I remember being at a conference, long ago, when a speaker was talking about the idea that two consistent but contradictory worldviews can, under certain circumstances, just be irreconcilable and have to coexist.What began as a troubling year for Bush, facing a new, energetic Democratic Congress, ended in triumph for the president as frustrated Democrats nursed their losses. Democrats failed in their No. 1 objective to stop the war in Iraq and bowed to Bush and his veto threats on tax policies, energy legislation, children's health insurance and general spending.This was not Lord Bush's victory, or at least, this was not a victory made by Lord Bush. This was a self-defeat for the Democratic "leadership". If there has ever been a bigger bunch of pussies in the hallowed halls of congress, it has not been during my lifetime*.
Bush tried to position himself as an advocate for working families by taking aim at his favorite target: the Democratic Congress.
"The Congress cannot take economic vitality for granted," Bush said.
"The most negative thing Congress can do in the face of economic uncertainty is to raise taxes on the American people," Bush said.
The audience of roughly 80 people listened to Bush with respectful silence. Yet a line that normally gets him applause — "I'll veto any tax increase" — drew no reaction at all.
Holy crap! No reaction to tax vetoes? Let's remember something very important here about the audience (hell, any audience) when Commander Chimp was speaking: they are a bunch of ringers. Dissent is not allowed in a Bush audience, which is generally stacked with members of the Still-Delusional Third (or whatever the number is these days). Even this audience failed to applaud his "no taxes" mantra, which may just be a clear indication that America is finally waking up to the enormous hole into which it has dug itself. Or maybe not. But you have to be pretty blind not to see at least some of our economic woes.
Two months ago, President Bush made a strong argument for updating a law which oversees the government's ability to engage in surveillance of Americans and non-citizens, which requires warrants from a secret court. He spoke of the importance to our nation's security to have a bill ready for him to sign, so as to not "limit" his administration's anti-terrorism activities.There's more, of course, but we all know how the script goes these days, dont we? There'll be lots of hand-wringing from "Democratic" leaders, a few "incendiary" comments from real liberals, some near accusations of treason from Republicans, some actual accusations of treason from a "conservative" pundit or two, and then, once more, King George will get his way, and America will slide a little bit farther down into that ditch we used to call fascism, but now have rebranded as Patriotism™.
"Congress and the President have no higher responsibility than protecting the American people from enemies who attacked our country," he said.
But underneath this urgency was a threat: Even if Congress sent him an updated Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) bill with the provisions he said were required to pursue wiretaps of individuals with a minimum of judicial oversight, Mr. Bush said he would veto it if it did not also include an extraneous provision: immunity to telecommunications companies from liability for their past participation in the administration's wiretaps.
DALLAS (Reuters Life!) - More Americans believe in a literal hell and the devil than Darwin's theory of evolution, according to a new Harris poll released on Thursday.If you've ever wondered what will cause America to loose our world leadership position (I mean, aside from neo-con foriegn policy), look no further than our increasingly stupid attitude about science. What is the world's future (economically, anyway) going to be based on, science or philosphy?
Read on...
Well, it's the end of the year, and apparently I made the correct choice, because I'm in, baby!
This comic is from the book Killed Cartoons: Casualties From The War On Free Expression, edited by David Wallis. It's a pretty interesting book, but I'll deal with it later, using a different cartoon. I just wanted to show this one now, since it seemed "appropriate" for the holidays.
Really, that sounds like some sort of government contract for Halliburton, but I'm serious. For $400, you can get yourself one of these snazzy laptops, and while that may seem pretty steep for a computer with no hard drive , bear in mind that what you are actually buying is two laptops. It's just that you only get to keep one. The other goes to a child somewhere in Africa, or Asia, or maybe South America. Someplace, at any rate, where having a computer would be a really big deal, even if it is bright green and incapable of playing Halo.Without a draft or a revitalized Reserve and National Guard that ties the military closer to civilian society, in the decades ahead American troops may become less soldiers, marines, sailors and airmen, and more purple warriors—in essence a guild in which the profession of combat-arms is passed down from father to son. It is striking how many troops I know whose parents and other relatives had also been in the service, especially among the units whose members face the highest level of personal risk. Contrast this with the fact that, at the 2006 Stanford commencement ceremony, Maj. General Lehnert, whose son was the lone graduating student from a military family, was struck by how many of the other parents had never even met a member of the military before he introduced himself.Now, one of the things that's always made me think that America was fairly immune to the kind of military coups that go down in other countries is that it seemed inconceivable that the military here would rebel against it's own people. However, if the above statement is accurate, how much longer before the disconnect between military personel and the general citizenry becomes so great that it becomes, not a case of turning on our own, but rather turning on those who "just dont understand"? David Brin has made the arguement (backed up here and there by articles within the MSN) that the military is becoming more evangelical, which further pushes them into an us-vs-them mentality.
Maybe I'm mis-remembering, since I was pretty young back then, but it seemed to me that once upon a time, when choosing a President, you got to chose which candidate you liked the best. Then came the Reagan years, and from then on it seemed like you just got to pick the candidate that you disliked the least. 
This is an old one from the Des Moines Register, cut out way back when I was a kid, Ford era. Still applies, though, just add "torture" and "domestic wiretapping".
The Auto-Wrench.
My blog is worth $9,597.18.
How much is your blog worth?
I love a good TV show, but they rarely love me. Frank's Place, Wonderfalls, and, after the fact, Dead Like Me and Firefly. Or maybe it's not me, maybe it's the networks.
Anyway, this is the first* part of the pilot of "Cupid", a briefly aired show which showcased the manic charms of Jeremy Piven. It's fun, it's clever, and it disappeared leaving a lot of loose ends. Watch them all (the episodes, not the loose ends) on YouTube.
Here's the story: Jeremy Piven is a man being held on a psych charge because he believes himself to be Cupid, the god of Love. He is released in to the care of a psychologist, Paula Marshall, who also happens to write a well-know Chicago advice column to the love-lorn and run a singles therapy group. How's that for a set up? Cupid claims that he wont be allowed back to Olympus until he unites 100 couple in "true love" without the aid of his magic darts, which he then proceeds to attempt (with varying success) for the course of the show.
Is he really Cupid? I dont know, and if it's contained in the first 9 minutes of the pilot, we may never know, because it's missing. I'm not going to say that it's a great show, but it is highly entertaining.
* part 2, actually, part 1 is here, but part 2 is better
Props to Bill, by the way, for pointing me to it.
Imagine this: Suppose, at the begining of the war, instead of invading, we had announced that we would pay every man, woman and child in Iraq $10,000 dollars (American); all they had to do was depose Saddam Hussein, and install a (nominally) democratic government. Can you imagine the outcry here in the U.S.? What?! Give away almost a quarter trillion dollars???
Hell, here in America we gave away millions to our own rich for a mere 600 pieces of silver, and that was more of a payday loan than anything.
Here's what I can imagine: Suppose, instead of destroying an oil-producing country (or two) in what will probably be a futile effort to ensure a steady supply of (environment destroying) oil and gasoline, we had built an infrastructure for recharging electric cars? Set up a sytem so that every restaurant and every park and every mall, hell, every parking lot had a recharge station. No, they wouldnt be free, you'd swipe a card through, or feed quarters or something like that, but you could do it everywhere.
Unfortunately, that hasnt happened. But hey! Dont dispair. One of the advantage of America having spent decades building crap cars is that there's plenty of rolling stock out there just waiting to be converted to electric. Sure it's a pain in the ass, but it'll be your gasoline avoiding, non-carbon emitting, I'm-greener-than-you-so-suck-it-neighbor pain in the ass.
