SUBJECT: And all along I thought things in Iraq were not going so well.

My response to a friend's email:

SUBJECT: And all along I thought things in Iraq were not going so well.

Now I see how wrong I was.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/


Subject: RE: And all along I thought things in Iraq were not going so well.
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 15:31:51 -0700
FROM:

Well, you see. If you had your head up your butt, you might think things were going well. But those who actually look at the real situation may disagree with this assessment.

The best part of being him, is that he’s never proclaimed what “success” is in Iraq , so that he can just walk around one day and say “we’ve been successful” and call it a win. Even if global terrorism continues to rise, Iraqi’s have no government, no police, no army, no electricity, no water, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi’s are dead, there is a full scale civil war taking place, 3000 Americans are dead, the middle east is more unstable now than it has been since the 70s, Iran is now unchecked, bin Laden is still alive, the Taliban controls 90% of Afghanistan and the war that was going to cost America a few million dollars is going to cost a TRILLION.

For all we know, that may have been his definition of success, and therefore we ARE indeed “kicking ass”.

Lobbyists and Puritans win...children lose

I’m sure this doesn’t surprise anyone, especially Bushies, who would fully support politics over science and lobbyists determining US policy even if it’s to the detriment of America ’s children. (the GOP’s concern for children only extends to election cycles)

The funny thing about this story (and it’s not really in the story, but we all know it’s there) is the GOP’s fear of a women’s naked breast is so overwhelming that they would prefer to ban breast feeding even though it’s better for children. Which is MOST ironic since this same faction that is so fearful of a breast are the same people who use “nature” to defend their hatred of gays. “It’s not natural” they will say about boys kissing, but as soon as a boob comes out, they turn into the Taliban to make sure no one sees a nipple. I’m pretty sure that Nestlé’s formula wasn’t mentioned in the Bible…

I wonder why

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/31/craig.arrest/index.html

is the GOP abandoning him because of: ?
A) He might be gay
B) He appears to have solicited sex in a public restroom
C) He pleaded guilty to a charge he is innocent of without advice from a lawyer (which makes him dumb)

Just wondering. What is the Bushie take on this?

Some more of that GOP morality...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20467347/



I love how the Good Senator, who is a member of the most august body in our land, wasn’t smart enough not to plead guilty even though he was innocent. I think if you’re that dumb you shouldn’t be in the Senate.

Unbelievable.

Strange what the Bushie's new definition of "Victory" is

My Bushie friend saw a report today that claimed Baghdad was safer than it was a few months ago, you would have that it was V-J day from his cheering. So, I posed this to him....he of course ignored me pointing out his obvious low standard for victory here in 2007.

I said:

If I said to you 4 years ago that "In the summer of 2007, nearly 4000
America soldiers will be dead, Iraq as a whole will be near anarchy, there will
be NO oil flowing, no consistent electricity and water in Baghdad, we will spend
nearly a TRILLION dollars and there is no functioning government in Iraq AND the
US is willing to allow ANY form of government as long as Bush can say it’s
“secure enough”, global terrorism will be increasing, bin Laden will still
alive, the Taliban will control most of Afghanistan” You would have said
that was absurd and that we were idiots.

Now, you call that
victory.

Well this clear's up Rudy's contention...he was by no stretch at ground zero very much AT ALL

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/08/18/rudy_yankees/

Obviously, Rudy is running totally on 9/11, which is sickening to me. Because of most of the GOP he's probably the most likely to get any of my support.

"Conspiracy of Fools"

Currently reading "Conspiracy of Fools"

It sat on my shelf for a long time and I don't even remember buying it, but at over 700 pages it seemed too daunting. Anyway, I started it on my trip to Texas and it is really hard to put down. I think it's the somewhat annoying way the author tells the story, with various anecdotes of things that are happening concurrently. So, each little snippet may only be a half a page, maybe a whole page. Again, while annoying, its hard to stop reading it.

I am surprised to find myself less harsh of Kenny Lay (but some people have said the author is too easy on Lay). Although he was VERY guilty of failing in his fiduciary duty to stockholders (including employees) for being clueless, I'm much more convinced of the guilt of Fastow and Skilling, especially Fastow. That guy was sleezy. As for Arthur Anderson, I used to wonder if they took too much flack, but they weren't just negligent, they were co-conspirators in much of Fastow's schemes.

