Via Bob Harris, we see that the Republicans are once again selling our health down the line by taking more bribes from Saudis that jeopardize our national health. All the links and more information in the post.
When are people going to wake up and realize that the GOP doesn't give a damn about them or their loved ones? They'll poison and kill anyone as long as they're lining their own pockets.
(Cross-Post-A-Go-Go)
Here's the Church, Here's the Steeple, Soylent Green is made from People!
Hagsville
Okay, what’s going on in Iraq right now is really, really not funny. So I know that it probably makes me a very bad person for nearly doing a spit-take when I read professional lunatic Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s commentary on Condi Rice’s recent surprise visit to Iraq:"The Crusaders' hag came to sully the land of the caliphate…”
Can someone get “Crusaders’ hag” on a t-shirt for her ASAP?
Fonda Banned
The owner of two Kentucky theaters has refused to show the new Jane Fonda film "Monster-in-Law" because of the activist role the actress took during the Vietnam War.You know, if he wanted to ban the movie because it looks utterly crapporiffic, that would be one thing. But this is just stupid. If I ran a revival theater, I wouldn’t ban Ben Hur because Charlton Heston’s a major psycho-dick (or was, before his brain went gooey). Pfft.
Ike Boutwell, who trained pilots during the Vietnam War, displayed pictures of Fonda clapping with a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft crew in 1972 outside the Elizabethtown Movie Palace to show his disapproval. The marquee outside Showtime Cinemas in nearby Radcliff reads: "No Jane Fonda movie in this theater."
[…]
Boutwell also banned previous Jane Fonda films, as well as Michael Moore's film, "Fahrenheit 9/11."
Bobo Meme
The Green Knight tagged me with the Bobo Meme, wherein the writer seeks to spoof the preeminent purveyor of garbage sociology, David Brooks. GK notes:
McSweeny's did it a while back, with a faux-Brooksian column explaining the deep, Red/Blue state divide between Lucky Charms eaters and Cheerios eaters; John at Blogenlust introduced the idea into the blogosphere with a brilliant meditation on "The Simple Life," and Mike's Well Hidden Genius, following a comment made by yours truly, decided to make it into a meme with a sociological analysis of the Coke/Pepsi wars.Being someone trained in sociology, I have a particular disdain for Brooks’ bullshit, and I think it probably shows in my meme submission, ahem. So without further ado, I present Brooks: 2017 Edition, a look into the dreaded columnist’s future...
-----------------------------
Much like the empty cookie jar of ideas belonging to the liberal elite of this great nation of ours, I discover myself suddenly devoid of related pairs of superficial items and/or concepts easily juxtaposed to reiterate my desperately hackneyed thesis about the differences between red and blue state America. Search as I might, every last smidgeon of consumerist paraphernalia has been exploited in one of my columns, the entirety of Americana wrung dry of every last drop of life in furtherance of a one-note joke that has earned me the undeserved applause (or well-earned mockery, if one is a sushi-eating liberal) of a generation.
So it is that I turn to myself, gazing upon my ever-fattening physique in the full-length mirror that hangs on the interior side of my office door, that flimsy but dependable divider that keeps me in, or keeps Maureen Dowd out, depending on the color of one’s perspective. My eyes drift downward, and I notice that my testicles seem to represent the seemingly insurmountable divide in America’s political landscape.
My left testicle, who I shall call Kennedy, fights for my attention with a shallow bravado that masks a lack of real substance. To be sure, Kennedy is the more functional of my two balls, and it responds to stimulation more readily and eagerly than its conservative counterpart. But it also more shriveled, indicative of a fading glory—Kennedy is clearly past its prime, and in spite of its various attempts to appeal to the female demographic, its lackluster success at producing quantifiable results is as unfortunate a decline as we have seen in the American left.
My right testicle, who I shall call Rove, on the other hand, is larger, hairier, rounder—seeming, even, to be improving with age. Though it is rather ugly, tends to be quite itchy, and hasn’t actually had any feeling in it for decades, nor, I believe, any semen-producing capability, Rove is clearly the superior gonad. Like the American right, it is bold and vibrant in spite of the many obstacles in its way—the hideous appearance, the irritation, the complete and utter dysfunctionality. Rove is unstoppable. It cares not for female wiles—indeed, I have noticed it responds with equal enthusiasm to anti-gay rhetoric and gay pornography—but its magnificence lies mainly in its classic and traditional ballness. Rove is an everyball, and its appeal to the masses is something that Kennedy will never quite understand as it crawls inside my body at the mere thought of a Wal-Mart.
