Archive for the 'Hypocrites' Category

Apr 15 2014

The impeachment of Barak Obama

It’s a double whammy of depression, of late. On a personal note-the ongoing churn at my place of employ is making the ability to enjoy the choice location more than a little problematic sometimes. As the S.O. and I settle into the new house , the more we like many of its features. The one obvious down side has been the lack of internet connection-but the porch and view from said porch offsets it to a great degree. And after days like this one:

218318.strip

 

I need the peace and solitude it brings.

So I have that bit of downward pressure on my life-offset in great deal by location, but it’s not enough to overcome the frustration of knowing I am right, being right, and being unable to make the types of meaningful changes that need to be made.

Adding to the downward pressure on my spirit is the realization that I will be returning to the US of A-not by choice as much as lack of one. And that when I get there-the downward spiral of US politics will have continued its decline into abject stupidity.

Especially since as many pundits predict-the GOP may take the Senate as well as keep the House. Once that is accomplished, I fully expect the Congress of the United States to do nothing (something they are already doing), but  they will begin a full throated effort to impeach Barak Obama.

It’s coming-you can rest assured of that. And since it takes 67 Senators to convict, and the odds of the GOP winning that many seats are virtually nonexistent, it will be another typically pointless gesture undertaken by the teabagger crazed loons who run and who support the current twisted political vision known as the Republican party.

The bulk of 2015 will be spent talking about it and the Fox Noise machine will kick into overdrive trying to convict the president in absentia, since they will be unable to achieve their real dream of ending his political career. (Remember these were the same people who were telling you that Romney was going to win big).

Rep. Blake Farenthold (R-Tex.), who has said there are enough votes in the House to impeach Obama, added: “We’ve also talked about the I-word, impeachment, which I don’t think would get past the Senate in the current climate. . . . Is there anything else we can do?”

Why, yes, there is, congressman: You can hold hearings that accomplish nothing but allow you to sound fierce for your most rabid constituents.

The Republicans in the House know there is no chance of throwing this president from office. Yet at least 13 of the 22 Republicans on the panel have threatened or hinted at impeachment of Obama, his appointees or his allies in Congress. They’ve proposed this as the remedy to just about every dispute or political disagreement, from Syria to Obamacare.

 

This kind of political fight is exactly the last thing the country needs right now-but when did the GOP ever make doing the right thing a priority? Certainly not since the middle of the 20th century.

So how will it happen? I predict they will use the “slow burn” technique. They will pass their 65th or so vote to repeal the ACA.  When that  gets vetoed as it surely must,  it will set forth the following scenario:  there will begin a series of hearings trying to establish that the President exceeded his executive authority by making decisions on extending deadlines and such.  Using those as the pretext they will turn over to the House committee that does such things a resolution demanding the impeachment of Obama for exceeding his legal authority as President. ( When he in reality he has not even used his authority near enough). The old canards will be dragged out: Bengahzi, IRS, and all the rest of the nonsense that has been long been put to bed.)  Fox will have hour after hour of commentary for its brain dead audience-hyping the idea of impeaching the President. Comparisons to Clinton's blowjobs will resound. This will all occur in May or June of 2015 with the actual trial set to occur in September of 2015 after the summer recess. ( allowing the illusion of justice and due diligence by allowing both sides time to prepare-it will also try to be timed so as to make Biden a real lame duck if they should get lucky and win).

Nothing of substance will be accomplished by the Congress in 2015. They will stall on the budget-and perhaps force another debt ceiling fight, hoping to use that to pile on in the process, leaving the country to tear itself apart politically. And in the end-the President will be acquitted, but there will be loads of sound bites that ultra conservative Presidential candidates can use repeatedly showing how the Kenyan usurper was never supposed to be in the job anyway. ( Popular vote or Electoral college results not with standing).

And Nate Silver will be pilloried again-for denying the Romney monster the victory they feel was rightfully his in 2012.

And in the meantime what happens to the country?  Wages will continue to stagnate and more and more wealth will continue to move upward-aggravating the tepid economic recovery by seeing more and more Americans slide downwards in terms of purchasing power. In fact, the country could slip back into recession because of the turmoil the impeachment crisis will create in world markets. Holders of 401K's-like me-will see themselves condemned to working for the rest of our lives at unsatisfying jobs ( as the comic mentions above) because the value of our accumulated savings will tank.

And that will be all occurring before we get to 2016. 

Now ideally, an impeachment drama would produce the kind of universal public outrage that will backfire on the GOP and make it a pariah in the elections of 2016. It can and should lead to a recognition of the flawed and selfish viewpoint of American Politics and economics that was legitimized by Mitt Romney in 2012 ( with his disgusting codification of the rhetoric that 47% of the American population are nothing but "moochers")-and seized upon by soulless men such as the Zombie Eyed Granny Starver , Paul Ryan.

But it won't. Primarily because that kind of outrage will come from an informed electorate-something the United States has not had for a long time. Only about 20% of us actually understand the issues in the proper context, and draw the correct conclusions from it. Another 30% subscribe to the "I got mine, so fuck you!" philosophy of the current teabagger controlled GOP-and the remaining 50% just can't be bothered to get up from the TV to learn anything. Or vote.

If that does not give you good reason to be depressed about the future of the land of my birth-you are not grasping the problem.

Its a bad news story, that could be easily fixed and could have been as long ago as 2009.

But it won't.

Welcome to the new dark ages.

 

One response so far

Mar 20 2014

You try to be a good soldier….

Published by under Hypocrites

And what does it get you?

Kicked in the teeth that is what. Our completely dysfunctional workplace has struck again. A project I had devoted some 7 months of effort to-has been done away with. The details are dreary and not befitting anything but swear words. Nonetheless it caps off the end to a fucked up week. All of us from the "old" organization recognize it as the injustice it is. The new breed? Well they are so wrapped up in their own details they have stopped caring about anyone else-and the worst part is, no one cares about what anyone else wants. Which is what the author of this whole abomination wants.

GRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!! I am so mad I cannot see straight.

215759.strip

 

Now if you will excuse me-there is a fifth of Scotch to finish.

 

 

2 responses so far

Oct 22 2013

Where is Kent Brockman when you need him?

Well we met our new "team mates" yesterday. As I expected it, it did not go well:

 

It was an interesting exercise in surrealism. Our current boss was basically pre-empted by the GS-15 who seeks to enslave replace him. That issue has not been determined yet-but this guy acted like it had.

Then he went into an instructive little missive of how he and one of our flags went to visit John Deere last year, and told how they brought in an outside firm to help them "reorganize". And because of that experience we should not 'fear change".. ( BTW nice to know that you can afford the travel money for such little ventures-this while we beg for the merest of scraps).

