Monday, July 31, 2006

Sunday Morning Comin’ Down -- Part 1.



Or, "How in the the hell did Israel manage to gin up sympathy for the Devil?"

In which a nonexistent “International Force” becomes the empty vessel into which everyone pours their hopes and fantasies.

Reminds me of every “We’ll get a Database! And...and…and a Website!” discussion I’ve had clients and users over the years. The concepts themselves are meaningless syllables uttered by people who have no idea WTF they are talking about but do believe in The Majyks. They are the Conjure Words that will somehow summon forth a miraculous be-all, end-all, cure-all that will increase your market share and phallic dimension by 20%, help you lose that last 11 pounds, and cure both your rockin’ pneumonia and your boogie-woogie avian influenza.

Funny thing about that pathology is that there are two kinds of users – the ones that will pay you to tell them the truth, and the ones that’ll pay you to tell them what they want to hear and will fire your ass if you get within a parsec of the truth.

The latter will erode your soul, but will almost always pay much more lavishly (lying and denial being harder and much more demanding in the long run, even when you have the entire federal treasury to ransack.): the former keeps you in good with Dr. Karma but you’ll never get rich since half the time you’ll be called in by the survivors to splint up something that a previous swarm of locusts and users have fucked up for a premium price.

And that’s where we are now – nearing the bottom of the bust-out cycle. When all those crabby room-temp IQ dullards on the Right begin to wake up to the notion – vaguely, in a head-up-your-ass-darkly kind of way – that they been greased, fleeced and decreased (as the saying used to go) by the GOP poltroons they hired to tell them, “Hell Yes! A database and a website, a few easy, lucrative wars, coupla tax cuts and a little “process reengineering” will set everything to rights."

Now just sign this blank check here…and here…and here…and initial here…and give us your children and we’ll get right to work!

And now they are fucked, and will only have pfennigs to spend on fixing what they allowed to be gleefully smashed to bits in their name. And as mute-as-interstellar-vacuum as they have been as their Party raped and ruined this old world...that is exactly how loudly they will bitch about the price to fix it, and whine that we're not doing it right.

Things as of this moment (Monday) are shaking violently out of control: Israel has – in one day – agreed to and then violated a cease fire. Syria has gone on alert. Civilian deaths are piling up. And Bush is so freaked out that he has actually stopped wiping his ass with the UN and is now saying they need to do something.

So things on the ground have changed, but there were themes that emerged Sunday that are still relevant, so...

Fox News Sunday: As was true last week, you can tell that The Real has broken through in a hard, ugly way when actual reporters with microphones start the show reporting on actual news an arm’s length from death and misery from inside Lebanon. From Tyre, Lebanon and Kiryat Shmona, Israel.

Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns: Our next step is “to try to convince the UN” to send a force into Lebanon.

My my, how the worm has turned and flipped you off. Hey, why don’t we roll out that vintage Dubya rhetoric now, Burnsy?

Why don’t we just force the UN Bolton-style, bucko?

Or hey, why don’t we ask “the New Europe” for a hand? Or did you forget about Poland!!

Where’s your Messiah now?

I would be heartened if “looking into the abyss” had actually chastened these punk-assed Pinochets but it so clearly hasn’t. They will not take an ounce of responsibility for the wreck they have made, nor step away from the rhetoric of “critic = heretic” that keeps the pig people who prop up their party squealing with delight.

And they never will.

So fuck ‘em. Their sun is setting and the shadows are long, and when the accounting comes, we must demand that it be meted out in full, ferocious measure. Pegged to the exchange rate they themselves set: If a blowjob is worth an impeachment, surely lying, spying, denying and sending other people's kids out to do your dying is worth hard time in a stone room.

But I'll settle for trials. Endless, humiliating, public, splashy, mutual rat-out trials.

Hume: How do you have a cease fire without talking to the people on the other side of the border who are shoot at you?

Man, when Brit Hume is actually forced to ask reasonable questions you know the situation is so much worse than anyone is letting on.

Burns: But they’re Bad, Brit. Bad, bad Zoot! They’re Bad. They have to realize they’re Bad! And then they have to stop being Bad! Oh, wicked, bad, naughty Zoot!