Liberals can learn an important lesson about the American people from my left nut—strength and appeal are not to be found in good production, quick response, or a good work ethic, but instead in the determination to succeed despite all odds and the appearance of goodness. While the liberal elite sip their lattes and drive their Volvos to their fancy tech jobs, their political sway with the public will continue to wrinkle and shrink like Kennedy after I remove myself from the Finnish cold bath at the Cheney Men’s Spa. The red states voters, on the other hand, will increase their relevance, swelling with importance and influence, much like Rove, crimson and ripe after a special session with the Gonzales brand electrodes I share with Safire.
Huh
I proposed to Mr. Shakes that each month, when I get horrible, debilitating menstrual cramps, I should be allowed to kick him in the balls. He thinks this is a bad idea. Funny, that. I was sure he'd go along with it.
'Scuse me... 'Scuse me...
"...the man with big balls is coming through"*
Go to Crooks & Liars and watch the video of George Galloway.
Then realize how different things would be now if our media and the Democrats weren't afraid to talk like this.
I couldn't help but snort when I was listening to this, and scrolling along the bottom was information on the frigging Michael Jackson trial.
*Thanks yet again to Bill Hicks.
Seriously?
The Gadflyer’s Sarah Posner reports:
The American Family Association is also up in arms over a decision by the national Parent Teacher Association, that den of sin and perversion, to allow Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) to conduct diversity and tolerance trainings at its upcoming conference while excluding Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX). (PFOX was one of the plaintiffs, represented by Jerry Falwell's legal group, in the lawsuit challenging the policy of the Montgomery County, Maryland public school system to teach tolerance and acceptance of homosexuality.)What in the fucking fuck is this bullshit?! (Aside from further evidence that since douchebags like the American Family Association can’t win arguments with things like “facts” and “reason,” they’ve resorted to trying to melt our brains with synapse-frying lunacy.)
Watch for PFOX -- which claims that homosexuality is a choice and that people can therefore reform themselves into heterosexuality, contrary to all scientific evidence, not to mention anecdotal evidence as represented by scores of gay Republicans -- to make some of the same arguments it made in the Montgomery County litigation when it protests its exclusion from the PTA convention. Its M.O. is to claim that if you teach tolerance of homosexuals, you should teach tolerance of ex-homosexuals, too. Excluding them, PFOX claims, is viewpoint discrimination and suppression of free speech.
First of all, I don’t believe in “ex-gays,” unless the definition is “a self-loathing homosexual who forces him- or herself into an unwanted sexuality to avoid the mockery, hatred, and condemnation of the cynical purveyors of gay-reform programs.” The supporters of the ex-gay movement, of course, define it as someone who has sloughed off the chosen coil of same-sex attraction, in which case, I’m not sure I understand why they don’t simply refer to ex-gays as “heterosexuals.” Why the need for lawsuits to ensure that tolerance for ex-gays is taught? Aren’t heterosexuals tolerated pretty much everywhere? If these gay-reform programs are so successful, why do ex-gays need a special designation?
Next thing you know, the ex-gays will be wanting the legalization of ex-gay marriage, protection for ex-gays against job and housing discrimination, partner benefits for their ex-gay spouses, and that’s really going to send this country to hell in a handbasket.
(Of course, I realize that the whole point of this obnoxious bullshit is that they want to promote their ex-gay brainwashing propaganda, not that they give a crap about the actual ex-gays who rotate as spokespeople for the three months apiece until they go back to being gay. Still, it’s notable that even the champions of ex-gays either don’t believe that ex-gays are truly “cured,” as they claim, or that they are so reviled by someone who has at one time been gay that they refuse to address them as heterosexuals, or both. Either way, they’re pricks.)
Oh, Africa
Brad Plumer, who I suspect has a severe case of racing brain syndrome as incurable as my own, describes Helen Epstein’s article God and the Fight Against AIDS in the New York Review of Books as “one of the most fascinating—and horrifying—things” he’s read in awhile. I totally agree with his assessment.
The struggle against the unyielding AIDS crisis in Africa is being crippled by religion—and religious people who want their slice of the $1 billion pie of US funding earmarked for abstinence-only AIDS prevention programs in Africa. Evangelical Christians in America were hardly concerned about the AIDS crisis until recently; indeed, many of them welcomed it in its earliest stages as the wrath of God, seeking to rid the world of sexual deviants—a turn of heavenly events that seemed to justify the hatred against homosexuals and sexually revolutionized feminists which had been their stock in trade for years. Then came the serendipitous confluence of an evangelical Christian revival in Africa, as African men sought to control increasingly independent women, on whose shoulders the problems of Africa was squarely placed, and the pledge of a new American president, a born again American president, to earmark funding for abstinence-only programs. The opportunistic among American evangelicals saw the AIDS crisis in Africa as an unprecedented missionary opportunity and a possible payday to boot. In the end, neither God nor money is helping stem the tide of AIDS infections in Africa.
