Saturday, June 12, 2004

Rush Limbaugh - Biggest Hypocrite, Asshole, Piece of Shit in the Whole World

The King of Bloggers Himself, Atrios, once again uses Limbaugh's own words to hoist the piece of shit on his own petard. Of course, the people who have been drinking his kool-aid for years won't blink at his third divorce just as they didn't mind the fact that it turns out he is a drug addict and a racist. Just like John Stuart Mill says "Not ALL conservatives are stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives". A corollary to that is: Not all conservatives are stupid, but anyone who give Rush Limbaugh a second thought is a complete fucking idiot. No wonder they call themselves dittoheads.

|

A Newly Discovered Poem by the Bard

(as reported in the Funny Times)


“Oh proud left foot, that ventures quick within
Then soon upon a backward journey lithe.
Anon, once more the gesture, then begin:
Command sinistral pedestal to writhe.
Commence thou then the fervid Hokey-Poke,
A mad gyration, hips in wanton swirl.
To spin! A wilde release from Heaven’s yoke.
Blessed dervish! Surely canst go, girl.
The Hoke, the Poke – o banish now thy doubt
Verily, I say, ‘tis what ist’s all about’.”

|

Friday, June 11, 2004

Coup d'Etat

OK, this is really out there in tin foil hat territory, but it is interesting reading.

Does anyone out there have some objective opinions on this site "From the Wilderness" and the guy who runs it Michael C. Ruppert?

|

Presidential Outlook

MyDD has the best current and up-to-date presidential race analysis I have seen so far including state-by-state projections. They are much more detailed than the national media beauty contest polls.

They also cover the House and Senate races. Check it out

President 2004 Analysis

Projections and trends calculated and compiled by Chris Bowers

Last Updated 6/10, 5:20 p.m. EDT
National Two-Party Vote Projection
Kerry 52.01
Bush 47.99
Status: Lean Kerry

Electoral Projection
Kerry Bush
Solid 200 142
Lean 101 95
Total 301 237
States changing hands from 2000: FL, NV, NH and WV

|

Wednesday, June 09, 2004

Convention Against Torture (CAT) for Dummies


Found this (via Call of Cthulhu). It's a pretty good resource for why the President has no authority what-so-ever to give permission to anyone in our government to engage in torture of any kind.

Here is an exerpt:

So the terms of the Convention Against Torture is the law of the land in the United States, right?

A: Yes it is, with the exception of the few reservations the US made.

Q: Aren't there exceptions when torture can be justified?

A: No, Article 2 Paragraph 2 states "No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture."

Q: Did the United States have a reservation regarding this section?

A: No.


snip


Q: So given his role as chief law enforcement officer and given the fact that the Convention Against Torture is the law of the land and given the fact that the Convention Against Torture provides for ""No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture," why would the president's legal advisers say "The president, despite domestic and international laws constraining the use of torture, has the authority as commander in chief to approve almost any physical or psychological actions during interrogation, up to and including torture?"

A: I cannot possibly explain why.

As Michael Froomkin said:

"And just imagine what those guys will do if they don’t have to worry about re-election."

|

More on Reagan

Bushwatch has a host of good articles about our 40th president.

|

A fair analyis of the Reagan Legacy


Krugman again shows he is one of the most honest and clearest political commentators out there today.

|

Monday, June 07, 2004

It's time to really get scared people, and I'm not kidding


This has been out on blogs all day, and finally the NY Times picked it up that the criminals in the Bush administration put together a legal brief that stated:

"President Bush was not bound by either an international treaty prohibiting torture or by a federal antitorture law because he had the authority as commander in chief to approve any technique needed to protect the nation's security.

...any executive branch officials, including those in the military, could be immune from domestic and international prohibitions against torture for a variety of reasons.


Josh Marshall points out the following from said memo:

To protect subordinates should they be charged with torture, the memo advised that Mr. Bush issue a "presidential directive or other writing" that could serve as evidence, since authority to set aside the laws is "inherent in the president."

Did ya get that - authority to set aside the laws is "inherent in the president".

So, your suspicions were correct. We do live in a dictatorship, except our dictator is the stupidest in history, with the possible exception of Idi Amin.

|

Sunday, June 06, 2004

Whatever Happened to the Democratic Party in Texas

In 1987 I had only been in Texas a short time. Texas had a Republican for Governor (Bill Clements), but Mark White had been the previous Governor, Bill Hobby was the Lt. Governor, Lloyd Bentsen was U.S Senator, Jim Hightower, for God's sake, was the Ag Commissioner, Jim Wright was the Speaker of the US House or Representatives. I am not sure (I could easily research this but am too lazy right now) but I think both legislative houses in Texas at this time were Democratic also.

Sometime in 1987 my wife and I went to a barbeque in Austin at Jim Hightower's ranch. Many of the big-time Texas Democrats were there. They had a real stump out in the yard for candidates to stand up and give speeches on. Jim Wright was there. I'm pretty sure Gary Mauro was there, Ann Richards, and Morgan Fairchild. Lot's of Austin bands played including Asleep at the Wheel (if I am not mixing events up). Anyway, we had a lot of fun - or at least I had a lot of fun. I don't think my wife had as much fun.

So Bubba, you ask, what is your point? My point here is that once the Democrats had a vibrant party and won lots of statewide races. They even got pseudo-socialist corporation haters like Hightower elected to statewide office. Now days it is hard to find people to stand up in public and say they are Democrats. What the hell happened?

|

D-Day and what it means

Why are Americans so insecure that we need constant adulation about helping defeat the Nazis in WWII? We want the French especially, but also the rest of Europe to forever acknowledge this sacrifice that we made save their butts.

I've got some news for you - we didn't do it to save the French, just like we are not in Iraq to bring FREEDOM to the Iraqis. Freeing the French from Hitler was merely a by product of our purpose over there. Our purpose for fighting the Nazis was born out of our own perceived self interest - as it should have been. If we were interested in saving Europe from the Nazis we would have been fighting over there by 1940. We only went into Europe to fight the Nazis because 1) Hitler declared war on us after we declared war on Japan; and 2) we were rightly scared shitless of what the world would be like if Hitler won.

However, we as a country like to pretend that we are altruistic and that all of the wars we fight are just and aimed at spreading freedom and high moral values throughout the world. Then we want those we "liberated" (e.g. the French) to praise our goodness thoughout eternity. We want - no we expect - that each generation of liberated people pass down to their children and grandchildren the story of how the US saved their butts from pure evil, and therefore they must be eternally grateful and forgive any present and future sins the US government might feel necessary to perpetrate.

|