There were many people who tried to raise flags, but when the CFO is the criminal and has all the power, it's hard to stand up to that. But you have to wonder why NO ONE had the balls to do anything more substantial (maybe it was the rising stock price??)

Does God Love America best?

I recieved this email today showing an American flag with what appears to be a cross in it created by sunlight. It stuck me a bit offensive that this email was saying that God Loves America more than others. Here is my response



Sorry, I had to speak up. This message seems to say that "God Loves America best". Which seems like a short-sighted and possibly a very unChristian thing to say.

Actually, this photo is quite believable and to be expected (see this article on the subject http://www.snopes.com/photos/patriotic/azflag.asp)

1- the cross is a symbol that was created by man to represent Christianity, although some Faiths don't celebrate the cross as much as others. (Not to mention the debate that has been going on in Christianity for 2000 years on what the 10 COmmandments say in regard to "Graven Images". (For an interesting look at just how much man has played a hand in the "Divine Word" read the 2nd commandment as it appears in various versions of the Bible, say King James vs. New Revised...). My point, would God show his existence to the world by tricks of fabric and sunlight? Would God show this in the form of a Cross (a man-made device)?

2- The more offensive part of this email, at least for Christians, should be...that God loves America best. Why would God show a particular allegiance to one country over another. Are Americans better than Canadians? Are Americans better than Italians? Are Americans better by virtue of the location of their birth??? These country affiliations are, again, man-made political boundaries. it would seem that God, having existed for all time, wouldn't have "a favorite team", especially one that has only been around 225 years. For an interesting read on God and Politics, here's a quote from the book of John:

Likewise, the Christian does not become involved in the affairs of earthly governments but represents the heavenly kingdom to them. He is in this world but is not of this world (John 17:16).



-----Original Message-----
From:
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 10:59 PM
To:
Subject: FW: FW: UNBELIEVABLE PHOTO!!!!!!!]

This is a beautiful photo of a giant American flag in Arizona The photo is authentic, UN-Touched and was taken on regular Kodak 35mm film. The person who took the picture couldn't believe the image created by the suns rays.
Nice of them to share it with the world!
Read what is says under the picture....

For those that prefer to think that God is not watching over us...go ahead and delete this.
For the rest of us...pass this on.

More stuff that must stop

I've spoke of my disgust for people who can't say the word "Sandwich" without putting an "M" in the middle. (SAMWICH) but I've yet to discuss these two other gems.

1- STOP USING THE WORD "SURREAL" TO DESCRIBE EVERY GODDAMN LITTLE THING THAT IS A BIT STRANGE.
Every time some 3rd tier celebrity gets interviewed every thing in their life is "So Surreal". No! It's NOT!. Just b/c the time you walked into the Burger King and Lindsey Lohan was there doesn't make it "Surreal".
http://www.britannica.com/ebc/article-9379935

"Surreal" - (Mid-20th century. Back-formation surrealism])>from Merriam Websterke



2 - WORLDWIDE BAN ON BANDS WITH NUMBERS IN THEIR NAMES.
The world has had enough. Using a number in your name is just lazy and it's beyond STUPID now. Blink 183, Maroon 5, Three Doors Down, Sum41, and on and on and on. STOP it. Get a real name like "Brian Jonestown Massacre" or hell, even "the Monkees".

The Worst Nightmare

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/20/bush.colonoscopy/

CHeney to run the world for 150 minutes...do you know how much damage a man that evil can do? WOW.

Comedy at the Texas Capital or "That's right, you're not from Texas"

Just returned from Austin and visiting my brother, but there was a little something that happened on our tour of the Capital Building that I must share with you.

We were walking around the building just taking in the history and when we went into the Senate Chamber we came upon a tour group. The guy leading the tour looked very Texas (whatever that means) , about mid 40s, dressed in a suit and quite authoritative on the building and Texas history. So, he going through his stuff about the Senate and then he points out the portraits on the wall. Sam Houston, Stephen F Austin, etc. various state senators. And he points out the HUGE painting of LBJ on the wall. Explains that LBJ is there b/c he was the only President who TRULY called Texas his home and he goes on and on. Finally, he says "you know there are 4 Presidents with ties to Texas, do you know who they are?" Someone says "LBJ and the Bushes". The guy says, "right...of course LBJ, who always called Texas home and was very proud of Texas. And the Bushes, but they were born and raised and educated in New England, not in Texas. They just have had homes here, that's why their portraits are not hung in this room".

