I need to stop and commemorate this anniversary. 20 years ago tonight the Berlin Wall started to crumble. Those of you, amongst my three or four (on a good night) readers who were young or not yet born may not realize what that means to those of us "of a certain age."
And I have to go back a ways. (It's what we old farts do when we tell a story, we go back a ways.) When I was in grade school thru high school, back in the fifties and early sixties, people all over the globe lived with the idea that there could conceivably be a nuclear war. As a grade schooler, I remember being marched down to the basement floor of the school with my class and told to lean against the wall with my arms over the back of my head. All I remember about it was that it was for "emergencies." What did I know of nuclear war? Of course this pathetic activity would not have saved any of us from incineration. But it gave adults something to do.
People built bomb shelters, stored up supplies. Most of us went on our way, saying to ourselves, "nah, it won't happen" and keeping our fingers crossed. 1961 was a particularly anxious year, with President Kennedy's ill-advised attempt to start an anti-Castro revolution in Cuba in April—I was with my high school choir in Niagra Falls singing for some kind of Welsh convention ( really, it's true) when we got the news, and we thought that things were going to be getting pretty hot pretty soon. Happily they didn't.
Then in August the East Germans built their miserable wall, because too many of their citizens were realizing the limitations of Communism and fleeing to the west. Many of us thought that that might be the start of something, but geopolitical realities prevented a war from starting, though that was no consolation to the East Germans.
Thereafter, several times a year, we would hear in the news of someone being shot trying to get over the wall, or captured trying to sneak through the gates. Occasionally there was a happy story of a successful escape, but there were many deaths. It seemed like the ugly thing would be there forever, and it was a symbol of the Iron Curtain itself, the wall of arms and might separating the West from the East.
Then Mr. Gorbachev became premier of the Soviets, and he knew the times were a'changing. He's a personal hero of mine. He started the process which led to the eventual dissolution of the Soviet empire. By 1989, there was so much pressure from its people for more freedom, the East German government was unraveling. Even they couldn't stomach shooting that many people. And Russia was no help—Gorbachev had already told the East Germans it was time to swim with the tide.
So one day in November of 1989, the ninth, it was announced that the government would allow East Germans to go wherever they pleased. The details were unclear, and the government certainly didn't mean to have happen what did happen, but suddenly thousands of East Berliners were at the gates demanding to be let thru for a stroll in the Western part of the city.
At the Bornholmer Strasse crossing, there were so many people making demands, and so little direction from the government, that someone in charge just said to himself, "Shit, we can't keep this up," and opened the gates. When guards at other crossing points got the news, they also opened their gates. Within days, pieces of the Berlin Wall became a coveted souvenir of a closed period of history.
And nobody got nuked.
I remember driving to work through Pittsfield early the next day, hearing the news with mouth agape, and tears streaming down my face. I knew this was the end for Communism in Eastern Europe. I knew that shortly Czechoslovakia, birthplace of my parents and home of my forebears, would follow suit. By the end of November, President Husák had resigned, and by the end of December Alexander Dubček, another personal hero, was speaker of the parliament and Vaclav Havel was President of Czechoslovakia.
Why this means so much to me:
My father left Slovakia (there was no Czechoslovakia at the time) to avoid serving in the Austro-Hungarian army and to seek his fortune in the United States. Later he went back and married my mother and brought her over too. So I have family back there. Back in the sixties, my mother's sister wanted to see her again so she came to see us. She came alone—her husband had to stay behind so they wouldn't defect together. And it's not like he was some big deal with a lot of state secrets. He was a train engineer for pete's sake. What, were they afraid he'd reveal the schedule of the Bratislava—Sered express to Western spies? But that's the way the paranoid mind works. He came the next year, without his wife. One of my cousins is a nuclear physicist, and her husband one too. They could not travel abroad together. One always had to stay behind under the thumb of the state so that the other would return.
By New Year's Day, 1990, that was all over.
I have never known that kind of oppression personally, but the experience runs in my family. We know from oppression. Somewhere back at the old homestead, there is a picture of my mother's father, in New York City. When I asked what he was doing there, my mother replied, "He had to leave the country for a while, the police were after him for agitating for Slovak independence from Hungary." When I hear people nattering on about Obama being a dictator, trying to start a "socialist" or "communist" state, I know they are idiots. They don't know anything about it. They never had the oppression, they have no clue.
Bad cess to them.
Me, I feel better knowing that being a pain in the ass runs in the family.
