Saturday, March 15, 2008

The Real Terror Threat to Real Americans

One time acquaintance & professional loudmouth Johnny Angel (forced, for one reason or another, to use his legal name, Johnny Wendell, on air) suggested today on his 0700-0900 Sat. show on L. A.'s own KTLK 1150AM "progressive" talk station that the various federal anti-terror laws passed in the wake of 11 September 2001 should be used immediately by Generalissimo Bush to round up gang members (there's been a spate of gang shootings of alleged innocents here in Los Angeles recently) declare them enemy combatants & ship 'em to Gitmo. Sounds like an excellent idea to us, but since contributions to Republicans are more likely to come from developers & car dealers, we're sure the only Federal activity against domestic terror will continue to be against "eco-terrorists" who deface Hummers or burn down McMansions & gigantic apartment complexes that are under construction, w/o killing anyone. When the FBI says "eco-terrorists," we suspect they mean people who are terrorizing the economy (the campaign contributors' economy, that is) not those who are acting to protect the environment. No idea where one could find the stats, bet we'll bet our next General Relief check that more Americans have been killed by gang-related violence since 11 Sept. 2001 than died in the attacks that day.

God Damn America to Hell!!!

We at Just Another Blog (From L. A.)™ would like to announce our complete & absolute endorsement of Jeremiah Wright's "incendiary" sermons. Incendiary, in this case, meaning truthful. The truth hurts, doesn't it? We also "vehemently disagree and strongly condemn the statements" that have been made by Sen. Obama trying to disassociate himself from J. W.'s truth. Stand up like a man, Barack. If "Insane in the Membrane" McCain can actively seek the endorsement of John Hagee, & be photographed w/ him (not that Just Another Blog™ thinks the Roman Catholic Church is any thing but The Whore of Babylon & a cult) then why can't you be a man & support the truth your "pastor" (Guess that makes you a fucking sheep to be led around, doesn't it?) has the intestinal fortitude to speak. P. S.: There are better sermons than the one linked to above, where Wright does indeed say: "God Bless America? God Damn America!" So say we all here at Just Another Blog™, except for the Gawd part, 'cause there ain't no such thing!

Friday, March 14, 2008

More on Mental Health (Or the Lack Thereof)

I've no idea why the "group" concept is so fucking popular w/ mental health professionals, other than laziness or a feeling that compensation for their labor isn't enough (probably isn't, in the public sphere) so let the wig jobs handle it themselves. Why, just yesterday, being in a mood to grab a sledgehammer & begin wreaking total & absolute destruction on inanimate objects ranging from newsracks to single-story buildings, I attended an hour-long group described as "Living with Strong Emotions," facilitated by an unpaid non-professional ( just plain busybody?) who took cues from Big Bill W.'s Big Blue Book of Big-Ass Bullshit. (I've got your Moral Re-Armament & higher power right here, you surrendering losers!) Once the nine or ten groupies introduced themselves, said how they were feeling on a scale of one to ten (I guess) & expressed gratitude (Didn't some wise-ass say "Gratitude is an emotion for dogs?") for something, as well as explained the trivial reason they were less than a 10 (really, you wouldn't believe some of the insignificant crap, compared to my glorious troubles) & the person who won't shut up & always has something on a tangent to add "contributed" (Is it a Law of Group Dynamics that every group has one?) I'd only been able to rant/rave for two minutes, & the group was over w/o any concrete, positive suggestions as to why I shouldn't start smashing things. There seems to be some concept that being in a group w/ other less functional types is "supportive," whatever that means, but it's not the support this melancholic needs, it's housing, not an over-medicated slow-talker offering me a hug. (Not that any one offered one, but you know what I mean.) Not to be a sexist pig, but recognizing, if not celebrating the differences between the sexes, mental health workers should realize that support, to males (one of whom I more or less count myself) means a resolution of the problem, not a processing of the emotions (whatever the hell that means) as occurs when women gab about their problems. (OK, "gab" could qualify as sexist, but I find the slang of past ages highly amusing, & at least I didn't type "have a henfest.") Something I realized at a sadly late age, but now that I understand it I'm not letting the concept go. All jocularity aside, what are we supposed to get from these things? There is almost always the person who won't shut up but is way off on a tangent, the person (often me) who doesn't want to share w/ the group, & cliches, platitudes & psycho-babble/jargon from all. And the sub-text of being a member of the group, participating, not being isolated, ad nauseum. I. e., they want you back in the herd so you may be manipulated w/ greater ease, & become a productive member of Pig Nation again. Phooey!!