Hume mumbles on the verge of asking the same question that – horrors! – Liberals have been asking now for the last 5 years

“Or…what?”

Perhaps a spanking!
Iran: You must spank Lebanon well, and after you are done with her, you may deal with her as you like... and then... spank me!

All: And me! And me too! And me!

Iran: Yes! Yes, you must give us all a good spanking!

Because, hey, that’s worked so fabulously so far.

Burns: The ceasefire has to be permanent and durable. We won’t talk to Hezbollah. And Israel won’t. Lebanon must.

Burns: This has not been a good 2.5 weeks for Hezbollah. Militarily.

Burns (In a voice not unlike a creepy little sot trying to convince the woman who dumped him of his staggering popularity): There are a number of countries who have expressed an interest in joining an International Force.

Hume: What, are you shitting me? “A number”?

Burns: Yes. Several. Lots. Scads.

Hume: Who?

Burns: Ohhhh. Lookit the shiny object! All you need for a force line this based on our experience in Afghanistan. Lookit!

Afghanistan? You’re using Afghanistan as your sterling example of how to Get It Right?

Uh-oh.

Burns: Hezbollah cannot profit militarily from this.

One needs to understand that when Burns says that “Hezbollah cannot profit militarily from this” he omits two crucial words from his oratory –
“…be allowed…”

Much to our horror, and thanks to that confluence of insanity, ideology, arrogance and incompetence that we call “Neocon” in English, Hezbollah is clearly already profiting from this, and so Burns is reduced to waiving his Erectiley Dysfunctional Saber around on behalf of his Electorally Malfeasing Party and asserting, in so many words, that “This Shall Not Stand.”

As another GOP Tickle-Me-Gitmo Doll uses whats left our nation’s credibility as POTUS’ Port-a-Potty.

And who, exactly, Ambassador Burns, is going to disallow Hezbollah from doing whatever it pleases?

Us?

Israel?

Jebus?

Who exactly?

And as to this meta-theme of “we’re not gonna even talk about a cease fire until we get a just and lasting peace first” I have two words:


Ko-Rea.


Fifty-three years ago the Korean cease-fire was signed. It was signed without all the details worked out, and without a perfect plan for peace ready to be slotted into place.

For fifty-three years a technical state of war has existed between the North and South.

Fifty-three years of tension and antagonism and aggravation…but no mass graves. No mushroom clouds. No more tens or hundreds of thousands of Americans dead on the other side of the world.

Who in their right minds thinks that that was a bad idea? That we should have waited for perfection before seizing the possible.

And two more words: Benjamin Franklin.
“There never was a good war, or a bad peace."

And then Presidential Medal of Honor Winner and Archfuckup L. Paul Bremer breezes his pocket square and manicure to Fox to hold forth on Iraq, because only on Fox would Bremer be Rolodex Guy Number One when it comes to that debacle.

Shorter Bremer: Nothing was my fault. The military screwed it all up.

We had enough troops to stop the looting – 40,000 – but the troops were never give orders to stop it. THAT was the real mistake.

The strategy (for those who were not paying attention) is for 3,700 new soldiers (And add “Drawdown = more troops” to the long sad Bush “War is Peace” lexicon) to “disarm the militias”. Forcefully.

Going block-by-block, kicking in doors?

Yes.

Going after the Sadr Brigades that way?

Yes.

Are you out of your fucking MIND?

Yes.

Bremer on Ricks’ book – “Fiasco” – wherein you, L. Paul, are taken to the woodshed:

“There was no Iraqi army to disband.”

But there was a structure. There were people with uniforms and guns.

No. There was no Army to “disband”. They all just went home. There was nothing we could have done about it.

Later…

The Army was Bad. Like Zoot. Bad. And “recalling” the Army would have been a disaster.

Shorter: We didn’t recall the Army because they were Bad like Zoot...but there was no Army to begin with...and there was nothing whatsoever we could have done.

Bremer: The “real” problem is that we did not have a military plan to defeat the insurgency.

Just my musing, you understand. I would never wish actual harm on another, but the next asswipe who starts braying that “Liberals hate the military” seriously needs to be garroted with L. Paul Bremer's Medal Of Freedom sash.



On Face The Nation -- Real News again. Lara Logan in Tel Aviv.