Good night all.
Be grateful for where you are and when you live.
Here are a couple of videos showing the fall of the Wall. Be prepared to shed tears.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_eCVhCGYwE&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MM2qq5J5A1s&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLS17dCidEI
Monday, November 9, 2009
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Election time again?
The biggest problem with not posting regularly is that so damn much happens it's hard to keep up. Like I said last time, I'm n0t as young as I used to be.
So the elections yesterday, Nov. 3, produced mixed results. In Maine the ballot to disallow gay marriages was voted in, as was an initiative to expand medical marijuana usage. This may be the first concrete proof of the idea that marijuana damages brain cells. Even if I get sick, I'll vacation somewhere else.
Republicans won govenorships in New Jersey and Virginia. From what I heard prior to the elections those were not big surprises. Some people think they were. The Republicans (what's left of them) are hoping these off-off year elections will give them momentum in 2010. Good luck with that.
The Democrats are saying it proves that voters want things to get done and point to their victory in New York's 23rd district and say it proves their agenda must move forward. Good luck with that. Senate majority leader Harry Reid is unsure that there will be a health care bill by the end of the year. One wonders what the use of a majority is if it takes so long to get done something most of the country wants done.
About the 23rd district elections—it was a satisfying pie in the face for conservatives who have taken the Republican party hostage. All the big stars and would be stars came there to kneel at the altar of right-wing wingnuttery (Gov. Pawlenty of Minn., where will you go for votes now?). Pawlenty, Sarah of the sexy boots and half-term governorship Palin, Dick Armey (a major mover behind the "tea-baggers") all came to support Doug Hoffman, a carpet-bagger who doesn't even live in the district, over the Republican party nominee, Ms. Scozzafava. In a remarkable and delightful turn of events, after withdrawing from the race because of the outside blitz for Mr. Hoffman, she threw her support to the Democrat, Mr. Owens, who finally won.
Upstaters know a pig in the poke when they see one. And kudos to Ms. Scozzafava for recognizing that the Republican Party she thought she was a part of, is essentially dead. I remember when the Republicans were a respectable party.
I'm showing my age, but back in the day there were people one could admire and respect, even if one wouldn't vote for them. Eisenhower, Margaret Chase Smith, Henry Cabot Lodge, Prescott Bush (grandpa of our George). There is probably a lot of rotational velocity happening in their graves right now.
Back to Maine. That was a real disappointment. It is taking so long for people to recognize that the 14th amendment applies to everyone, not just those with officially approved love partners. It's time for people like me, straight people who do recognize those rights, to get up and do more to get rid of these hypocritical laws which deny people the right to celebrate their love in a legal marriage. With the divorce rate and co-habitation without benefit of clergy rising so rapidly among heterosexuals in this country, you'd think conservatives would be glad anyone is willing to marry. We have to recognize that the money for these anti-gay campaigns only comes from a few sources, mostly very rich conservative businessmen who want to exercise their power without going thru the messy business of running for office themselves. And the Catholic Church, the church of "priests were always meant to be men and the sexual-abuse thing has nothing to do with that". I read that there were second offerings taken is some churches for funds to support the anti-gay marriage vote. Isn't that illegal?
Of course the Church has never shied away from telling it's parishioners that they would be liable for hell-fire if they didn't vote the Catholic way. I know, I used to be Catholic, and I remember.
I didn't mean this to be a diatribe against the church. One doesn't expect anything different from that quarter so why dwell on it? And I do recognize that the Church has very often done a lot of good in the world. But I am more concerned with the way certain individuals and other organizations flow money into a state where they don't even have any, or a large, presence, to influence the general vote, especially when they use lies and fear to get their way.
This is a subversion of democracy.
I live in Massachusetts, which has allowed same-sex marriage for some years now, and last time I looked out the window, the state was still there. Heterosexuals were still getting married as well as same-sex couples—the world has not ended for us.
It must be a real stone in the throat for conservatives to see that the state is not falling apart. Too bad.
I'm done.
So the elections yesterday, Nov. 3, produced mixed results. In Maine the ballot to disallow gay marriages was voted in, as was an initiative to expand medical marijuana usage. This may be the first concrete proof of the idea that marijuana damages brain cells. Even if I get sick, I'll vacation somewhere else.
Republicans won govenorships in New Jersey and Virginia. From what I heard prior to the elections those were not big surprises. Some people think they were. The Republicans (what's left of them) are hoping these off-off year elections will give them momentum in 2010. Good luck with that.