Oh really? When our HR is telling us it knows nothing about this event-and when it does happen, one of the specific goals is a reduction of billets? My office mate and I just looked at each other in sheer amazement.

But I digress-he told us that little story to justify why he is turning to a contractor, one that works directly for him and depends on his decisions for continued work on said contract to organize this merger. He was not in the least happy when it was pointed out to him ( and the contractor person), that doing that is a blatant conflict of interest.

Perhaps a call to the IG might help?

Seriously, John Deere? That company has nothing in common with the organizations we work for. Unless it's veiled imagery for putting us all out to pasture.

Just blow me now.

Probably the most bizarre thing about the whole exercise, is that he seems to think we don't know exactly what happened-when in fact, everyone in the room knows what has transpired and what is transpiring. I mean after all, he's not the only one who talks to flag officers. An outside look? Really?

No one is afraid of change. They do have a desire not to do things just for stupidity's sake, however and that is what the logic behind this is. I've been though that more than couple other times.

The future days, suck they shall.

No responses yet

Oct 11 2013

I’m tired of hearing about the children……

In this debt fight nonsense, the deficit scolds continue to say "its for the children". Whenever I hear that what I want to reply is something profane-and with good reason. The children lose no matter what, if the cruel and inhumane policy prescriptions are carried out. What the arrogant and pompous preachers of the deficit really want is a way to back out of the contract. Basically, the talk of children and their needs is just a smoke screen to hide a more sinister emotion, " I got mine, so fuck off!"

I wrote a year and a half ago why this a flawed viewpoint. I think it bears repeating now:

 

So its about the children, eh?

Also known as-Why Mark Steyn sucks.
 
Phib presumes to lecture me on what issues are really about-sadly I missed most of his lecture because I was having a good time over the weekend-sightseeing and practicing not procreative sex with the S.O. In a recent post, he asserted that he was tired of discussing:
 
This totally contrived non-controversy has almost left me looking to either retreat to my country acreage to wait out the rioting of the unworthy, or join James Cameron in the undying lands to watch to new Dark Age take hold.

 

The fact that some are trying to bring this non-issue up at this time in our republic makes me feel at times that this nation is not worthy of the generations of sacrifice that brought us here … but that is crazy talk. This nation has gone through worse, and in the end all will be well.

 
The issue is not putting a sheep's bladder on your John Thomas; it is what legacy we leave to our children. This is an economic crisis we cannot fix with a peace treaty or a post-war boom; no, nothing that simple – but we need to fix it sooner more than later.
 
Well, jolly good and dandy-it’s for the children is it? Well, on that you are right-but it’s also about telling those same children the correct story-not just the parts that suit your narrative. I’ve got some suggestions about some things you might want to tell your children to warm their hearts as they struggle to keep their heads above water in the multi-polar world you are going to bequeath them, but I’ll do that at the end of this post. One should leave with the things that need to be remembered.
 
And something that is not worthy of any brain memory space are the silly words of that pompous twit, Mark Steyn.  Not the master-as Phib would present him-but just another worthless piece of Fox News paid excrement. Quoting another worthless piece of excrement-Paul Ryan, Mark Steyn has the balls to assert that the discussion about demanding that all employers provde a standard level of preventative care, is somehow a clever ruse to divert public attention away from the President’s recently released budget. ( As a matter of policy here at Far East Cynic HQ-we do not link to idiots, thus you will have to Google what I am about to quote to you). 
 
This is a very curious priority for a dying republic. “Birth control” is accessible, indeed ubiquitous, and, by comparison with anything from a gallon of gas to basic cable,one of the cheapest expenses in the average budget. Not even Rick Santorum, that notorious scourge of the sexually liberated, wishes to restrain the individual right to contraception.
But where is the compelling societal interest in the state prioritizing and subsidizing it? Especially when you’re already the Brokest Nation in History. Elsewhere around the developed world, prudent politicians are advocating natalist policies designed to restock their empty maternity wards. A few years ago, announcing tax incentives for three-child families, Peter Costello, formerly Timmy Geithner’s counterpart Down Under, put it this way: “Have one for Mum, one for Dad, and one for Australia.” But in America an oblivious political class, led by a president who characterizes young motherhood as a “punishment,” prefers to offer solutions to problems that don’t exist rather than the ones that are all too real. I think this is what they call handing out condoms on the Titanic.
 
Statements like these are why Steyn needs to be held down and have his smirk and beard dry shaved off of him. Besides the fact that the prophylactics are not under discussion here-a clever dodge by many of Phib’s commenters to not discuss the real issue-the standardization of services provided by insurers, something they solved a long time ago here in Europe. The services that Steyn and others say “just pay for it yourself” can actually be rather expensive: contraceptive services and related counseling, a number of related preventive health services such as: patient education and counseling; breast and pelvic examinations; breast and cervical cancer screening according to nationally recognized standards of care; sexually transmitted disease (STD) and Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) prevention education, counseling, testing and referral; and pregnancy diagnosis and counseling. Some of those items can run up a fairly healthy bill-more than just the cost of a box of condoms. Not a great deal for a wealthy man like Steyn-but some 800-1800(cost of screenings and prescriptions) a year in prescription costs can be a lot for someone making less than 25K a year. And what’s more –it’s clear that GOP candidates want to expand what the definition of contraceptive services means, if the “testimony” of that well known douchebag Presidential candidate Rick Santorum has any bearing:
 

Rick Santorum opposes all mandated coverage without co-pays. Rick Santorum is linking mandated coverage to abortion because it’s politically beneficial to him to do so. It doesn’t matter if the mandated coverage without co-pays is screening for gestational diabetes or amniocentesis, so this is (of course) not about abortion because screening for gestational diabetes without a co-pay (for example) has nothing to do with abortion, and Santorum opposes that, too. I know that because that’s what he said.
There’s really no reason to discuss amniocentesis specifically, other than the fact that media swallowed Santorum’s carefully calculated and misleading framing whole and thus discussed only what he wants to discuss. How about this headline: Rick Santorum is protecting large employers and health insurance companies, and he’s using disabled children to do that. The conservative opposition to mandated coverage in insurance policies is about opposing federal regulation of health insurance companies and large employers, not abortion, because conservatives oppose all mandated coverage without co-pays. All of the rest of this over-heated nonsense is misdirection. No one ever asked the religious leaders what other sections of the health care law that apply to large employers they opposed, and that’s a shame, because that would have been a very good question.
 
