Saturday, April 12, 2008
If I could kill myself first, to prove to you my good intentions, I would. Then I could go on this murder spree, just like I've been planning to for six and a half months, knowing full well that all your doubts and concerns were adequately answered. Unfortunately, that's not the way these things work. But I swear on the lives of the children I killed earlier this week that I will follow through on this promise. It may not sound like much, but given the situation, it's the least I can do. Think about how much better my death will make all of your family members feel—that is, presuming those family members are not there at the time, in which case I will of course have to kill them, too. At least they'll have the knowledge that some emotionless killer isn't still out there on the loose, waiting in the darkness to strike again. It may not be the closure that someone who just went through an unthinkable tragedy would want, but it should be comforting nonetheless. I sincerely hope it gives you some kind of reassurance to know you'll have died in a mass murder/suicide, and not just a mass murder. Even if it helps only a little, I'll have done my job.We still don't understand why the ONION is thought of as a "satire" operation.
For the record April 12, 2008 Presidential race: Rosa Brooks' Thursday column cited Center for Responsive Politics statistics on military donations to the candidates for the first two months of 2008. The figures were for contributions from January 2007 through February 2008.
Friday, April 11, 2008
Thursday, April 10, 2008
McCain has said he hasn't had time to read the bill and isn't sure if he could support it. It's hard to believe that neither he nor anyone on his staff has had time to read such an important bill, which has been around since before he started running for president.Oh, we don't find it so hard to believe. Per Wes & his co-author, Jon Soltz, chairman of VoteVets.org, all the other Vietnam vets in the Senate support the bill, as well as former SecNav John Warner.
[Jason] Bensley, who served in southern Iraq, Mosul and Diyala province, is in debt, trying to pay for college. "I wouldn't have the faintest idea why a member of Congress wouldn't want to support the GI Bill," he says. "Sen. McCain should know how hard it is for veterans to transition back into civilian life."Well, no, Jason. By the time Sen. "Bomb-bomb" was going to "transition," he'd married a millionaire beer heiress & served as the U. S. Navy's liaison to the U. S. Senate. Makes the "transition" one hell of a lot easier, doesn't it? Not to mention being the son & grand-son of the first father-son combo to make four-star admiral in the USN. The Senator could have gone straight into full-time
The White House has voiced concern on the bill, arguing that if returning troops are offered a good education, they will choose college over extending their service. This is as offensive as it is absurd. First, it is morally reprehensible to fix the system so that civilian life is unappealing to service members, in an attempt to force them to re-up. Education assistance is not a handout, it is a sacred promise that we have made for generations in return for service. Second, falling military recruitment numbers are just as serious as retention problems. To send the message that this nation will not help you make the most of your life will dissuade a large number of our best and brightest from choosing military service over other career options.Frankly, we don't support the fucking troops. People so stupid that they volunteer to defend a nation that won't provide them w/ adequate educations or decent jobs, leaving them only the option of military service or starving pretty much deserve to be part of thinning the herd, if you know what we mean. And of course if these stupid people didn't enlist, warmongering assholes wouldn't have a military w/ which to bully the rest of the world. So fuck 'em, as we said. Also on the military front, we heard on the radio last night that in an ABC News report asking Americans in Iraq who their presidential choice was, almost all those shown (unscientific, of course) were for the sane Senators, Clinton or Obama. (Granted, that's pretty second-hand, and we can't find the story on the ABC News website. Maybe it's been censored already.) And in Rosa Brooks cage-liner column today, we see that Republican predominance in the ranks is not what it used to be.
The same trend has been true among military personnel, for decades a solidly Republican constituency. In 2004, 60% of active-duty military personnel who responded to a survey sent to Military Times subscribers identified themselves as Republicans. By 2007, that had dropped below 50%. (Military personnel tend to take screw-ups in Iraq pretty personally.)Maybe those people aren't as stupid as we implied above. Obviously not, as they are making that college money by stealing gear from Uncle Sam.
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
The United Nations defines the crime as the "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group." Intentionally left out of this definition are "modern" political labels for people: the poor, religious people, the middle class, etc.Other than the obvious problem w/ the above (The difference between "religious groups" & "religious people" would be?) it seems the word
"genocide" was coined by a Polish Jew, Raphael Lemkin, who was responding to Winston Churchill's 1941 lament that "we are in the presence of a crime without a name"has more to do w/, well, genocide, rather than plainly simple mass murder. We've had a phrase for that for a while. The whole point of genocide is that a specific group that cannot change its identification is being targeted merely because it is that group, which has often been stigmatized or scapegoated in order to establish boogey-men w/ whom to scare a populace or nation.