The Democrats are saying it proves that voters want things to get done and point to their victory in New York's 23rd district and say it proves their agenda must move forward. Good luck with that. Senate majority leader Harry Reid is unsure that there will be a health care bill by the end of the year. One wonders what the use of a majority is if it takes so long to get done something most of the country wants done.
About the 23rd district elections—it was a satisfying pie in the face for conservatives who have taken the Republican party hostage. All the big stars and would be stars came there to kneel at the altar of right-wing wingnuttery (Gov. Pawlenty of Minn., where will you go for votes now?). Pawlenty, Sarah of the sexy boots and half-term governorship Palin, Dick Armey (a major mover behind the "tea-baggers") all came to support Doug Hoffman, a carpet-bagger who doesn't even live in the district, over the Republican party nominee, Ms. Scozzafava. In a remarkable and delightful turn of events, after withdrawing from the race because of the outside blitz for Mr. Hoffman, she threw her support to the Democrat, Mr. Owens, who finally won.
Upstaters know a pig in the poke when they see one. And kudos to Ms. Scozzafava for recognizing that the Republican Party she thought she was a part of, is essentially dead. I remember when the Republicans were a respectable party.
I'm showing my age, but back in the day there were people one could admire and respect, even if one wouldn't vote for them. Eisenhower, Margaret Chase Smith, Henry Cabot Lodge, Prescott Bush (grandpa of our George). There is probably a lot of rotational velocity happening in their graves right now.
Back to Maine. That was a real disappointment. It is taking so long for people to recognize that the 14th amendment applies to everyone, not just those with officially approved love partners. It's time for people like me, straight people who do recognize those rights, to get up and do more to get rid of these hypocritical laws which deny people the right to celebrate their love in a legal marriage. With the divorce rate and co-habitation without benefit of clergy rising so rapidly among heterosexuals in this country, you'd think conservatives would be glad anyone is willing to marry. We have to recognize that the money for these anti-gay campaigns only comes from a few sources, mostly very rich conservative businessmen who want to exercise their power without going thru the messy business of running for office themselves. And the Catholic Church, the church of "priests were always meant to be men and the sexual-abuse thing has nothing to do with that". I read that there were second offerings taken is some churches for funds to support the anti-gay marriage vote. Isn't that illegal?
Of course the Church has never shied away from telling it's parishioners that they would be liable for hell-fire if they didn't vote the Catholic way. I know, I used to be Catholic, and I remember.
I didn't mean this to be a diatribe against the church. One doesn't expect anything different from that quarter so why dwell on it? And I do recognize that the Church has very often done a lot of good in the world. But I am more concerned with the way certain individuals and other organizations flow money into a state where they don't even have any, or a large, presence, to influence the general vote, especially when they use lies and fear to get their way.
This is a subversion of democracy.
I live in Massachusetts, which has allowed same-sex marriage for some years now, and last time I looked out the window, the state was still there. Heterosexuals were still getting married as well as same-sex couples—the world has not ended for us.
It must be a real stone in the throat for conservatives to see that the state is not falling apart. Too bad.
I'm done.
Friday, October 23, 2009
Drones
I gotta start posting more. There's too much to fulminate about. I get distracted, lose my notes, start rolling my eyes about something else—it's tough trying to keep up.
And I'm not as young as I used to be.
So there is an interesting article in this week's New Yorker about the use of drone planes against enemies in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Especially in Pakistan. There is a so-called "secret" war waged by the CIA (Rachel Maddow called this "the worst kept secret since Elton John came out") going on there, using drones to spot and then shoot missiles at Al-Queda leaders. Sounds good. Except in tribal areas of Pakistan, a country with which we are not at war (yet?) we have killed upwards of 700 (estimated—it's a no-news area) people to off about 2 dozen terrorist leaders. So is this good or not? Is it worth 700 "collateral" damage deaths to kill a few Al-Queda guys? Do you suppose that maybe those collateral deaths might NOT be raising two or five or more dedicated revenge seekers to fight against us?
There has been a problem in Afghanistan, where we actually are waging war, with innocent people getting picked off by drones, and it is causing trouble for our troops and the politicians we support there. And this is a place where we (mostly) know what is going on. Some wedding party gets wiped out by a misguided rocket, at least people have a chance to get queasy about it. Although a stronger reaction is hoped for.