Thursday, March 13, 2008

A Day Off & a $ Short

We note that Friday the Thirteenth has arrived a day early this month.

Don't Even Bother Asking

You bet your sweet ass we're as bitter as fuck here at Just Another Blog™? How'd you notice?

Econ Notes From All Over

The latest indicators indicate recession. Here at Just Another Blog™ we can't wait for an economic depression, so middle-class pigs will be right there w/ us, wandering the streets aimlessly w/ all their material goods in a couple of bags, victimized by callous, greedy landlords, wondering where their "investments" went (See that yacht at the marina? That's where your retirement is, sucker!) & why they can't get Medicare or any other help. Bush War & Reagan economics, taking us back to feudal society. Couldn't happen to a nicer, more deserving nation.

Where's The Outrage?

Unlike other office holders recently caught w/ their pants down, the most prominent of whom would be Sens. Craig (R-ID) & Vitter (R-LA), Gov. Spitzer resigned his office, although we here at Just Another Blog™ saw no reason for him to do so. None of the ex-gov.'s personal activities are really any of our or the gummint's business. And where are all the glibertarians bemoaning the gov't. prying into people's bank acc'ts. & personal lives? Apparently if you believe the "free market" doesn't mean a free pass for corruption & cheating, & then do something about, it's another story for the forces of "Freedom and Liberty." Maybe Spitzer should pull a Larry Craig & change his mind about resigning, so he can at least serve the remainder of his term. Wonder if Sen. Diaper-Doo Vitter plans to run again, & if the good moralists of the state of Louisiana will send him back to Washington? (They may just want to have him safely out of their state, so they can concentrate on titty-flashing for plastic beads.)

Rant/Rave Concluded

Yesterday I ran out of time (& it's running out for all of us) to conclude effectively my little load of righteous anger, by returning to the R. D. Laing reference (Hard to stop once a good spew of hatred, rage & pain starts, & the Santa Monica Public Library only gives one 90 mins./day.) The point being that if this unspeakably horrid culture/society/scam ("the world") that's been perpetrated/constructed on this once decent & honest planet by you awful mutants believes me to be "mentally ill" for not wanting to be a part of it, it is the one illin', not I. Step back & look in the mirror, world. Why would I want to have anything to do w/ either the ignoramuses or, even worse, those who think they know something, but don't? For example:
Only 28% of the public knows that nearly 4,000 Americans have died in the Iraq war[.] [...] In the poll released Wednesday, around a third said about 3,000 U.S. troops have died and about one in 10 said 2,000. On the other hand, about a quarter put the figure close to 5,000. The actual number Wednesday was 3,987, according to the independent website
Of course there's a partial excuse for this stupidity: The media needs you to be a brain-dead food tube, consuming tainted beef & useless Made-in-China-by-slave-laborers-who-have-what-used-to-be-your-jobs objects.
The portion of news stories that are about the war also has dropped in recent months, according to a study by the nonpartisan Project for Excellence in Journalism.
The medication I take doesn't make me feel any more like participating in or "contributing" (that means being exploited like a dog, for those of you reading by wrapping your lips around each & every syllable) to this world. Desiring blissful ignorance of & numbness to all that surrounds me (Will it & they never shut up?) is a healthy reaction, not a sick one. Enough of this, already. What's the point (of anything)?

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Mental Health/Illness Manifesto Rant/Rave

