — and insisted he was not playing a double game by hinting at moves to start cutting US troop numbers in Iraq: "Whatever you do, don't call me cute."

He also managed to remain gracious in the face of further niggling about the inconvenience to the people of inner Sydney. At a joint press conference with John Howard, Bush played comic to the PM's straight man. He grinned. He winked. He made eye contact with journalists as he argued that the Iraq war could be won. He joked around, and congratulated the PM on "your … like … grandfatherhood".

But there were a few faint hints of impatience. As Howard's opening statement dragged on, Bush pursed his lips and shifted his weight from foot to foot.

The rest of the day was a giddy social whirl. A bit of local rump at a lunchtime barbecue with the troops, and an hour of mountain biking in the North Shore suburb of St Ives. By nightfall, it was back onto a pleasure cruiser for a trip across the harbour to sign the visitors book at Admiralty House and dine with the Howards at Kirribilli House. Janette Howard greeted Bush at the door, thanking him for bringing rain.

And Bush owned the second killer line of the day, as he drew US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice into a photo to make up the foursome. "You can be my date," he purred, an invitation most straight men would kill to issue.

Posted without comment. For now.

Larry Craig--the gift that keeps on giving

I'm somewhat baffled by Tappy McWidestance's position here. I know that a Republican like him would rather be considered a child killer or a Klansman rather than being gay, but it seems like a very difficult road, both politically and legally.

From a political standpoint, his party sees him as toxic. They don't need him to "clear his name" to hold the seat, Idaho is as safely red on a statewide basis as any state in the union. he can't credibly speak on any of his pet "family" issues, and he is an obvious gift that keeps on giving to Senate democrats who, while unable to touch Idaho, can use his presence in the Senate as a bludgeon in swing state campaigns.

And legally? Judgment has been entered in the case. It is VERY difficult to withdraw a guilty plea after entry of judgment. That might happen in those cases where informed consent was absent (the drunken public defender who couldn't explain the consequences, the mentally challenged defendant who didn't understand the nature of his admission, but a college-educated United States senator? That is a tough sell.

His team is mumbling about "constitutional" questions. Talk about another tough sell. He was properly advised of his Miranda rights, and there was no unreasonable search or seizure involved. I doubt that tapping and hand waving is protected "speech" when it relates to the solicitation of lewd conduct. if so, then you could go back and unwind every solicitation conviction on record. I also don't see any entrapment defense, when at least according to the police report, Craig was the instigator.

Another consideration is that this probably wasn't the good senator's first foray into this seamy world. Now that people beyond the flyover states know his name, there are stories to be told--and money to be made.

The clincher, though, would be that any withdrawal of the guilty plea could result in a trial, a tawdry public spectacle of the kind that muni court has never seen before. In open court, all bets are off, and the evidence is in, evidence that went away with a plea to a lesser charge. THAT could be fun.