DAMNNNNNNN

It was quite obvious that this guy, this expert on Texas and proud Texan was pointing out the fallacy the Bushes are "Texans". And when the guy leading the tour of the building where the former governor's portrait hangs points that out, it was PURE COMEDY. Delicious. I don't think it was a comment on either of their political legacies, it was just that they are not considered Texans by Texans.

btw- turns out Dwight Eisenhower was born in Texas, but moved to Kansas when he was there, so he ain't no Texan either.

It's NOTHING like Clinton

While defending the President's latest lame and pathetic move, his buddies have trotted out the "Well, Clinton did it" excuse...which KILLS me b/c when Bush ran he was going to "repair the damage done to the Office by Clinton", but now he continually defends his actions by saying Clinton did the same thing.

That would just be funny if it weren't so incredibly irrelevant. Clinton's pardon of Rich was for Rich's crimes. the Libby affair still stems from the knowning outing of a secret agent of the CIA, I still say that's treason. and the fact that it came from the Executive branch should be grounds for everyone one of them going to prison, but I'll let that go. Libby committed a crime to further the political aims of the President and the President is letting him get away with it. All this bullshit about damage to reputation (how hard to you think it will be for Libby to get a job with some GOP thinktank????), the bullshit about the fine (he has over $5 million dollars in his defense fund)...so Libby suffers very little consequence. All for doing the President's bidding (well, actually Cheney's we all know ). It's not a stretch to see this all being part of the plan. Libby taking the fall with the pre-arranged deal that he'd NEVER do time.

I also understand that there is a good reason NOT to pardon him completely. from what I've heard Libby would lose his ability to use the 5th amendment b/c he could not incriminiate himself, or more importantly he COULD incriminate Bush, Cheney, et al. Disgusting.

ANd just for some context. EVeryone trots out Clinton's record on pardons...it's nearly IDENTICAL to Reagan's.

Once again, Bush proves he's the worst President we've ever had.

Thanks CNN:
Pardons and Commutations
George W. Bush (2001 - ) Pardons -- 13 Commutations -- 4
Bill Clinton (1993-2001) Pardons -- 396 Commutations -- 61
George H.W. Bush (1989-1993) Pardons -- 74 Commutations: 3
Ronald Reagan (1981-1989) Pardons -- 393 Commutations -- 13
Jimmy Carter (1977-1981) Pardons -- 534 Commutations -- 29
Gerald Ford (1974-1977) Pardons -- 382 Commutations -- 22
Richard Nixon (1969-1974) Pardons -- 863 Commutations -- 60
Lyndon Johnson (1963-1969) Pardons -- 960 Commutations -- 226
John F. Kennedy (1961-1963) Pardons -- 472 Commutations -- 100
Dwight Eisenhower (1953-1961) Pardons -- 1,110 Commutations -- 47
Harry Truman (1945-1953) Pardons -- 1,913 Commutations -- 118

New White Stripes...best Zeppelin album since Physical Graffiti

Bought the new White Stripes CD yesterday. I like it well enough. Some songs I really like others...eh...

It does appear that Jack listened to A LOT of Zeppelin before laying this one down. If you've heard Icky Thump you know of what I speak. There are other songs that are very derivative of Zeppelin, even a song with Middle Eastern sounds. Much of the rest is straight up rock and roll.

I would say that this the best Zeppelin CD since Physical Graffiti, even better than Wolfmother's attempt at a Zeppelin CD, but they lose points for sounding a lot like AC/DC too.

It's probably the best rock album in a long time, it's just that Jack has a higher standard to live up to, so at this point after 2 listens, I'd give it a B+.

Why atheists are "better" people

I've been tossing this idea around in my head for a while, so here goes.







Virtue, it is said, is doing the right thing when NO ONE is looking.



Yet, many so-called "Christians" act in a decent way because they believe they will be rewarded for that behavior by entrance into Heaven. Isn't that the same as seeking a reward for your good behavior?