Anyway, when the CIA operates, and this is without any oversight or accountability (the CIA is, after all, a secret organization) how do we know the operations are effective? And don't you think it's a little dangerous to have non-military personnel deciding who lives and dies in a country we aren't at war with?
Apparently Obama has approved more more drone attacks in 9 months than George Bush did in the last three years. I don't know who is giving this guy advice, but I think he might want to bring other voices into the conversation. The American halo is already tarnished by torture—shouldn't we be just a leetle bit more cautious about killing operations in a country we'd like to be on our side?
Back in the seventies the public and Congress were justifiably upset about CIA freedom to assassinate or abet assassination, so we passed laws. Now it's against the law for an agent to slit an Al-Queda leader's throat, but okay for an agent in Virginia or California or wherever to guide a drone (possibly by information provided by an informant who may have a personal stake in the removal of the intended victim) and shoot a Hell-fire Missile at a house which contains the target, his children, his in-laws, his friends, his baby-sitter, whomever.
I don't like killing, even if I sometimes feel mad enough to think I could, but I'd be more comfortable with the single throat-slitting, especially if it were vetted by a panel of military personnel (not spooks) as being useful. At least if there was a mistake only one person would suffer, not his extended family and friends.
It's a bitch to have to think about stuff like this. I don't even like what I said in the last paragraph. I don't like that it's true.
But most people don't think about this. And it's understandable. Hell, I don't think about it much of the time, being involved with problems of my own survival (and sometimes of my own making). There are drones in the air and there are drone voters on the ground. I would like for enough of us to be concerned enough of the time so that we can get out elected representatives to do their jobs and deal with this stuff properly. And they won't do it properly unless they know we are properly concerned.
And this brings me to drones in the Congress. Specifically Repubicans droning on with the party line of "no."
30 Republicans voted against a bill that would forbid the military from using contractors which forced their employees to sign agreements they wouldn't sue if raped or discriminated against. This was an Al Franken bill which was inspired, if that's the right word, by an incident in which Jamie Lee Jones was drugged and gang raped and imprisoned in a shipping container by Halliburton employees.
Why am I not surprised?
Actually, I am not so much surprised at the actions of Halliburton employees, they have the former VP Cheney on their side, as I am, still, by the feckless perfidy of the 30 Repubicans who voted against the Franken bill. These people really believe that corporations are more important than people. Halliburton is so important that it doesn't matter if one of their employees is raped. Repubicans voted against a Consumer Protection Agency. Is their thinking "why protect consumers?" Who do they think "consumers" are? Not the peoiple who voted them into office, certainly. Consumers are some sort of low-level life form which corporations are allowed to feed on like Morlocks fed on the Eloi in H.G. Wells' time travellor story.
Consistently Repubicans side with corporations against their own constituents. Of course, corporations give them more money. Corporations are better than the average American citizen because they have more money.
Hell, you all know this. Corporations are the embodiment of capitalism which is the bedrock of the American way. That's why you and I don't matter.
Okay, I've got more—haven't even got to the state of the art world yet.
Another night.
In the meantime, get a job and do something more useful than reading me.
And I'm not as young as I used to be.
So there is an interesting article in this week's New Yorker about the use of drone planes against enemies in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Especially in Pakistan. There is a so-called "secret" war waged by the CIA (Rachel Maddow called this "the worst kept secret since Elton John came out") going on there, using drones to spot and then shoot missiles at Al-Queda leaders. Sounds good. Except in tribal areas of Pakistan, a country with which we are not at war (yet?) we have killed upwards of 700 (estimated—it's a no-news area) people to off about 2 dozen terrorist leaders. So is this good or not? Is it worth 700 "collateral" damage deaths to kill a few Al-Queda guys? Do you suppose that maybe those collateral deaths might NOT be raising two or five or more dedicated revenge seekers to fight against us?
There has been a problem in Afghanistan, where we actually are waging war, with innocent people getting picked off by drones, and it is causing trouble for our troops and the politicians we support there. And this is a place where we (mostly) know what is going on. Some wedding party gets wiped out by a misguided rocket, at least people have a chance to get queasy about it. Although a stronger reaction is hoped for.
Anyway, when the CIA operates, and this is without any oversight or accountability (the CIA is, after all, a secret organization) how do we know the operations are effective? And don't you think it's a little dangerous to have non-military personnel deciding who lives and dies in a country we aren't at war with?