But then again-misdirection and avoidance of telling the entire story are Steyn’s trademark.  Steyn writes with "a shrill, mocking tone of moral certainty that consigns those who disagree with him to the status of appeasers or even terrorists; and a willingness to distort, misrepresent, and omit facts in order to advance his argument." One should expect nothing more from the man and his column linking the controversy over coverage to the deficit proves it yet again.
 
Which brings us back to the children. When you sit them down and tell then the story of the decline of a once great nation that failed to live up to its potential-make sure you tell them all the facts. Don’t leave out the important ones like pompous moral zealots like Steyn do. Make sure you tell them about the fact that:
 
The great majority of the debt that you so love to rail about-was racked up by a combination of spending on wars that we could not afford, and should probably have never gotten involved in, in the first place. And then tell them that –even for ones that were brought upon us, we failed to mobilize all of our potential strength and power to fulfill the first obligation to win quickly and decisively-because a presidential appointee wanted to prove some outdated theories on “transformation”. The other part was hinged on tax cuts that never should have been made.
 
And then tell ‘em that the President that appointed that same Secretary of Defense, refused to raise the necessary revenue to fund these wars. And decided to double down on not funding those wars when-as many critics had predicted-energy costs rose and impacted growth rates across the world and within the United States.
 
Tell them that in the end-both countries we went in to “save”-were hopeless basket cases, primarily because of the failings of the citizens of those countries. We, however, refused to pin any of the blame on those same tribally motivated people-even when it was clear that we could stay for 2 or 20 years and nothing would change. But we were able to send their aunts and uncles to die in the dusty corners of the far reaches of the American empire.
 
Then tell them tell them that the government-their government, pushed a policy of tax cuts for the richest one percent combined with a systematic dismantling of the regulations that were in place to prevent those same one percent from bringing down the house through unbridled greed.  Tell them that the lure of easy profits distracted the banking industry from its core mission: providing an efficient payments mechanism and assessing and managing risk. That instead of focusing on lending to small businesses and creating jobs-they concentrated on creating increasingly risky securities all so they could reap huge bonuses and transaction fees.  Don’t treat them to tired old explanations about the Community Reinvestment Act and Fannie and Freddie-without first pointing out that these criticisms are sheer nonsense. They had nothing to do with the 200 billion dollar bailout of AIG-which was based solely on derivatives, nor did Fannie or Freddie have anything to do with the massive overinvestment in commercial real estate.
 
Tell them about the money the banks were supposed to have used to restart credit. But didn’t.
 
Remind them that the so called “productive class” became so obsessed with short term returns-on which their bonuses and pay were based- that they engaged in repeated and reckless accounting gimmicks-that hid the truth.
 
Tell your children that because of your devotion to American Exceptionalism-they remain just one major illness or job loss away from bankruptcy and poverty ( assuming they aren’t there already)-that in the first decade of the 21st century, when faced with a clear moral and economic incentive to reform the healthcare system and in the end drive down the overall cost of a major driver of the government expenditures you love to lecture them about. Tell them that the rest of the advanced world solved this problem during the 80’s and 90’s offering the US some good ideas to pick and choose from-these countries providing equal or better care than the US,  but spending less than the US does-your country turned its back on literally millions of its fellow citizens in the name of “freedom”.
 
When you tell them the story of Greece-make sure you highlight the role the major banks and funds played in 2010 assaulting the Greek economy when they sold Greek bonds short. Be sure and tell them that the austerity doctrine that you and other “conservative” economic theorists pushed on them –simply created a death spiral that never increased aggregate demand. The banks and funds who demanded all this never got hurt-but the average middle class or lower Greek paid a terrible price. Tell them about the inherent Greek laziness-never too early to have them remember American superiority. But when you do-be sure to point out that the “people” who don’t pay taxes in Greece are mostly big corporations and professionals who can afford to hire people to help them evade taxes. ( Kind of like the GOP wants it to be over here). Remind them that banks got away with it and that linkage of the world economy made a default by Greece a nonstarter from the word go.
 
Tell them too-that companies that could well afford to invest in their companies failed to do so-but instead sold literally thousands of their workers down the river, to make a huge profit for one person. ( Insert well known CEO of a major corporation walking out on pension obligations).
 
Remind them that the banks pulled off one of the biggest frauds in history-but not one banker went to jail for it. Tell them too of the unbridled commodity speculation in 2008 –that literally starved people to death-but made a lot of people rich.
 
And then finally, tell them the God’s honest truth, that their country-a once great nation that still has great potential-frittered away the first decade of the 21st century by failing to recognize the changes that had taken place in the world. And in failing to adapt to those changes-it brought itself to the point where it failed at home and abroad. And in the end it had no one to blame but itself-because it let itself be seduced by an illusion: that things would stay the way they were some 30 years ago, because we were a great power.  We could have still been a great power had we made the necessary changes to fix our society and balance our budgets-but we were too easily fooled by our corporate masters, who were more than willing to write off some 90% of the American population to make sure they were comfortable.
 
Just like the Chinese.
 
 
 
 

10 responses so far

Oct 02 2013

What he said.

Congress imposed a government shutdown? Fuck you, pay me. Oh, had a fire? Fuck you, pay me. The place got hit by lightning? Fuck you, pay me.

 

( All posts will start with this until the shutdown is over).

 

The President summed up the issues at play in this shutdown pretty well yesterday. Its worth listening to his entire speech, not just the condensed or ignored version that would be shown at Fox Noise. (BTW I found it interesting that Fox was more concerned with showing Netanyahu's UN address than anything else-and they have taken their marching orders from Jim DeMint and referred to the shutdown as just a "slow down".)

 

 

 

He needs to talk this bluntly a lot more. 

“At midnight last night, for the first time in 17 years, the Republicans in Congress chose to shut down the Federal Government. Let me be more specific: One FACTION of one PARTY in one HOUSE of Congress in one branch of government shut down the government. All because they didn’t like ONE law.”

“The Republican shutdown did not have to happen, but I want everyone to understand why it did happen. The republicans in Congress refused to fund the government unless we defundedor dismantled the Affordable Care Act. They’ve shut down the government over an ideological crusade to deny affordable health insurance to millions of Americans. In other words, they’ve demanded ransom just to do their jobs…They don’t get to hold the entire economy hostage over ideological demands”…

This shutdown isn’t about spending, or deficits or budgets. After all, our deficits are falling at the fastest pace in 50 years. We’ve cut them in HALF since I took office. In fact, many of the demands the Republicans are now making would RAISE our deficit. So this shutdown isn’t about deficits or spending. It’s all about rolling back the Affordable Care Act…this, more than anything else, seems to be all the Republican party seems to stand for these days. It’s strange that one party would make keeping people uninsured the centerpiece of their agenda. But that is what it is.”…..