It was some published shrink (R. D. Laing?) who wrote that mental "health" was defined by society. Here's my take, in the first person singular, so you'll know I mean it. I'm not interested. I'm not interested in being a "healthy" member of your unhealthy, death-worshipping culture. I'm not interested in being a member of your "community," which means only sucking up to you & playing the same fucking political games that I can't play (I wouldn't be in this situation in the first place if I could, would I?) in the"real" world either. I'm not interested in being in "groups" where the truly deranged go off on tangents & I get nothing but more hopelessness & despair. I'm not interested in having to attend your bullshit chapel services to get a meal or a cot. (Stop preying on the ruined & hopeless, religious assholes. Take your fucking missionary work to the wealthy, successful & popular, see how far your exploitation goes there!) I'm not interested in receiving charity from wealthy women (that's the alliterative form, the rhyming form is "rich bitches") attempting to use up their spare time, & assuage their guilt for prostituting themselves to men who lie, cheat, steal & murder to achieve success & buy trophy wives in this world of liars, cheaters, murderers & thieves. It's entirely about how much better they feel about themselves after "helping" poor unfortunates. Stick your day old bread from overpriced, pretentious Westside restaurants up your various wretched holes! I am not interested in waiting in lines for food or shelter, nor am I interested in waiting on lists for yrs. & yrs & yrs. for transitional or permanent shelter. I am not interested in being a wage-slave to a corporation that will pay me a wage (even though it's a $ or two an hour over the so-called minimum wage) that will not allow me to live alone, w/ a tiny amount of creature comfort, in this city of shit & pain. Especially when said corporation's managers will treat me like a piece of shit. It's not enough that your humanity is destroyed by the crummy wages, they must take what little dignity one might have too. Screw 'em. But enough negativity. Here are positive affirmations, for your lying, stupid, "Oh, don't be so negative," attitudes even though I'm living in the streets & piss-drenched alleys on $221.00 cash & $160.00 in Food Stamps a month, w/ no realistic hope for any relief, just an even shorter life w/ greater physical suffering. Easy for you to say, w/ your crummy job "helping" people, which seems to consist of telling them to "be positive," or "chill out." I am not blind. I know what my future holds, & there's nothing "positive," or "possible" about it. I am intelligent, much more intelligent than you, who are too stupid, ignorant, or willfully blind to notice that everything is made of shit & you are all dying. I know too much for my own good. I am tired of living & less & less scared of death, especially as I hope to take many of you w/ me when I go, or at the very least screw up traffic somewhere, or delay the Red Line for quite some time. I could not possibly care any less, except for the destruction & agony I will leave in my wake. I am nothing to you, you are less than nothing to me. I will not die w/o being noticed! NB: This has not made me feel any better. But it's entertaining. Can't tell if I mean all of it or not, can you? P. S.: Should I tell my shrink or case managers or any other of the useless "be positive" element about my little "web log?" Because the slightest threat against their precious world of violence, hatred, war, greed & general evil would result in my being committed to a mental hospital, while the truly insane & violent continue their merry way through the world, in positions of power, producing & causing more twisted fucks in their image. Yes, George Bush & Dick Cheney can rant, rave, rattle their sabres and threaten entire nations w/ horrid mutilation & death from above any time they fucking want to, but I mention that I'm tired of living & wouldn't mind being dead, & it's off to the loony bin. Where's the justice, or even simple fairness, in that?I'm glad I'll be dead soon; your world that I never wanted anything to do w/is only going to become worse. I pity the young, for even worse shall be their world, though at least in part it will be their own fault. And that's it for today's Ranting Lunatic Prophecy Corner!!

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Compare & Contrast (Again)

We're beginning to think that we should transform this "web log" into a review of the L. A. Times, as we no longer have 16 hrs./day to wander the web looking for outrages, but instead are limited to dead trees & radio waves for our input & inspiration. Example: Just yesterday we referred to a Times op-ed about the probable return of RW militias. Yes, we understand the difference between an op-ed (not written by a Times staffer) & a news article written & edited by Times employees. Still, the one day separation between the op-ed,
Home-grown terrorism Current political conditions are conducive to violent domestic extremism.
& today's
Domestic terror groups in disarray after Sept. 11 After the violent mayhem of the '90s, right-wing extremist groups are less active. Some believe the 2001 attacks diverted rage away from the U.S. government and toward foreigners.
is somewhat amusing. And in no way, shape or form does today's story indicate there won't be a revival of domestic non-governmental terror. Nor, indeed, does today's piece make any note of the facts from the op-ed, that is, this sort of mania flourishes under (relatively) liberal administrations. It does refer to those dangerous "eco-terrorists" that the FBI wastes so much time on. Let's see how the FBI will respond to RW hate groups screaming that "the Democrats surrendered to Al-Qaida" by pulling troops out of Iraq (assuming such actually happens, & we're not holding our breath) therefore any action against the current "Jew-dominated" gov't. is legitimate & necessary. Funny part (there's always something w/ these people):
Three years after foreign terrorists killed nearly 3,000 Americans in the Sept. 11 attacks, Steve Holten left the San Francisco Bay Area, drove east through the Tahoe National Forest, skirted the Truckee River and settled himself in Reno. Here he proclaimed himself a lieutenant colonel of the local chapter of Aryan Nations. He sent an e-mail to area newspapers declaring war on the federal government, the media and the Jews. But no war came. Holten's career as a domestic terrorist was short and uneventful. FBI agents promptly arrested him, and a federal grand jury indicted him for transmitting a threatening e-mail. He pleaded guilty and served four months in prison. After getting out he contracted the AIDS virus, and he was rearrested, this time for soliciting a man for sex in a nearby city park. With shaved head and Nazi lightning-bolt tattoos on his neck, Holten is emblematic of how far the anti-government terrorism movement has sunk in the years since the attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center.
Don't worry, The South (or its mentality, if you can call it that) will rise again.