Apparently Obama has approved more more drone attacks in 9 months than George Bush did in the last three years. I don't know who is giving this guy advice, but I think he might want to bring other voices into the conversation. The American halo is already tarnished by torture—shouldn't we be just a leetle bit more cautious about killing operations in a country we'd like to be on our side?
Back in the seventies the public and Congress were justifiably upset about CIA freedom to assassinate or abet assassination, so we passed laws. Now it's against the law for an agent to slit an Al-Queda leader's throat, but okay for an agent in Virginia or California or wherever to guide a drone (possibly by information provided by an informant who may have a personal stake in the removal of the intended victim) and shoot a Hell-fire Missile at a house which contains the target, his children, his in-laws, his friends, his baby-sitter, whomever.
I don't like killing, even if I sometimes feel mad enough to think I could, but I'd be more comfortable with the single throat-slitting, especially if it were vetted by a panel of military personnel (not spooks) as being useful. At least if there was a mistake only one person would suffer, not his extended family and friends.
It's a bitch to have to think about stuff like this. I don't even like what I said in the last paragraph. I don't like that it's true.
But most people don't think about this. And it's understandable. Hell, I don't think about it much of the time, being involved with problems of my own survival (and sometimes of my own making). There are drones in the air and there are drone voters on the ground. I would like for enough of us to be concerned enough of the time so that we can get out elected representatives to do their jobs and deal with this stuff properly. And they won't do it properly unless they know we are properly concerned.
And this brings me to drones in the Congress. Specifically Repubicans droning on with the party line of "no."
30 Republicans voted against a bill that would forbid the military from using contractors which forced their employees to sign agreements they wouldn't sue if raped or discriminated against. This was an Al Franken bill which was inspired, if that's the right word, by an incident in which Jamie Lee Jones was drugged and gang raped and imprisoned in a shipping container by Halliburton employees.
Why am I not surprised?
Actually, I am not so much surprised at the actions of Halliburton employees, they have the former VP Cheney on their side, as I am, still, by the feckless perfidy of the 30 Repubicans who voted against the Franken bill. These people really believe that corporations are more important than people. Halliburton is so important that it doesn't matter if one of their employees is raped. Repubicans voted against a Consumer Protection Agency. Is their thinking "why protect consumers?" Who do they think "consumers" are? Not the peoiple who voted them into office, certainly. Consumers are some sort of low-level life form which corporations are allowed to feed on like Morlocks fed on the Eloi in H.G. Wells' time travellor story.
Consistently Repubicans side with corporations against their own constituents. Of course, corporations give them more money. Corporations are better than the average American citizen because they have more money.
Hell, you all know this. Corporations are the embodiment of capitalism which is the bedrock of the American way. That's why you and I don't matter.
Okay, I've got more—haven't even got to the state of the art world yet.
Another night.
In the meantime, get a job and do something more useful than reading me.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Didn't see THIS coming department
Obama gets the Nobel Prize for Peace.
Who'd a thunk?
I'm conflicted. I'm always happy to hear some American has gotten a Nobel prize for something—in spite of conservative opinion, I do have pride in this country—and I have to admit a certain swelling of the chest on hearing of Obama's award.
But I have to ask: the guy has been president for 9 months, tops. Sure he has the ability to inspire people (those who aren't being ruined by health and energy industry flacks and their lies) and he has lofty goals. But has he done anything yet?
This has got to be the mother of all expectations—how would you like a Nobel prize when you were just getting started? This is worse than the most prototypical Jewish mother. Or Slovak mother. Or—your nationality/religion here—mother.
The pressure is on, Obama—you better produce. I bet he woke up this morning and heard the news and said "Oh, shit."
It's not like the guy has enough on his plate.
He can live up to it if he starts fighting and gives up the "oh we can be bi-partisan and love each other" crap.
Some reporters have suggested that this was as much a slap at the Bush administration as an acknowledgment of the greatness of the Obama administration. It's easy to see it that way, especially when the Nobel committee mentions the way Obama has reached out to the rest of the world, and suggested that we (America) are ready to work with, as opposed to, well, opposing, the rest of the world. So he's given a prestigious award for being a good citizen.
I hope it inspires him to really get out there and kick butt for health care, repeal of "don't ask, don't tell", Palestinian/Israeli peace, add your particular obsession here.
Who'd a thunk?
I'm conflicted. I'm always happy to hear some American has gotten a Nobel prize for something—in spite of conservative opinion, I do have pride in this country—and I have to admit a certain swelling of the chest on hearing of Obama's award.