If you buy a car, and you don’t pay your car note, you don’t save money by not paying your car note. You’re just a deadbeat. If you buy a house, you don’t save any money by not authorizing yourself to pay the mortgage. You’re just going to get foreclosed on your home. That’s what this is about. This is routine. This is what they’re supposed to do as a routine matter.”

“Congress has to stop governing by crisis. They have to break this habit. It is a drag on the economy. It is not worthy of this country.

 

This is why, I have no time for people like this-who pontificate repeatedly about how "polite" conservatives are compared to progressives. For one thing its not true. The documentary evidence of the coarseness of the denizens of Earl Grey ville is on the record-and has been ever since this bunch of selfish folks and their manufactured outrage showed up on the scene. They have played havoc with the United States, and I am NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ANGRY ABOUT IT?

Spare me your condecension! You  have no right to it.

I'm sorry. Putting a gun to someone's head and threatening to kill them unless you do exactly what they say, does not exactly qualify as a "polite" thing to do.

To be sure, what the robber demanded of me – my money – was my own; and I had a clear right to keep it; but it was no more my own than my vote is my own; and the threat of death to me, to extort my money, and the threat of destruction to the Union, to extort my vote, can scarcely be distinguished in principle….

Let us be diverted by none of those sophistical contrivances wherewith we are so industriously plied and belabored – contrivances such as groping for some middle ground between the right and the wrong…

Fuck you, pay me.

No responses yet

Sep 16 2013

And while we are on the subject……

Of Mark Steyn-a completely useless man.

Here's another point of view that highlights my steadfast belief that Mark Steyn should just go fuck himself:

“Had we rolled out something that was very smooth and disciplined and linear, they would have graded it well, even if it was a disastrous policy. We know that, because that’s exactly how they graded the Iraq war,” – President Obama.

So take that-you worthless Canadian turd.

2 responses so far

Sep 15 2013

True to form

I hate Mark Steyn. He is once again proving himself to be the worthless piece of shit that he is.

Over at the National Review, the resident loony bin of the crazed zealots in America, Steyn is crying because he did not get his "splendid little war".

For generations, eminent New York Timeswordsmiths have swooned over foreign strongmen, from Walter Duranty’s Pulitzer-winning paeans to the Stalinist utopia to Thomas L. Friedman’s more recent effusions to the “enlightened” Chinese Politburo. So it was inevitable that the cash-strapped Times would eventually figure it might as well eliminate the middle man and hire the enlightened strongman direct. Hence Vladimir Putin’s impressive debut on the op-ed page this week……….

This is what happens when you elect someone because he looks cool standing next to Jay-Z. Putin is cool mainly in the sense that Yakutsk in February is. In American pop-culture terms, he is a faintly ridiculous figure, with his penchant for homoerotic shirtlessness, his nipples entering the room like an advance security team; the celebrities he attracts are like some rerun channel way up the end of the dial: Goldie Hawn was in the crowd when Putin, for no apparent reason, sang “I found my thrill on Blueberry Hill,” which Goldie seemed to enjoy. In reality, Putin finds his thrill by grabbing Obama’s blueberries and squeezing hard. Cold beats cool.

Maybe someone should remind this douchebag guy of the facts.

1) The majority of the American people do not want to go to war over Syria. The President has to deal, unlike a smug Canadian pundit, with that stark fact.

2) Our own Congress doesn't support it. Except for Daddy Warbucks McCain and Lindsey, "I never met a war I didn't like". Graham, most Congressmen are hearing and heeding the desires of their constituents to stay the hell out.

3) The US has already wasted a lot of its military, economic, and political capital on two failed wars in the Middle East-which in turn sets the back drop by which any military intervention in Syria will be judged.

We'll not even get to the fact of the lives wasted-in these wars that douchebags like Steyn advocated from the safety of their Canadian Citizenship-never having to serve or take any risk themselves.  Like William "The Bloody" Kristol-Steyn is always willing to sacrifice other people's children for the long lost idea of American global hegemony.

See, guys like Steyn can't seem to make up their minds. On the one hand he and his gang of deluded neocon wannabes bemoans the fact that Obama has usurped the Constitution on many issues. ( Soon we will hear the asshole Steyn screaming BENGHAZI for the thousandth time). On the other hand, "If you follow the Constitution, the power to make war resides in the Congress. Period. That the Congress has allowed that power to drain away, and/or that the Congress has allowed its constitutional authority to atrophy, is beside the point. If it wishes to reassert those powers, it is perfectly within its constitutional mandate to do so. Yet that seems to be the very thing that some of the more serious critics of the president's recent actions are arguing against. It is at the heart of every proxy argument being raised about the president's "waffling" or the country's "credibility."

Which is what is really at the heart of Steyn's whining. He could care less about the people of Syria, anymore than he cares about the majority of people in America. He just wants another cudgel to use on Obama, who he has made clear repeatedly he regards as an illegitimate President. What he fails to realize is that it does not cost the US anything to try Putin's proposal-if it fails the option to use force is back on the table, and maybe, just maybe, we might actually stumble onto the real use of force that makes the most sense: a Turkish Invasion of Syria. Which would go a lot farther towards changing the situation "on the ground" and putting the fear of God into Assad.

Syria has a problem-but it is a Syrian problem. US does not have to “own” Syria or Putin's  proposal. That is something that Steyn cannot imagine – because he is so trapped in his stupid dreams of American exceptionalism. An idea whose time has long passed. 

I have a better idea. Let's lob a couple of cruise missiles at Mark Steyn's house. That would provide a decisive result, one that literally thousands of cruise missiles into Syria cannot. It would rid the world of a worthless muck raker-providing him the exit from this mortal coil  he so richly deserves.  It would be a positive result-by eliminating someone or something that is sucking all the positive ideas out of American society.

 

 

 

No responses yet

Jul 15 2013

The Zimmerman verdict

There is not much for me to say about the verdict. I feel about the same way I did when OJ was aquitted-shock that it happened, and no surprise that it happened exactly the way it did in Florida. Florida's gun laws suck-and the "stand your ground law" that Zimmerman based his defense on, is poorly written and unevenly enforced. 