While atheists, the ones I know, are some of the most "christian" in their actions. They do unto others, etc. They live according to the Golden Rule. Not because they seek a reward in the afterlife, but because it's just the right thing to do. Doing the right thing for the sake of doing the right thing, not for gain.



Even if Pascal was correct with his wager, and you behave according to that thinking, atheists are still more "pure" in their actions.



Ironically, enough this occurred to me as I was putting a shopping cart back into the rack of carts at the entrance to a grocery store. I ALWAYS do that, yet as I walked back through the lot I saw dozens of carts left in the middle of the parking lot by those either too lazy or too selfish to walk 20 feet to put them into one of those cart corrals. Carts that will have to be rounded up by an employee, carts that will block parking spots, or dent other cars. Why do people feel so important that they are above fulfilling this little part of the Social Contract with their neighbors? Surely, this is a small, but telling, behavior amongst our fellow citizens.



I understand that people turn to God for all sorts of reasons. To fill emptiness in their lives. For comfort. To remove accountability for their own failures, to have someone to "blame" or to credit. But, I have such a difficult time believing that one religion has it "right". For these Bible thumpers to assume that by the chance of birth (being born into a Christian country as opposed to India or Japan) that they KNOW they have the correct understanding and version of God.



With "religion" existing in countless forms among all people and through time, whether is it Aboriginal Creation myths, Greek mythology, Islam, Jainism or Christianity. Through their existence humans have sought to seek understanding of what they do not know, "what causes thunder?". "How was the earth formed?" I have always found it fascinating that old religions are now called "Mythology" while current religion is gospel, but it seeks the answers to the same questions.

While a Christian finds it laughable that earth was created on the back of a tortoise, it's inconceivable that God did not create earth in 6 days. Genesis is just as likely to be right as the creation stories of Inuits or Buddhists, no? How arrogant is it for anyone to believe that they have the RIGHT version of God? Again, often just by the luck of the location of their birth or who their parents are.



Some people take the Bible as the literal word of God, but it wasn't written by God. it was written by men. and other men EDITED the book, left out whole sections. The people that are most upsetting are the ones who like to quote the Old Testament for justifying their hatreds while they completely ignore the teachings of Christ in the New Testament. Christ (at least he should have for Christians) changed the game. the Bible went from "eye for an eye" to "turn the other cheek", but the most zealous "Christians" are the ones least likely to follow the words of Christ.

That's what I call ironic.

This pisses me off

Before I start...let's be clear. I am saddened that they have lost three children and I hope the other three live.

"We continue to trust in the Lord and are hopeful for a good outcome for
Cadence, Lucia and Sylas," the statement said.

So, tragically, the third of six sextuplets has passed in MN, but the family is going to "continue to trust in the lord". Yet they didn't trust the lord enough to have him help them have a child. No, they turned to science and a science that created 6 babies. Something that God very rarely does on his own. So now that the family has lost half of their children they are going to put it on God?

You wonder why the parents decided to keep all 6 embroyos. I'm sure it was some religous conviction that wouldn't allow them to keep only a more reasonable number of embroyos and carry them to term with a MUCH greater chance of survival and success for the children.

I find it astounding that they will speak of this being in the Lord's hands when they used science to create a litter of children all of whom have a very slim chance of thriving. The human body was not meant to have litters, but science has enabled that. If God has anything to do with conception of every human being, why mess with his process if you're only going to turn to God as your children die.

One of two guys I can get behind

As a Libertarian, Ron Paul is an obvious choice. He says a lot of the things I believe. He'll never get elected or even taken seriously, but hopefully his principled ideas of limited government will get attention by both parties after 8 years of the most invasive, unprincipled, corrupt administration in 100 years, if not ever.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

I also like Richardson on the other side. If only for his fantastic resume. I don't know if there has been a person with such a varied and complete resume with the skills to run the country (Maybe John Quincy Adams?)

http://www.richardsonforpresident.com/

He's been a Congressman, a Cabinet Secretary, UN Ambassador and Governor (or a border state) and if Immigration is going to be a big issue, a guy who grew up in Mexico City might be in the best position to understand the issue.