But I have to ask: the guy has been president for 9 months, tops. Sure he has the ability to inspire people (those who aren't being ruined by health and energy industry flacks and their lies) and he has lofty goals. But has he done anything yet?
This has got to be the mother of all expectations—how would you like a Nobel prize when you were just getting started? This is worse than the most prototypical Jewish mother. Or Slovak mother. Or—your nationality/religion here—mother.
The pressure is on, Obama—you better produce. I bet he woke up this morning and heard the news and said "Oh, shit."
It's not like the guy has enough on his plate.
He can live up to it if he starts fighting and gives up the "oh we can be bi-partisan and love each other" crap.
Some reporters have suggested that this was as much a slap at the Bush administration as an acknowledgment of the greatness of the Obama administration. It's easy to see it that way, especially when the Nobel committee mentions the way Obama has reached out to the rest of the world, and suggested that we (America) are ready to work with, as opposed to, well, opposing, the rest of the world. So he's given a prestigious award for being a good citizen.
I hope it inspires him to really get out there and kick butt for health care, repeal of "don't ask, don't tell", Palestinian/Israeli peace, add your particular obsession here.
Monday, October 5, 2009
The right, so desperate, cheers America losing the Olympics
So the Olympics are going to Rio, not Chicago.
Full disclosure, this decision doesn't affect me one way or the other. I understand that this is important to people that many regard it as an honor to host the Olympics, and I know that different people who would be affected had legitimate arguments for their positions either for or against. I myself wondered why Obama was going to Copenhagen to argue the case for Chicago. I have since learned that leaders from all the contesting cities also showed up, so it wasn't just a personal, quixotic gesture of Obama's. I stand corrected (well, I'm sitting down actually).
Now, the other leaders of losing countries went home and people in their countries were sad, but as far as I know, did not consider the Olympic Committee's rejection as a referendum on their leader's abilities.
Not here, however. The Wretched Right, the conservative wingnuts, so dismayed that their policies were roundly defeated in the last election, so upset at that liberal NEEGROW having won, are desperately clutching at the straw of Obama's failure to get the Olympics to Chicago. Finally, that sonovabitch failed at something, they exult. It doesn't matter to them that they are slapping Chicago in the face. They probably figure that Chicago deserves it, for giving us Obama. It doesn't matter to them that they are slapping America in the face. As long as they can get Obama while they do it…
It goes to show how desperate and pathetic Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and the rest of that unpatriotic, weasel crew—I'm sorry, I just maligned weasels—the rest of that unpatriotic, asshat crew are and how ineffectual. They would rather see America thrown in the dust than see Obama accomplish anything good for the country, even if it's just getting an expensive, though entertaining, sports spectacle to come here. And that's all they got. So sad.
I think I remember a time, way back in my youth, when conservatism actually stood for something, as opposed to just being against anything. But it was in the foggy distance of my youth (I did have one) so I might misremember.
Closer to home, John Ensign is getting into deeper water, his affair, his hiring of his mistress's son, his payoff to the mistress's family, are getting the legal attention they deserve. It'd be nice to see one of these philanderers and his vagabond pecker get thrown in the hoosegow. (Did I really just say that?)
I'm still waiting for both he and Mark Sanford to resign, they being so adamant that philanderers should resign, if the philanderers happened to be Bill Clinton.
Ya know, just writing about these guys makes me want to go wash my hands.
If you want to have fun, watch friday night's (Oct. 2) Rachel Maddow show and see her lose it over the Moment of Geek—when someone "gets shagged by a rare bird."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#33148607
That's it for now.
Full disclosure, this decision doesn't affect me one way or the other. I understand that this is important to people that many regard it as an honor to host the Olympics, and I know that different people who would be affected had legitimate arguments for their positions either for or against. I myself wondered why Obama was going to Copenhagen to argue the case for Chicago. I have since learned that leaders from all the contesting cities also showed up, so it wasn't just a personal, quixotic gesture of Obama's. I stand corrected (well, I'm sitting down actually).
Now, the other leaders of losing countries went home and people in their countries were sad, but as far as I know, did not consider the Olympic Committee's rejection as a referendum on their leader's abilities.