Under the more narrow definition that was approved, it's genocide to try to wipe out Roma (formerly known as Gypsies), but it's not necessarily genocide to liquidate, say, people without permanent addresses. You can't slaughter "Catholics," but you can wipe out "religious people" and dodge the genocide charge.Personally, we're opposed to wiping out "people w/o permanent addresses," but all in favor of letting Catholics or plain "religious people" have it. They're all stupid & shouldn't be allowed to waste oxygen. Then he goes on to this:
[A] moral hierarchy of evil, which in effect renders mass murder a second-tier crime if it is done in the name of social progress, modernization or other Enlightenment ideals. This can lead to a dangerous way of thinking in which people who are perceived to be standing in the way of progress -- middle-class farmers opposed to collectivization, aristocrats, reactionaries -- can be more forgivably slaughtered than ethnic groups because they're allegedly part of the problem, not the solution. After all, you've got to break some eggs to make an omelet.Speaking of dangerous ways of thinking, this moronic bastard can't think past the "Enlightenment" as anything besides an excuse for mass murder. And we should certainly point out that there are few people claiming that
In general, the Soviets and the Red Chinese elude the genocide charge -- and hence the status of ultimate villains -- despite having murdered scores of millions of people in the 20th century, in large part because their victims stood in the way of progress.Just who in any legitimate discourse has been claiming this, Mr. Goldberg? We guess that "shock & awe" wasn't mass murder because it was directed against people who happened to live near Saddam Hussein, rather than the Iraqi people. Last & least:
Of course, the climate of anti-Semitism made the Holocaust possible, but so did Enlightenment bias, which holds that almost anything can be justified in the name of progress.This really must be the stupidest thing he's ever written on which Just Another Blog™ has had the misfortune to waste three mins. of reading time. He gets his knickers in a knot over a resolution passed by the Duma (which, like Russia itself, is hardly the pinnacle of Enlightenment values) & then gets a blanket condemnation of the Enlightenment out of it. Perhaps a return to such pre-Enlightenment values as the Inquisition would please Mr. Goldberg. He's really the definition of a self-hating Jooo, isn't he? Qualifiers noted in Jonah's work: "somewhat," "implicitly," "in effect." As if that wasn't enough of an insult to those of us w/ two brain cells to rub together, directly underneath Goldberg's pathetic tripe in both the dead-tree & online versions of the Times was a wonderment from Max Boot, the well known chickenhawk/warmonger. (Is that redundant? Does "hawk" pretty much = "warmonger?" Whatever.) Brace yourselves, here it comes. Max paints a rosy picture, but realizing that one can't fool all of the people all of the time, he does mention a few buts (even italicizes the buts).
The security forces are growing in size (from fewer than 500,000 in 2006 to more than 600,000 today) and competence (although a few deserted in Basra, most do not run away from a fight), but they still need U.S. support, especially for higher-level functions such as command and control, air cover, logistics and intelligence collection.Note well the "higher-level functions." Guess the "security forces" are cannon-fodder to be "supported"/directed by U. S. "support." And they don't all run away now. According to Max, withdrawal
would be not only a terrible stain on our honor (we might be indirectly responsible for genocide) but a significant strategic setback because it could destabilize the entire region. Victory -- defined as a democratic state that does not oppress its own people, provide a haven for terrorists, proliferate weapons of mass destruction or threaten its neighbors -- remains eminently achievable if we listen to the best advice of Petraeus and Crocker and resist the urge to pull our troops out too fast. If we ignore their warnings and head for the exits, we are assured of the worst military defeat in U.S. history and a major victory for Shiite and Sunni extremists who will continue to attack us in the future.Ah yes, "honor." Nothing more honorable than attacking an essentially defenseless nation that never attacked us, but had a big-mouthed asshole in charge, who used implied threats of WMDs in a vain hope of not being attacked & holding onto power. (Bush or Hussein? You decide.) And there's that genocide word again. At least we got a definition of "victory" out of Max. Most of his long-distance baby-killing buddies can't even come up w/ one. Frankly, this country deserved to be defeated in this mess, but once again we must make clear that "we" won the war handily, but, for various reasons (incompetence & ignorance being the top two) the occupation hasn't been going too well. We can certainly bet that Iraq is much less likely to threaten its neighbor Iran now (oh wait, he means Israel, we wanted Hussein to threaten Iran during the '80s & '90s). The likelihood of any colonial construction of two principal ethnicities & one religious schism not threatening its "own" people is pretty low. The terrorists are already there. Look at Palestine & how they feel about Israel. Every Iraqi killed, wounded, raped or humiliated by American forces is going to feel the same way about us. As well as the Iraqis who endangered themselves & their families by helping Americans, who are forced to stay there because we won't let them emigrate here. As far as those WMDs, stop crying "wolf," chickenhawk.