Lapel Pin Patriotism

The eternally shallow Jonah Goldberg offers yet more drivel to This Great Nation of Ours™, pretending there's no difference between nationalism & the "patriotism" he'd like to practice (try enlisting & "surging" in Iraq, Loadpants, if you're such a patriot, rather than attempting to lower the national I. Q. w/ every sentence you type). Key line:
Nationalism, a romantic sensibility, says "my country is always right." Patriots hope that their nation will make the right choice.
And left-o-commie Democrats actually try to make the nation make the right choice. Case in point: The invasion & occupation of Iraq. What was the "right choice" there? And whose "patriotism" was questioned at the merest mention that Our Current National Clusterfuck™ might not be the "right choice?" We might also note the irony of an op-ed piece entitled:
Loyalty oaths fail the test of democracy Such requirements are an anachronism from the McCarthy era.
appearing on the same page as Goldberg's column.
Certainly, a truly disloyal employee could pose risks to the government. She might (if she were doing something other than teaching remedial math) disclose secret information to an enemy, destroy important government files, make decisions intended to harm the public interest and recruit other employees to engage in subversive activities. But just how does a loyalty oath guard against such dangers? After all, anyone who is truly disloyal will simply take the oath falsely. No dangerous subversive will be deterred by the requirement of an oath.
In other words, Jonah, you twit, actions speak louder than words, & the phony flag-on-the-lapel patriotism that Republicans practice, at which you claim the "left" is deficient, is another red herring. Of which country do you think Sen. Obama is campaigning for the presidency, Nepal? Real patriots needn't advertise; their actions, policies, etc., prove their patriotism w/o drawing attention to it, as if they were "old fogy right-wing bullies." What's that proverbial "last refuge of a scoundrel," again?

Monday, March 10, 2008

The Worstest Generation

If your curiosity was piqued by our brief quotations from the review of Nicholson (C'mon, dude, lighten up, just call yourself "Nick.") Baker's new Human Smoke, there is a podcast or something where you post-literate types can listen rather than read. (Jeezis, we thought this whole devil-box thing would return us to literacy, but no, it's all "txtng" & A/V crap.) Click here & scroll down until you see a guy who thinks he's Santa Claus (Speaking of "lightening up," get a fucking shave while you're at it!) w/ the words "Nicholson Baker" beneath his visage. It's in the right column. (The embed lead somewhere entirely different. We are so fucking sorry to have made any of you do any extra clicking. We know there are only so many million clicks in that mouse of yours.) Looks as if this one may cause some controversy. As usually happens when someone thinks for him/herself.

People Get Ready

From today's cage-liner:
In November, it is possible that a liberal Democratic administration will be elected to replace the long-established conservative Republican leadership. Such a transition has occurred three times in the past 80 years, in 1932, 1960 and 1992. (For various reasons, the defeat of Gerald Ford in 1976 does not fit the model.) In each period, within two to three years, the nation had a frightening upsurge of radical right-wing, paramilitary movements. In each case, these angry movements spun off terrorist cells that plotted assassinations and bombings. Significantly, these upsurges only characterize the shift from conservative to liberal administrations. Paramilitaries remain few in number and marginal under GOP administrations.
Not the first time a rise in action (rather than mere babbling) by right-wing lunatics after the replacement of the W(orst) admin. has been forecast, but this item provides historical context.