Not here, however. The Wretched Right, the conservative wingnuts, so dismayed that their policies were roundly defeated in the last election, so upset at that liberal NEEGROW having won, are desperately clutching at the straw of Obama's failure to get the Olympics to Chicago. Finally, that sonovabitch failed at something, they exult. It doesn't matter to them that they are slapping Chicago in the face. They probably figure that Chicago deserves it, for giving us Obama. It doesn't matter to them that they are slapping America in the face. As long as they can get Obama while they do it…
It goes to show how desperate and pathetic Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and the rest of that unpatriotic, weasel crew—I'm sorry, I just maligned weasels—the rest of that unpatriotic, asshat crew are and how ineffectual. They would rather see America thrown in the dust than see Obama accomplish anything good for the country, even if it's just getting an expensive, though entertaining, sports spectacle to come here. And that's all they got. So sad.
I think I remember a time, way back in my youth, when conservatism actually stood for something, as opposed to just being against anything. But it was in the foggy distance of my youth (I did have one) so I might misremember.
Closer to home, John Ensign is getting into deeper water, his affair, his hiring of his mistress's son, his payoff to the mistress's family, are getting the legal attention they deserve. It'd be nice to see one of these philanderers and his vagabond pecker get thrown in the hoosegow. (Did I really just say that?)
I'm still waiting for both he and Mark Sanford to resign, they being so adamant that philanderers should resign, if the philanderers happened to be Bill Clinton.
Ya know, just writing about these guys makes me want to go wash my hands.
If you want to have fun, watch friday night's (Oct. 2) Rachel Maddow show and see her lose it over the Moment of Geek—when someone "gets shagged by a rare bird."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#33148607
That's it for now.
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Public Option?
Well, the senate Finance Committee has shot down the public option, for now. Senator (Gr)assley of Iowa has shown his asshattery again. Not long ago I saw a video where a woman told him that the Lewin Group, from which he had been getting info on health care, was actually an organization wholly owned by United Health Care, a health Industry member.
Apparently Sen. Grassley didn't care enough to check up on this because he referenced the Lewin Group again during the Finance Committee discussion, repeating the same industry lies.
Where is that man's brain? In some health industry lobbyist's pocket?
Just asking.
Apparently Sen. Grassley didn't care enough to check up on this because he referenced the Lewin Group again during the Finance Committee discussion, repeating the same industry lies.
Where is that man's brain? In some health industry lobbyist's pocket?
Just asking.
Monday, September 28, 2009
A couple more things…
Just want to note the passing of my favorite conservative, William Safire. I disagreed politically with him on just about everything, but he was a gentleman. And you have to give props to him for coming up with "nattering nabobs of negativism." I'd say Safire made VP Spiro Agnew what he was with the stuff he wrote for him.
And I always looked at his word usage column in the NYT. That, I really respected him for. We need more defenders of the language and it's usage in this world, not less.
Bye, Bill, thanks for the memories.
I don't like to dump on Obama, but sometimes he just deserves it. What is it with this bullfeather trip to Denmark he is making? To advance the cause of nuclear non-proliferation? Uh-uh. It's to put in his two cents for Chicago getting the Olympics for, oh, whatever year, it doesn'tmatter, the Pres of the USA has more important things to do. There's this health care issue…
He should be here putting all his weight behind the health care issue all the time until he gets what he wants. No one is going to die if Chicago doesn't get the Olympics, fer pete's sake. People are dying now because of insurance company greed. Check your priorities, Barack. Get Barack on track and pay attention to the real issues.
Besides he's going to look like a real doofus if the Olympic Committee, not known for either intelligence or integrity, gives the nod to some other city. He better hope those guys like him.
That's it.
I'm outa here.
And I always looked at his word usage column in the NYT. That, I really respected him for. We need more defenders of the language and it's usage in this world, not less.
Bye, Bill, thanks for the memories.
I don't like to dump on Obama, but sometimes he just deserves it. What is it with this bullfeather trip to Denmark he is making? To advance the cause of nuclear non-proliferation? Uh-uh. It's to put in his two cents for Chicago getting the Olympics for, oh, whatever year, it doesn'tmatter, the Pres of the USA has more important things to do. There's this health care issue…
He should be here putting all his weight behind the health care issue all the time until he gets what he wants. No one is going to die if Chicago doesn't get the Olympics, fer pete's sake. People are dying now because of insurance company greed. Check your priorities, Barack. Get Barack on track and pay attention to the real issues.
Besides he's going to look like a real doofus if the Olympic Committee, not known for either intelligence or integrity, gives the nod to some other city. He better hope those guys like him.
That's it.
I'm outa here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