Re: Sopranos...shut up

I'm growing weary of all this belly-aching about the Soprano's finale. before I saw the last episode I had low expectations, mostly due to David Chase's own arrogant comments. Basically, he said (I paraphrase) "don't expect tidy endings, b/c life isn't full of tidy endings". So, I expected a finale with NO answers to anything and Chase sitting smugly at his home feeling all full of himself. But my immediate reaction to his comments leading up to the finale are this: "hey Dave, it's a TV show. it's not "life" or "real"". So, I expected some answers and the one that I decided I needed was "who lives: Tony or Phil?"...I got that answer ...repeatedly thru a combo of gun shots and SUV tires.

The last scene in the finale is genius. You've seen Tony making peace with his life both family life and "work" life. His looking off into the distance while raking the leaves showed that contentment. As they sit at the diner later, the family is all together. AJ has his shit together (although the fact that he got "all better" after watching his car go up in flames was one of the most unreal and lame course corrections in the history of the show). Meadow, while a poor parker has her shit together and TOny understands why she wants to go into law ...and maybe even defend Daddy once she passes the bar.

Carmela is fine. She has made her peace with the life she leads. She's had her chances to leave, and surely she has enough reasons, but she likes the nice cars, espresso makers and expensive watches that this life affords, she's going nowhere.

The guy in the Member's Only jacket going to the bathroom bring fantastic tension for anyone who knows The Godfather movies. It's an obvious shout out and there to make you think what could happen.

So, as the screen goes black does Tony look up to see Meadow walk in? Does he see a gun held at him by the guy coming out of the bathroom? Do those kids who walked in right before Meadow create some issue. It's all there, I was literally (and I NEVER use that term incorrectly) on the edge of recliner.

At first, I felt a little ripped off, but after an hour or so, I realized the genius of the ending. It was nearly the exact opposite of how "Six Feet Under" ended with it's litany of what happened to everyone over the next few decades by describing how they died. Chase went exactly the other way.

Your left thinking what you want to believe. If Tony lives on, does Paulie become his number two? Paulie who seemed to be the person most likely to be killed next for about the past 3 years, with his dealings with New York, the tension b/t he and Chris and basically his going bat-shit over the past year. Is this what Tony is left with? How can he hold on to power with such a young crew and no one left but Paul from the old school.

If he is dead, what happens to AJ? Remember how he wanted to avenge his father's shooting by going after Uncle Jun? AJ would surely end up in the family business, if only to avenge his father's death, but AJ too likes the comforts that life brings (remember his complete and instantaneous 180 about caring too much for the pain in the world to loving the new BMW dad bought????).

So many other things to consider, so many what ifs. A brilliant end, to a brilliant series. And a fitting end. It did not cheat fans, it gave enough answers, not all, but enough. Kudos Mr. Chase.

Bushie admits most of this is true

My Bushie friend sent this to me under the sub: line "I'm afraid a lot of this is true"

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/

I responded with:

I agree, especially b/c the Bush tactic of insulting, questioning the intelligence and patriotism of anyone who disagrees with them goes way back. Now that he’s insulting the GOP, you guys are noticing that this tactic is childish and offensive. Bush has NEVER debated or encouraged discussion of his positions. His position is you agree with me or you’re an idiot and unpatriotic. It’s been done by all the Bushies, but now that he’s doing it to you, Peggy and the other faithful are having an epiphany.

So much for being like the "Business World"

Republicans are always going on about how Government should be run like a business (Bush's INCREDIBLE deficits are ignored while they say this...SURPRISE)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18553053/

I can’t speak for your employers, but I’m pretty sure it’s the same way with regard to ethics. You can’t date a subordinate, and you sure as hell can’t bend the rules to get your significant other promotions out of cycle and raises beyond guidelines. That would get you fired at here in about 10 minutes. I’ve seen it happen twice.

Why shouldn’t the president of the World Bank be held to the same ethical standard as the majority of American businesspeople?

I know why, b/c the current administration is absent any sense of morality and ethics. Most of Washington is ethically challenged, but this WH is beyond compare especially since they ran on restoring integrity to the office.

Shameful

More shameful behavior (AND THE MEDIA IGNORES IT)

The behavior of a 2 bit dictator from the third world, not the President of the United States .

Just more of Bush bringing shame upon the Office. Just who is Dick Cheney meeting with? Will we find out the Abrahmoff has been there dozens of times?

It’s like they think we serve him, but he serves America …and you Bushies know damn well if this was a Democrat you’d be losing your shit right now.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/01/cheney.secrecy.ap/index.html