The two key issues of the case for me are: 1) Zimmerman followed Martin-after he was specifcally advised not to.  In essence he picked a fight he didn't have to pick-and could have left to trained law enforcement officers. 2) Despite the opinion of the jury, the case for self defense here was weak at best. Because Florida's law is written so poorly-and has a lot to do with determining Zimmerman's mental state-logical burdens of proof would not and could not be met:

Contrary to popular misconception, the burden of proof lies on Zimmerman to demonstrate that he acted in self-defense, not on the state to show that he didn't. "Innocent until proven guilty" only applies to culpability for the offense in question, and no one has argued that Zimmerman didn't pull the trigger that ended Martin's life. While someone who has committed a violent crime obviously has the right to defend himself, we set a dangerous precedent if we automatically give the benefit of the doubt to the murderer instead of the victim. Not only does the victim lack a voice to present his or her side of the story, but any murderer who has been caught will naturally be inclined to argue that his or her actions were somehow justified. Because a murderer's word is obviously suspect, and because murder is not an offense which we can afford as a society to sanction without the strongest of all possible reasons, we must demand that one who is known to have taken another human life establish beyond any shred of doubt that he or she had good reason to do so — and punish them, for the sake of protecting the sanctity of human life, if their culpability can be established and their justification cannot.

Zimmerman never convincingly proved that his life was in danger. His bloody nose and the scrapes on the back of his head do suggest that he and Martin were involved in a physical altercation of some sort, but had he had his head smashed against the pavement several times (as he claims), he would have sustained far worse injuries than that. As the evidence stands, all we know for certain is that he and Martin had a fight, which does not translate into justifiable cause for thinking his life was in danger. If, for example, two men are involved in a barroom brawl, and one pulls out a gun and shoots the other, the killer shouldn't be exonerated simply because both parties were equally engaged in the act of violence; he is only justified if he can prove that he had good reason to fear the other party would have killed him if he had not acted first. A charge of manslaughter may be substituted for a more severe account, but it is ludicrous to claim that he should be entirely acquitted. Similarly, Zimmerman simply fighting with Martin does not justify Zimmerman killing Martin precisely because the only sound evidence that could have proved his life was in jeopardy — the severity of his bodily injuries — failed to meet that standard of proof. In short, there is no good reason to believe beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman had to end Martin's life.

What's probably more troubling are the reactions of the brain damaged individuals who inhabit the Liar's Club and those of the totally deranged at "Breitbart's Mausoleum". It is the reaction of the learning impaired at of these locations that make one ashamed of the human race in general-and Americans in particular. If you want some real evidence of the decline of American civilization and the corrupting effects of a fake news organization like Fox News-just read some of the comments there. Then take several showers to wash the filth off of you.

Matthew Rozsa summed it up well-its time for a "J Accuse" type letter to the country as a whole:

Yet millions of people have ignored the facts, and the rather basic logic that can be applied to them, because they want to take his side. Even before the photographs of Zimmerman's injuries were released, or before Martin's character was smeared by Zimmerman's defense attorneys, these same people were scrounging around for ways to defend Zimmerman and condemn the child whose life he took. For all of the talk of political correctness inconveniencing white people, the primary beneficiaries of braindead etiquette are the racists who are allowed to spew their bile and then hide behind disclaimers of their own so-called "color blindness."

I say enough. And I add to that disgust the following:

I accuse George Zimmerman of being a common murderer, for the reasons explained before.

I accuse Zimmerman's defenders of believing that Trayvon Martin deserved to die because he was a black male.

Some of them undoubtedly have deluded themselves into thinking that they aren't racist; others, just as certainly, know that they dislike black people but lie so as to avoid the stigma of being labelled a "racist." All, however, are basing their opinions on the fact that Martin was black. If both men had been white, these same people would never dream of arguing that a heavyset adult male with a firearm could be defended for stalking an unarmed child and killing him. These same people, whether they admit it or not, would rightly dismiss his claim to have acted in self-defense once the aforementioned evidence was presented to them. Because Martin was black, however, they readily bought into the stereotypes our society teaches about African American men, and formed their opinions accordingly.

Finally, I accuse our society of systematically targeting African Americans using the same logic employed by Zimmerman, his supporters, and the Florida jurors.

20 responses so far

Jul 04 2013

Happy Independence Day

Or as the German’s refer to it-just another work day.

But for me it was good-slept for about 12 hours recharging my batteries from hard booming work in Bucharest.

Took the S.O. down to France today-and we did some French wine shopping. Came back to a dinner of Chinese food and German beer. What better way to honor America than by celebrating internationally?

I spent a lot of time today remembering one particular 4th of July, one that truly represented a declaration of Independence for me, 4 July 2000. That literally was a time of great independence for me. I had broken free from the chains of bondage to that unique specimen of womanhood, fat shrew Americanus-and while I still had a many months of legal hassles to work through, to be rid of that and be free to savor the life beyond the marital grave was indeed a wonderful thing. No 4th of July in 13 years hence has had the meaning for me that that particular 4th did.

Because it also represented the freedom from bondage from the “program” of a particular quack, who had 6 months earlier tried to use his medical license to justify his “right” to interfere in my private life. I can honestly say-he is the one person, really the one and only person-that I have hated with a passion that remains unquenchable. To this day I still despise him-and the “system” he misrepresented.  Maybe eventually my hatred for him will dissipate-in the meantime my remembrance of the words, “ a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security” has special personal meaning for me. In other words, through my betrayal and misfortune at his worthless mind and hands-I learned anew for myself about my inner strength and MY RIGHT  to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Perhaps the suffering he inflicted must needs have come-BUT WOE BE UNTO HIM BY WHICH IT CAME. A cheery” fuck you” to him-a worthless excuse for a medical professional. He had no right to interfere in my life then-and he will never have the right or the opportunity again. Neither did his employer-a point he never understood. His job was to dispense medicine-not to make value judgments.   If you want to know where my stridency on the rights of the Sailor came from, while it did not begin there-it most certainly reinforced the need to defend them. I was lucky, I had the means and seniority to break free from his chains. I shudder to think of the long train of victims he inflicted damage to-who never got the chance to break free from his malpractice.

God,  it felt good and liberating to write that-and I only hope that someday he reads it, or better yet I get the chance to deliver the sentiment to him in person. The 13 years of relative victory-with more than a couple of unplanned detours-represent my personal revolution. My independence day victory.

In the final analysis, its the chains that we let be tied around us, they are the ones that really hold us back. Be them from work, or bad personal choices, or money-or the lack thereof-or just simply allowing people to try to exercise a sway they have no right to exert.

Personal declarations of independence are tough-but once in while you can break the bonds that bind you-and find the courage to step boldly into the unknown.

I hope there is still the strength within me to find it again-and to stay on the path less traveled by-for it has made all the difference. Fuck you KMB!

And Happy 4th of July to the rest of you!

 

2 responses so far

Jun 21 2013

Not understanding what was said…..

One should respect public opinion insofar as is necessary to avoid starvation and keep out of prison, but anything that goes beyond this is voluntary submission to an unnecessary tyranny.