Sunday, March 9, 2008

Imperial Hubris Indeed

In today's regional fishwrapper (We've decided not to worry so much about half of our items being based on L. A. Times items, after all, this is Just Another Blog [From L. A.]™, not from Peoria or Washington, D. C. or even Walla Walla, Washington.) Michael Scheuer, whose first two books were published anonymously, has the lead piece in the Opinion section. It probably should have appeared under the "Anonymous" byline as well. Mr. Scheuer is not a total fool, he's derided the current administration for its foolish "war of terror," & its insistence that "they hate us for our (slowly eroding ) freedoms, but in his article he calls for
the use of massive, largely indiscriminate military force
against the
worldwide uprising of radical Islamists.
"Worldwide uprising?" No question there are religious fanatics out there, wishing to harm the United States & its interests (mostly oil, of course) & they are not to be taken lightly, but just what indications are there of a "worldwide uprising?" A few thousand "radical Islamists" per Islamic country, or non-Islamic country, carrying out acts of terrorism in the Islamic Crescent & parts of North America & Western Europe do not a "worldwide uprising" make. For some reason (payments from the military-industrial complex?) Mr. Scheuer seems to think that "the clandestine service and special forces" are not enough:
Simply and callously put, covert forces cannot kill the number of enemies that require killing.
He offers no estimate of the numbers that need to be offed, but claims
[t]he fact is that in this global war against non-uniformed, religiously motivated foes who live with and are supported by their civilian brethren, and who are perfectly willing to use a nuclear device against the U.S., victory is only possible through the use of massive, largely indiscriminate military force.
Is he suggesting the carpet bombing of any place occupied by Muslims, simply because the "radicals" live in the same neck o' the woods? And what does this mean:
But as long as we continue to avoid the broader, Europe-angering death and destruction that are the necessary byproduct of war-winning conventional military campaigns, we will not be able to win. Although the covert services can successfully eliminate the enemy's leaders, its foot soldiers and civilian supporters are not being wiped out. Thus, fallen Islamist chiefs are quickly replaced, and their troops and civilian support networks remain intact. Bluntly put, using covert forces as our main war-making tool ensures an endless struggle against a well-led, resilient and manpower-rich enemy.
Manpower-rich? No one can say w/ much certainty how many fundamentalist foot soldiers there are, let alone "civilian supporters," but we would really like to know what the targets of this "broader, Europe-angering death and destruction" are. Believe you us, if there were divisions of radical Muslim troops, armor & artillery, supported by an Al-Qaida air force (other than the ones they manage to high jack, of course) & navy, we'd know exactly where to apply plenty of conventional military force. But this sounds like the old "turn the Middle East into a glassy parking lot" routine, especially in light of this:
The knee-jerk reaction to calls for applying massive military force is an anguished cry of "oh, but we will lose the battle for hearts and minds!" That is an utterly false claim because the United States has already lost the "hearts and minds" war -- up to 80% of Muslims worldwide share Osama bin Laden's belief that the goal of U.S. foreign policy is "to weaken and divide the Islamic world," according to a poll by the University of Maryland's Program on International Policy Attitudes. More military force could only drive that number up marginally.
So we should continue w/ foreign policies that alienate & then radicalize Muslims, then bomb the shit out of them, because 80% of them are lost anyway? As opposed to electing leaders who would at least weaken the stranglehold of the oil & armament industries on American foreign policy & enable us to attempt to win back some of that lost 80%? Sad, as we had thought Mr. Scheuer had some common sense. Oh well. Once you've read this in your dead-tree edition of the Times, flip the Opinion section over, & it will magically become the Book Review, where the cover review is of a book Jonah Goldberg might want to consult when carefully researching & detailing what should be his next book, Conservative Fascism. (Fair & balanced, y'know.) It's about the origins of WWII, & not the standard "if only they hadn't appeased Hitler, blah blah blah" take, either. Let's look at some quotes from Winnie Churchill, the hero of the National Review crowd (it gets their knickers all squishy when they refer to George W(orst) Bush as Churchillian):
Churchill is a dominant figure in "Human Smoke," depicted as a bloodthirsty warmonger who, in 1922, was still bemoaning the fact that World War I hadn't lasted a little longer so that Britain could have had its air force in place to bomb Berlin and "the heart of Germany." But no, he whined, it had to stop, "owing to our having run short of Germans and enemies." Churchill was not driven by anti-fascism. In his 1937 book "Great Contemporaries," he described Hitler as "a highly competent, cool, well-informed functionary with an agreeable manner." The same book savagely attacked Leon Trotsky. (What was wrong with Trotsky? "He was still a Jew. Nothing could get over that.") Churchill repeatedly praised Mussolini for his "gentle and simple bearing." In 1927, he told a Roman audience, "If I had been an Italian, I am sure that I should have been entirely with you from the beginning to the end of your victorious struggle against the bestial appetites and passions of Leninism." Churchill considered fascism "a necessary antidote to the Russian virus," Baker writes. In 1938, he remarked to the press that if England were ever defeated in war, he hoped "we should find a Hitler to lead us back to our rightful position among nations."
And from the Big Appeaser himself:
British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain said in 1939 of German treatment of Jews that "no doubt Jews aren't a lovable people. I don't care about them myself."
Winston again:
But even more than the communists, Churchill's enemy No. 1 in the 1920s and early '30s was Mohandas Gandhi and his doctrine of nonviolence, which Churchill warned "will, sooner or later, have to be grappled with and finally crushed."
As previously documented here.