Davis had no such issues despite facing what Torre, himself a cancer survivor, called "a more important game coming up." Davis gave up two runs and six hits in six innings and also had a big day at the plate, collecting two hits and driving in a run. Torre, who underwent surgery for prostate cancer in 1999, said he felt an affinity for Davis. He recalled his fears upon hearing his own diagnosis, saying, "The only connection with cancer is death in your mind when you hear it."Our best wishes do go out to Mr. Davis. John Wayne licked the "Big C," you can too, Doug!! Bleeding Cardinal Red Also, in case the sexist "mainstream" media wasn't all over it (17th item on the L. A. Times.com sports page) our could-have-been alma mater, Stanford, was whipped by Tennessee in the NCAA Bitchball champeenship.
Three reporters from Arizona, on the condition of anonymity, also let me in on another incident involving McCain's intemperateness. In his 1992 Senate bid, McCain was joined on the campaign trail by his wife, Cindy, as well as campaign aide Doug Cole and consultant Wes Gullett. At one point, Cindy playfully twirled McCain's hair and said, "You're getting a little thin up there." McCain's face reddened, and he responded, "At least I don't plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you cunt." McCain's excuse was that it had been a long day. If elected president of the United States, McCain would have many long days.And some hot poop on Hagee:
Hagee holds many other radical beliefs. In a 2006 address to CUFI, Hagee declared: The United States must join Israel in a pre-emptive military strike against Iran to fulfill God’s plan for both Israel and the West…a biblically prophesied end-time confrontation with Iran, which will lead to the Rapture, Tribulation, and Second Coming of Christ.Is it a great stretch of the imagination to connect this w/ the alleged evangelical/fundamentalist infiltration of the U. S. Air Force? When we have generals who have declared that their allegiance is to "God, family & country," in that order, it would seem that anything is possible. Slim Pickens, any one? (We forget the name of his character in Dr. Strangelove.)
Speaking to the 2007 AIPAC conference, Hagee compared supporters of a two-state solution in the Middle East to Nazis. Hagee also echoed right-wing Israeli politician Binyamin Netanyahu, telling the audience that “Iran is Germany and Ahmadinejad is the new Hitler.”
P. S.: This item should have appeared yesterday, but the devil-box was cut off, & we didn't manage to get to a different secret location to publish it. But it's timeless, therefore a classic, & we were able to add the bits about Hagee to it.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
But we'd like to give a shout-out to the staff at Starbucks #05738, located @ the corner of Santa Monica Blvd. & Pontius in West Los Angeles, just a blk. W. of Sepulveda Blvd. As Your Editor staggers in there each early a. m. that he has the scratch to shell out $1.95 for a large (or "venti") coffee, hair greasy, breath possibly funky (we ain't gwine brush our teeth in a public restroom before the coffee) dragging several bags w/ us, the staff are always cheerful & respectful, even realizing there won't be any tipping involved, remember that we want a large coffee (Sometimes it awaits us!) & gave us a free croissant yesterday when their stupid point of sale computer system rang it up as $0.00.
And, they leave the cabinet in the men's room unlocked, resulting in all the toilet paper rolls an urbane urban camper could want. Thanks, guys & gals! Keep up the good work!!
Monday, April 7, 2008
UPDATE (7 April 2008 @ 1938): We advised the Times of their computational error, & they have corrected the subhead.
UPDATE II (9 April 2008 @ 1250): Here's the first draft, which we wrote on 5 April & then forgot (a peek at our behind-the-scenes machinery):
Seventy-five yrs. ago today, the prohibition of
alcoholbeer was over as the bars reopened & boozesuds began flowing legally & openly again. Fortunately, this little experiment in imposing the morality of frigid old biddies on the rest of the nation had no long lasting effect, other than giving organized crime, La Cosa Nostra, the Mafia, etc., all the power they ever needed to corrupt already corruptible gov't. agents & agencies.
Seems like a fair exchange; peoples' lives are ruined, boozing, now having the cachet of being "forbidden," is made more popular than previously, & another source of income for criminals, politicians & Joe Kennedy is created. A perfect example of the "free" market & gov't. working hand-in-hand for the good of gov't. & those w/ the funds to start a bootlegging business.