Condoms alone aren’t the answer, either, but they are a better answer than abstinence-only. The best solution, however, is best represented by a campaign developed in Uganda by Ugandans themselves, who better understand the unique social constructs of their sexual culture (shared by much of the continent), including both informal and formal polygamy—a tradition which will not be eradicated, is uniquely troublesome in terms of halting the spread of infectious diseases, and cannot be adequately addressed with either abstinence-only or safe-sex only programs alone. Why has this program been abandoned? Well, it certainly wasn’t funding the work of any American or other western groups who were sure that they had the best ideas for Africa, so it was summarily abandoned. Bringing it back is now not an option, as it definitely doesn’t appeal to American evangelicals, including our president, who hold the funding on which they depend and would prefer not to acknowledge that even the godly born-agains in Africa, pious counterparts in the cradle of civilization, aren’t, in fact, free from the sins of the flesh. As it turns out, the compulsion to denounce the depravity of others whilst carrying on the same purportedly condemnable activities behind closed doors is hardly a uniquely American trait. From here, through Africa, straight to the ends of the Earth, there is simply no shortage of those who are willing to sacrifice the lives of those addicted to their snake oil, inveigling each lost soul in need of an answer to live the kind of life they are not willing—or able—to live themselves.
Question of the Day: USPS Edition
Via The Fixer at The Alternate Brain, we discover that: “PhotoStamps are now available to anyone who wants to create their own personal USPS-approved postage.” (Learn more.) Fix notes:
You know I'm gonna have the wife take a pic of my ass and I'm gonna put 'em on envelopes that contain bills.Ha!
Personally, I think this gives me the perfect incentive to begin a weekly letter-writing campaign to Alberto Gonzales, with a different picture from Abu Ghraib serving as the stamp each week. The letters won’t take long to write; they’ll each only be one word: Quaint.
So, what’s your PhotoStamp project going to be?
Times' Dumb Idea
Ezra’s right when he notes that the NY Times’ decision to hide their columnists behind a $50 annual subscription is a bad one.
As regular Shakers might have noticed, I’m not big on reading columnists, anyway, and it’s mainly because they’re usually writing about shit at least a week after I have and being far less interesting about it (read: no snark or cussin’!). If that sounds narcissistic, well, perhaps it is, but it’s also the reality of why I don’t bother reading most columnists, even when it’s free, and I’m sure as hell not going to pay a dime to do it.
Recommended Reading
I highly recommend that all Shakers toddle over to The Nation and read this article. An excerpt:
What is it with these right-wing Christians? Faced with a choice between sex and death, they choose death every time. No sex ed or contraception for teens, no sex for the unwed, no condoms for gays, no abortion for anyone--even for that poor 13-year-old pregnant girl in a group home in Florida. I would really like to hear the persuasive argument that this middle-schooler with no home and no family would have been better off giving birth against her will, and that the State of Florida, which totally failed to keep her safe, should have been allowed, against its own laws, to compel this child to bear a child. She was too young to have sex, too young to know her own mind about abortion--but not too young to be forced onto the delivery table for one of the most painful experiences human beings endure, in which the risk of death for her was three times as great as in abortion. Ah, Christian compassion! Christian sadism, more likely. It was the courts that showed humanity when they let the girl terminate her pregnancy.
Afterwards, I think you'll enjoy this Tbogg post on that tricky female orgasm.
Nuclear Option Update
The Guardian reports via the AP:
Democratic Leader Harry Reid declared an end Monday to compromise talks with Republican leaders over President Bush's controversial judicial nominees, saying their fate along with the future of long-standing filibuster rules will be settled in a showdown on the Senate floor.I’m glad that Reid is holding his ground on this one. Too bad the rest of the Dems aren’t willing to do the same.
“I've tried to compromise and they want all or nothing, and I can't do that,” Reid told reporters after a private meeting with Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn.
Reid made his comments at the same time a small group of Democrats, who have been meeting with Republicans also eager to avoid a showdown, floated a proposal under which they would clear the way for confirmation of five nominees while scuttling three others.Who are these functionally retarded Dems that are still willing to compromise with the GOP? And what kind of dumbass bargain is this, anyway? The benevolent dictators will deign to allow a right of the minority to stay in place for a whole stinking year, as long as that minority essentially promises not to use it? How generous. And this anonymous* “small group of Democrats” thinks this is a swell idea? How wise.