Bertrand Russell


Recently, there has been a video that has gone viral in military blogging circles and elsewhere, showing the Chief of Staff of the Australian Army, Lieutenant General David Morrison, making tough talk on the issue of sexual harassment in the Australian Army.

A lot of people have been impressed by this video with his plain spokeness and tough talk. I am not in the least impressed-and see this video in a much different light.

Just more pap for the masses.

A cheery “Fuck you mate”-would appear to be required in reply.

There is nothing new here-save for his actual endorsement of the long held feminist ideal, namely criminalizing speech which runs counter to the party line. That has been the stated and unstated objective in the American military as well, especially as the years have passed and women have proven “indispensable” to the service of the Armed Forces. As this blog has proven repeatedly in many posts over the past 7 years-it’s complete and utter nonsense. It would appear that Gen Morrison through either active coercion or actual belief,  has bought into the myth as well.

Now I do not know the details of the Australian case, but I think without knowing exactly what occurred, the world-and the Australian military,  might not want to be in such haste to condemn the rest of the service for the bad acts of a few people. Yet as in the United States that appears to be exactly what is taking place.

There are legitimate policy arguments that still need to be held about the social revolution that has engulfed the armed forces of the Western Nations, policy discussions on fairness, affects on readiness, and over all common sense of many of the decisions that are being made in the service of the diversity industry that I know is present in the United States and appears to be in place in Australia. Some very knowledgeable and brave individuals have spoken out on these policy issues and taken a contrarian view, namely that of that every societal change comes at a cost to the society making it. Expanded roles of women in the military do have a cost and if the last 20 years have proven anything, it is that the administrative overhead of running a mixed gender force is huge. And it will continue to be greater than that involved in a single gender outfit.

Now to hold that point of view is not the same as endorsing misconduct. It would appear that the Australian offenders violated the cardinal rule of existence in today’s brave new world: 1) Know your environment and 2) never conduct conversations with your female co-workers that are not strictly limited to required professional matters. As a gun owner would say, “treat every gun as if it was loaded.” The adage applies to male / female interactions in the work place. “Always, always, always, be on your guard-and watch what you say or do.”  The consequences of failure to do so-appear almost weekly on the cover of Navy Times.

It is a cold day in hell when I agree with Wall Street journalist James Taranto, but the snowballs appear to be being tossed around in the infernal regions today. Taranto has pointed out the complete hypocrisy with which our elected leadership is behaving with respect to empowering our military leadership to deal with the issue of sexual harassment in the ranks:

In March, President Obama nominated Gen. Helms to serve as vice commander of the Air Force Space Command. But Sen. Claire McCaskill, a Missouri Democrat who sits on the Armed Services Committee, has placed a "permanent hold" on the nomination.

At issue is the general's decision in February 2012 to grant clemency to an officer under her command. Capt. Matthew Herrera had been convicted by a court-martial of aggravated sexual assault. Ms. McCaskill said earlier this month that the clemency decision "sent a damaging message to survivors of sexual assault who are seeking justice in the military justice system."

To describe the accuser in the Herrera case as a "survivor" is more than a little histrionic. The trial was a he-said/she-said dispute between Capt. Herrera and a female second lieutenant about a drunken October 2009 sexual advance in the back seat of a moving car. The accuser testified that she fell asleep, then awoke to find her pants undone and Capt. Herrera touching her genitals. He testified that she was awake, undid her own pants, and responded to his touching by resting her head on his shoulder………

It's fair to say that Capt. Herrera seems to have a tendency toward sexual recklessness. Perhaps that makes him unsuitable to serve as an officer in the U.S. Air Force. But his accusers acted recklessly too. The presumption that reckless men are criminals while reckless women are victims makes a mockery of any notion that the sexes are equal.

More important, Sen. McCaskill's blocking of Gen. Helms's nomination makes a mockery of basic principles of justice. As the general observed in her memo: "Capt Herrera's conviction should not rest on [the accuser's] view of her victimization, but on the law and convincing evidence, consistent with the standards afforded any American who finds him/herself on trial for a crime of this severity."

On Friday the House passed a defense bill that would strip commanders of the authority to grant clemency. That would be a mistake. The Herrera case demonstrates that the authority offers crucial protection for the accused.

Military officers and lawmakers alike swear an oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States." In the case of Matthew Herrera, Gen. Helms lived up to that commitment. Will Sen. McCaskill?

 

The point he makes is exactly the same one I made a few weeks back. These steps to deprive convening authorities of their discretion in court martial cases is dangerous-and full of unforeseen consequences. The recently passed action by Congress requiring minimum sentences and the inability of a convening authority to overturn a sexual harassment case,  doubly so.  They are stupid restrictions, passed in a knee-jerk fashion. And worse yet will be unevenly applied. Have a penis? Get fucked at the drive through.  Have a vagina? Here, take a tissue and lie down on the fainting couch-and let me pencil you in for your interview on “The View”.

Let me say it again, there is a difference between misconduct and sincere opposition to poorly thought out and poorly implemented policy. The former is just stupid, the latter is noble and something that happens not nearly enough in our military today. And that,  Gen Morrison,  is where your smooth sounding speech just falls apart. There are people who care too much about the proud traditions of the service, to see it sacrificed all too quickly on the altar of political correctness.

 

3 responses so far

May 15 2013

Yes Virginia, these people are that crazy.

I have been watching with great interest the cries of anguish over the so called "scandals" that have your dyed in the wool member of the Teabag set, salivating and dreaming of the day they get their revenge. Just for grins I actually dropped in on the group "that prides itself on its civilized discussion"-even though they very seldom actually do that. The members of this community are, by and large,  are a self reinforcing community-trading conspiracy theories among themselves and viciously attacking anyone who dares to challenge the conventional orthodoxy.

"I got a chuckle out of the intolerant part. That really is a pretty good joke. Lex would have gotten a chuckle from it as well."

Probably he would have-because the simple truth was they could not see intolerance if it bit them in the ass. But just because they cannot recognize-or they choose not to recognize,  their shortcomings, does not mean they don't have them. I reinforced that knowledge quite well-I got my fair share of abuse and am good to go for about 6 months. No need to return.

In case you have been in cave somewhere-here is a rundown for you:

Alex Pareene at Salon has an entertaining rundown of the three “scandals” that could supposedly lead to the impeachment of the president: Benghazi, the AP phone logs and the IRS-Tea Party thing.

Pareene figures the Benghazi issue is kaput because the GOP stupidly focused on meaningless talking points on Sunday shows rather than the real issue, which was inadequate security. And since austerity-humpers in the House were slashing security budgets like Fruit Ninja addicts in Arcade Frenzy mode, it’s a good bet they don’t want to go there. That and the preening Sunday performances of would-be soap opera stars like Senators McCain and Graham led the GOP to focus on the dud aspect of the Benghazi affair, soiling a once-promising bit of dirty laundry.

Likewise, Pareene points out that while the AP logs issue may have a built-in advantage due to its implications for the very media that would be charged with ginning up impeachment-level outrage, the GOP can’t claim clean hands there either: The Republicans are the ones who demanded that the administration investigate the leaks that led to the AP investigation in the first place. And the GOP isn’t really opposed to spying on reporters, at least if Republicans get to do it sometimes. This might lead to another brogressive boner for Rand Paul, but perhaps nothing more.

According to Pareene, the jackpot scandal has got to be the IRS-Tea Party thing because, even if, as seems likely, no one at the White House knew about it, it’s the “conservative movement’s dream scandal.

 

He is most certainly right about the last part-the IRS "scandal" is a Tea Party wet dream. The agency they hate the most-second only to their hatred of Obama, screwed up in actually trying to do their job. Which was namely, to weed out hack political movements that are trying to circumvent both the letter and the spirit of the tax code, in order to hide the fact that their donations are not just from the grass roots.

Tea Partiers love to lecture you on how its not just one movement, but several. And they love the idea that it is a grass roots movement-not orchestrated at all. Never mind that it ignores the fact that the Tea Party was the rebranded rump of the Bush dead-enders. It was a convenient fiction that they all tell themselves in order to hide the fact that their policy prescriptions are nonsense, that they would directly suffer the most if their plans were enacted, and that they are in fact-being exploited by men a lot richer than themselves. The media conveniently cooperated too-clinging to the absurd notion that it was a genuine grassroots movement. And they cling to it still, "like turds to a moth-eaten pair of faux-Colonial breeches."

And so they are shrieking with glee that they may finally have the chance they have been dreaming about since January 20th 2009. They think they can , dare I say it, impeach Barak Obama.

Never mind that none of this hardly rises to the level of "high crimes and misdemeanors"-never let the facts get in the way of a good, old fashioned, blood libel. The fact that they are so determined is enough to give any sober American pause. Pause and fear-that a significant portion of the nation's citizenry is so brutally demented.

I think the notion of impeachment is industrial-strength insane. There is utterly no proof that the President Obama even knew anything directly about the shifting Benghazi responses, let alone did something about them (yes, folks; under the Constitution, the President must do something). And as for the Internal Revenue Service story, from what we now know, those transgressions were committed by IRS staffers in Cincinnati who have never been closer to Obama than their television sets… Impeachment is crazy… and the idea that Obama has any direct culpability in either of these matters is, given what we know today, utter madness. Okay?

But this is my point: utter madness is what today’s Republicans do. You can present to me every logical argument you desire. Benghazi at the end of the day was a terrible tragedy in which mistakes, bad mistakes, were certainly made, and in which confusion and the CYA reflex led to some bad information going out to the public initially, but none of this remotely rises to the level of high crime. The IRS cock-up was just that, a mistake by a regional office. I get all this, and I agree with you.

But what we think doesn’t matter. I can assure you that already in the Pavlovian swamps of the nutso right, the glands are swelling. Theirs is a different planet from the one you and I inhabit….

… They do their base’s bidding, not America’s. How many times do you need to see them do this before you accept that it is the reality? And now there’s an added element. They want to gin up turnout among their base for next year’s elections. And if they gin it up enough, and the Democratic base stays home, they could end up holding the House and taking the Senate. And if they have both houses, meaning that the vote in the House would not be certain to hit a Senate dead-end, well, look out.

I hope the White House knows this. I hope they understand, I hope the President himself understands, that the fever has not broken and will not break. It might crescendo right up to his very last day in office. And yes, a lot of this Benghazi stuff is about Hillary Clinton. But not all of it. And the IRS thing, which Drudge led with for two days in a row and may yet be bigger than Benghazi, isn’t about her at all. If my worst fears are never realized—well, good, obviously. But it will only be because they couldn’t identify even a flimsy pretext on which to proceed. Never put the most extreme behavior past them. It is who they are, and it is what they do.

 

Yes they are that messed up and they are that crazy. These people are not caricatures-they really exist.

And that should scare the bejesus out of you.

20 responses so far

May 10 2013

The Professor would like a word, please.

Speaking of things that are degrading to women, back in January,  Martin Van Creveld published a fine article in Small Wars Journal. In it he makes the point that got RDML Gaouette fired, namely that there is a double standard existing in today's military-and its one where one gender is in fact devalued-but its men that are being devalued, NOT women.

Last not least, as figures from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan show, relative to their number military women are 90 percent less likely to be killed than military men. In other militaries around the world, incidentally, women’s share among the casualties is much lower still. Uniformed women, in other words, are not pulling their weight. Whether this is because public opinion will not stand for large numbers of dead servicewomen or because the women themselves have found a thousand ways to avoid going where the bullets are is immaterial. Probably both factors play a role. Instead of fighting, women get all the cushy jobs. For anyone who serves in the military, or whose livelihood depends on public approval, the prevailing climate of political correctness makes it impossible to mention the problem even in a whisper. Obviously, though, it is bound to have some effects on the morale of male personnel.

Van Creveld makes a key point about the thought processes behind the feminization of today's readiness. If you view the military as just another large corporation (in fact the largest American corporation) than increasing numbers of women in the force is just a reflection of the trend in society. So too are the large numbers of men unemployed and losing opportunity due to the reduced total numbers and increased numbers in the work force. Which is fine if you support the "corporate" point of view. On the other hand, " If the reason for having armed forces is to guarantee national security, then [having large numbers of women] the answer is clearly no."

As I have pointed out repeatedly in this space, discussions about women in uniform rarely deal with the true issues at hand and instead tend to focus on ideas of "fairness" and "opportunity"-when in fact the execution of wars in defense of the country is not a fair premise, and in a proper world would not exist at all.

So, it might do you well to understand the Professor's key point about what the "transformation" of our military force has wrought. You asked for it, you got it. Welcome to the world mediocrity built.

Looking back, clearly what we see is two long-term processes running in parallel. The first is the decline of U.S. armed forces (as well as all other Western ones, but that is not our topic here). The second is their growing feminization. Critics will object that, even as they were being downsized, the forces went through one qualitative improvement after another. In particular, the so-called “Revolution in Military Affairs” is supposed to have increased their fighting power many times over. That, however, is an illusion. To realize this, all one has to do is look at Afghanistan. Over there, “illiterate” tribesmen—not, take note, tribeswomen—are right now about to force the U.S. to withdraw its troops after a decade of effort in which they achieved hardly anything.