Under the proposal, circulated in writing, Republicans would have to pledge no change through 2006 in the Senate's rules that allow filibusters against judicial nominees. For their part, Democrats would commit not to block votes on Bush's Supreme Court or appeals court nominees during the same period, except in extreme circumstances.
Meanwhile, isn’t the whole point of this showdown that this is an extreme circumstance? If the judges being put forth at this point don’t trigger the notion of “extreme” in the minds of this cabal of loose cannon Dems, who, exactly, might Bush have to put forward that they would find extremely objectionable?!
These capitulating Dems are utter crackpots. Each day, a new GOP Senator comes out as being against the nuclear option. Now, it’s Richard Lugar, who notes:
“I believe that we are skating over very thin ice here with regard to the continuity of life in the Senate as we've known it,” Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., said over the weekend on CNN. “I'm opposed to trying to eliminate filibusters simply because I think they protect minority rights, whether they're Republicans, Democrats or other people.”A strange day indeed when I’m thinking Thank goodness for my Republican Senator! and wondering why the hell Reid can’t keep his foot soldiers in line on such a critically important issue.
* Not totally anonymous. You can thank Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson for coming up with this stellar scheme, and Arkansas Senator Mark Pryor for serving as his wingman. They refuse to name the rest of the rogue dealwheelers.
Outrage Fatigue
So I’ve been trying to get my head around this whole Newsweek thing, and I’m having a really hard time because I just don’t care. Am I really supposed to be outraged that our military interrogators are so insensitive that they allegedly flushed a holy book down the toilet, when I already know they’ve put people on leashes, smeared them with shit and menses, attached electrodes to their genitals, critically beat them, and a slew of other physical offenses that I find ever so much more objectionable than the desecration of a holy book? Am I really supposed to be outraged that a news magazine may have rushed something into print before it was fully confirmed, when I already know that our media is irrevocably fucked? Am I really supposed to be outraged that the administration has intimidated Newsweek into an apology, when I already know that Bush & Co. are the unchallenged masters of media manipulation and intimidation? Am I really supposed to be outraged at the hypocrisy of the White House scolding Newsweek for relying on anonymous sources, when I am all too painfully aware of the dodgy sources on which the administration relied to cull their cherry-picked evidence to make their case for war, after tens of thousands of American soldiers have now been killed or wounded? Am I really supposed to be outraged that Newsweek is being blamed for the uprising in Afghanistan, when I read about the defacement of the Qur’an as an interrogation tactic being used by US forces in an Arabic news story probably a year ago, thereby making it incredibly unlikely that this one report was the sole instigation of nearly a week of violent rioting?
What, exactly, am I supposed to get angry about here? The entire blogosphere is taking sides, the White House is going after Newsweek, Newsweek is on the run, everyone’s explaining “why this story is important,” but nothing I see is anything new; instead it is the culmination of bad foreign policy, an out-of-control military with a sanctioned and institutional pattern of abuse against detainees, a bullying White House with a pathological need to control information, and a national media that is a grotesque, disfigured shadow of its former self, which waved bye-bye to objectivity and responsible journalism long ago.
I just can’t get outraged about this story, because not one little shred of it surprises me. So forgive me if I can’t muster the requisite indignation go into a deep analysis of this whole idiotic debacle.
(That said, there are other people who are doing good analysis, so if you’re interested, here are my recommendations: Raw Story, Blogenlust, The Farmer at Corrente, Jesse at Pandagon, Keith Olbermann, Juan Cole, and The Moderate Voice has a comprehensive round-up here.)
[UPDATE: Check out Skippy, Lance, and Susan Hu's dKos diary, too. And by way of clarification...it's not that I don't give a shit at all; I just don't give a special shit about this story. It just seems like more of the same crap about which I rant every day, to less fanfare. I'm mad, but no more so than usual.]
Not one more Goddamned thing, Part Deux
August has a great post on this snotty "Newsweek Lied, People Died" phrase that the wingnuts are grabbing onto with their blood-covered hands and spouting smugly while ignoring the death count that clicks ever-higher in Iraq.
The audacity of this amazes me. Seriously, if anyone says this to me in real life, I don't know what my reaction will be. If my blog suddenly goes silent, I'm probably in jail for assaulting an asshole, and not in a good way.
UPDATE: Tbogg has more.