Are the two processes linked? You bet they are. Consider a work by two female professors, Barbara F. Reskin and Patricia A. Roos, with the title Job Queues, Gender Queues. First published in 1990, it has since been quoted no fewer than 1,274 times. As they and countless other researchers, both male and female, have shown, over time the more women that join any organization, and the more important the role they play in that organization, the more its prestige declines in the eyes of both men and women. (emphasis mine) Loss of prestige leads to diminishing economic rewards; diminishing economic rewards lead to loss of prestige. As any number of historical examples has shown, the outcome is a vicious cycle. Can anybody put forward a reason why the U.S. military should be an exception to the rule?

Welcome to the brave new world. To hell with it!

Warning notice: I am leaving comments on. However if someone spirals down the same rat hole we went through last year-and refuses to discuss issues but instead engages in personal attacks, your comment will be deleted immediately.

4 responses so far

Mar 26 2013

Some things remain constant in the universe

Such as the fact that on any given issue, Mark Steyn will be wrong about it. How do you know Steyn is lying? His lips are moving or his fingers are touching a keyboard.

Over at The Atlantic. Conor Friedersdorf points out the latest example of Steyn's hypocrisy by examining his unaplogetic defense of the decision to invade Iraq. You should read Steyn's self serving blabber first, then read Friedersdorf's skilled dissection of it.

He exposes Steyn as the complete hypocrite he has always been.

What neoconservatives never seem to understand is that you go to war with the citizenry that you've got. Urging a war of choice that requires more years of fighting to win than the citizenry will permit is itself an error. If guys like Steyn didn't realize, when they were calling on the U.S. to invade Iraq, that Americans would tire of fighting there after a decade of conflict, thousands of troops killed, and hundreds of billions of dollars spent, they should blame themselves for missing the obvious. If America looks weak for failing to win the war, we have Iraq hawks to blame for urging a war that required far longer to win than a democratic citizenry was ever likely to want to fight (and that might well have been unwinnable regardless of how long we remained an occupying force).

The Iraq hawks would be culpable even if they'd encouraged war without making any predictions about its likely cost. Instead, the hawks spent the pre-war period assuring Americans that victory would be sure and swift; proclaimed "Mission Accomplished" soon after the invasion; and started speculating in those heady days about regime change in Iran and Syria. It isn't ADHD that caused so many to support the invasion only to turn against the occupation. Many of the Americans who changed sides were misled by the faux-assurance of writers like Steyn, who puffed themselves up as if they were speaking obvious foreign-policy truths, openly mocked academics and pundits who warned of impending calamity, and most incredibly, continue all these years later to act as if subsequent events have vindicated their analysis. The hawks who say we'd do well to stay in Iraq and secure Bush's victory aren't winning converts in part because their predictions about how the war would unfold have been proven so spectacularly wrong by events — without their admitting it — that no one takes them seriously.

Some things just never change can always be counted on.  The sun coming up every day, for example, and the fact that you can always count on Mark Steyn to be a douchebag.

No responses yet

Mar 05 2013

Let the whining continue…….

Mitt Romney seems to be having trouble adjusting to life as a worthless piece of shit an also ran.

First, here's Willard, reminding us again that he only lost because he wouldn't give the Poors all the nice things, like the things he gave all of us here in Massachusetts, when he was pretending that he wasn't such a privileged, entitled dick.

The president had the power of incumbency. ObamaCare was very attractive, particularly to those without health insurance. And they came out in large numbers to vote. So that was part of a successful campaign.

You bet. It was going to be the part of your successful 2008 campaign, too, until the entire Republican party decided that it would rather inject itself with Ebola than spend eight years listening to you.


"It kills me not to be there, not to be in the White House doing what needs to be done," Romney told Fox News in an interview broadcast on Sunday, his first since losing to President Barack Obama last November."

Yeah…..sure….asshole-whatever helps you sleep at night in your gold covered bed.

Take it away, Charles Pierce:  "Somebody's still got the baaaaad butt-sting. The country decided you were a walking lump of cream cheese that it wouldn't sit next to on the last cattle car to Hell. Go away again now."

Nonetheless it always humorous to watch Rmoney try to pull off the common touch.:

The one thing I can say for absolute certainty, after watching Willard Romney try to impersonate a carbon-based life-form for over a year, is that "people" got as good a look at who he really is as they have of any candidate in the past 20 years. His problem was that he couldn't even fake being a fake well enough. I look forward to many more appearances from America's Fun Couple in the weeks and months to come, as they keep digging that hole with both hands.



Rmoney arriving for his Fox interview.

179126.strip

No responses yet

Mar 01 2013

Happy Sequester Day!

The douchebags elected representatives in Congress have once again failed miserably at their jobs..

You will notice the Countdown clock to your left, counting down the days till my furlough and or layoff-whichever comes first.

One of my favorite writers, Charles Pierce has summed up the situation quite well:

Whatever happens tomorrow, the utter failure of sequestration to do what it is designed to do is of a piece with the previous failures of the Gang Of Six, the Gang Of 12, and the king of all revered utter failures, Simpson-Bowles, which still has most of official Washington feeding Vaal at every turn in service to a commission that couldn't even muster a majority of its own membership, Whatever happens tomorrow, the utter failure of sequestration to do what it was supposed to do — namely, to be so utterly horrifying that it would force a deal — should bring an end to government by gimmick.

Government by gimmick is a dodge. Government by gimmick is a way for politicians to protect their status as politicians without actually doing the jobs they were elected to do. Government by gimmick depends vitally on the fundamental Beltway anti-democratic heresy — that the system as designed is inadequate to present circumstances and that the only way out of this is to go put together the proper group of bipartisan Very Important People to apply common sense to the problem. It was government by gimmick — the Tower Commission — that probably bought Ronald Reagan out of the Iran-Contra scandal because the gathering of wise men determined from the start that holding the president responsible by constitutional means would scare the children and disturb the horses. This is the principle that was applied to the useless Gang Of 14 solution to the "problem" of judicial filibusters. And, ever since the American people elected a Congress full of right-wing chew toys in 2010, government-by-gimmick has been the way the American economy has been directed, and now all the duct tape is failing, and the balsa's cracking, and the whole thing is coming apart, and the people in charge are spending long hours talking about how they couldn't have foreseen any of this.

The great thing about Pierce is that he does not succumb to all the nonsense about "both sides do it". He puts the blame squarely where it belongs-on the selfish children who inhabit the tea party crazed GOP.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

4 responses so far

Next »

  • Categories

  • Previous Posts

  • ISSUES?

  • Want to subscribe to my feed?

    Add to Google
  • Follow me on Facebook!

    Just look for Skippy San. ( No dash).
  • Topics

  • Meta