MORE UPDATE: The Rude Pundit has more. I'm afraid he's right... the Bushies are going to try and use this ridiculousness to get a free pass on torture. Not that I think they would have ever been brought to justice, anyway...
Another Blogiversary
Happy Blogiversary to T. Rex, who is celebrating SEVEN YEARS! Awesome.
Another great blog and superb blogger that rank among my very favorites. Congrats, KQ.
Question of the Day (Contender Edition)
Who's going to win - Sergio or Jesse?
(Does not apply to anyone not insanely addicted* to The Contender.)
* Symptoms include compulsively watching previous fights on The Contender website and waking up humming the "the tide of fight is turning" theme.
Just One of the Guys
[NOTE: I originally posted this Saturday morning, but since I think it's an important story, and to avoid it being buried in low weekend traffic, the way the administration attempted to bury it in the weekend news cycle, I'm putting it back up to the top for a bit.]
In an interesting little bit of news that got released to the media on a Friday so that the average American wouldn’t notice as s/he headed out the door to spend her/his hard-earned paycheck in the weekend ritual known as rampant consumerism (see also: patriotism), it was reported that “regular guy” George Bush and his simple librarian wife Laura disclosed ownership of as much as $18 million in assets.
This is according to the federal financial disclosure forms, annual filing of which is required of all executive branch officials, which the White House released yesterday. (Another bit of recent Friday news regarding the President’s mysterious financials you may have missed was the April 22 report that Bush’s listed address on his tax returns is not in Washington, D.C., or even Crawford, TX, but instead a post office box in Chicago—Post Office Box 803968, Chicago, IL 60680, to be exact—which is the downtown post office box of Northern Trust Corp., a multinational holding company that manages hundreds of billions of dollars, including the President’s blind trust. Never mind that the IRS does not allow post office boxes to be used on tax returns unless you don’t receive mail delivery at your home address; it’s not the President broke the law, no sir. You can’t break the law if you’re above the law.)
Anyway, back to the original story. The forms require only an indication of dollar ranges for the value of assets, so the President’s assets were listed as falling within a range of $7.8 and $18.1 million. The Vice President’s assets were listed as falling within a range of $16.6 million and $75.5 million, including “cash, investments, deferred compensation from Halliburton Co., stock options, salaries and retirement benefits.” Yowza.
They were also required to report gifts, which included $650 gold cuff links, a $400 pocketknife, and a $2,700 mountain bike from John Burke, the president of Trek Bicycle Corp for the President (which he’ll no doubt put to use during many national crises in the future), and a $1,600 painting, a $120 pen, and a $400 fly-fishing set for the Vice President (which he’ll no doubt put to use during many getaways with his good pal and Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia).
Another interesting tidbit:
The biggest asset Cheney disclosed this year was a $5 million to $25 million stake in the Vanguard Short-Term Tax- Exempt Fund, which fell 0.8 percent in 2004. The fund invests in municipal bonds with an average maturity of less than five years and provides income that is exempt from U.S. personal income taxes.The cited fund is a very conservative investment, which, as Mr. Shakes noted, seems indicative of an investor who doesn’t have much faith in the market at the moment. Interesting choice for a guy who’s going around telling the American people what a great idea it is for them to invest their earnings in private accounts.
Who Wants Some Good News?
I know I do! Check it out:
Bells began tolling for same-sex couples in Massachusetts one year ago this week. A year in numbers:Someone should mention this to John Kerry.
Date same-sex couples began legally marrying: May 17, 2004
Number of same-sex marriages performed in Massachusetts from May 17, 2004, until February 2005: 6,142
Number of male couples: 2,170
Number of female couples: 3,972
Number of heterosexual marriages in Massachusetts during that time: 30,872
Public support in Massachusetts for marriage equality in April 2005: 56%
Public support one year ago: 35%
Public support across the nation for a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman: 53%
Number of states that have amended their constitutions to ban gay marriage since 2004: 14
Percentage of Massachusetts voters who believe gay marriage has had a positive or no impact on the quality of life in Massachusetts: 84%
It’s amazing how Massachusetts hasn’t spontaneously imploded or turned into 7,840 square miles of nothing but leather bars and Bally’s or been the recipient of a brutal and horrific smiting by God himself. In fact, Massachusetts is doing just fine. (Better than most of the red states by just about any empirical measure.) Looks like the doomsayers that were so sure gay marriage would be the end of life as we know it were wrong again, just like they are about everything else. The only thing gay marriage in Massachusetts seems to have been the end of is legalized bigotry. Imagine that.