Lebanon kicks Condi to the curb...

The Prime Minister of Lebanon.

And Shimon Perez. – We don’t want anything from Lebanon but good relations. Lebanon is a great nation. But they are being held hostage by evil men. Hezbollah is cynical -- they targets civilians and they hide among civilians

Q: Aren’t you concerned that this may wreck the Lebanese government which is already very fragile?

A: A government…governs. But if a government has no influence on its own lands then it is not a government.

Me: A linebacker tackles, but the infant he was 22 years ago crawls. Do not mistake one for the other and demand that a baby bench-press 400 lbs, or you’ll end up with a lot of stupid homilies and crushed babies.


On This Week...: Mohamad Chatah -- Prime Minister of Lebanon’s Senior Advisor.

Cliffs Notes Version:

Q: Hezbollah is using children as a shield.

A; Israel is using self defense as a shield.


Followed by Nicholas Burns...trying to genially unpack his Majyk International Force conjure words on the desk like Ed Wynn's sidewalk pitchman character hawking ties and thread



in "One for the Angels".

Israeli Ambassador Daniel Ayalon: The War Crimes are Hezbollahs, not ours. It is unfortunate. It is tragic. But with Hezbollah, cease-fire = reloading.


On the Panel...

George Will: We’re facing a cascade of events reminiscent of 1914.

Fareed Zakaria: The idea that you could eliminate Hezbollah is ridiculous. It makes not sense. Ask yourself this question – is Hezbollah stronger or weaker today than they were six weeks ago? They are gaining sympathy. They are getting allies. The are coming off as heroic.

driftglass: Counting coup on Israel has always been the path to power and prestige. They are the Scary House on the block, and if you want to stand tall in your clique, you hop the fence, bust a window, and get away with it. Arafat dined out on that trick for forty years.

Zakaria: We continue to misjudge the importance of public opinion in this region of the world.

Draw down? Noooo. And we are sending more troops into Baghdad. Because the capitol city of the country we conquered three years ago is still not under control.


Zakaria: We are now quite close to deciding that the Nguyen Van Thieu Maliki Government has failed

Will: Worse than dysfunctional. A case can be made that the Interior Ministry is a terrorist organization.

Jay Carney : And this government was the last, best hope.

Carney: There are so many issues which are bad for Republicans, but the war is everything.

Zakaria: If I were a Democrat, I’d make up a campaign commercial makde up of nothing Donald Rumsfeld’s press conferences. It’s not just that he’s wrong; it’s like he’s living in a parallel universe. Like he’s slightly deranged. Living in a different world, not just a different country.

Well Thank God Rummy still has the unwaivering support of the Junior Senator from Connecticut.


On Meet The Press: Andrea Mitchell in Jerusalem. With Tim Russert “shouting” to her for some reason? No volume control on the tin-cans-on-a-string they use at NBC I guess.

Richard Engel – on-the-scene reporting of the death of children.

God forgive our fucked up species.

Permanent Israeli UN Ambassador Dan Gillerman: Hezbollah is everywhere. Not just in the South. “You cannot distinguish between Hezbollah and the rest of Lebanese society.” Those were the words of the leaders of Lebanon. That’s why we must attack to the North. We must go after their supply lines. We may be doing the dirty work, but we’re doing this on behalf of the rest of the world. On behalf of Civilization.

Gillerman: What would you want us to do? What would you do if it was you? If Miami were bombed from Cuba? If Chicago were bombed? These people are taught and raised to hate us. We have no quarrel with the Lebanese people. Or the Syrian people. But these people must rid themselves of the monster they have let run amok in their societies.

Gillerman: We never target civilians, but when civilians die as a result of our actions, we apologize. I have never heard anyone on the other side apologize for anything. Because it’s OK to kill Jews.

There’s a lot to agree with in what he said. And I genuinely don’t know what I would do if I lived in a country where my neighbors were trying to kill me and were quite open and aggressive about.

What I do know is, a big man can’t win a long fight. It doesn’t matter how many times the little prick in the corner calls you out and talks shit about your mother, if you’re a head taller and 100 lbs heavier you get about two minute and three or four punches to lay the little fucker out, and then the crowd starts to turn on you. And the more he keeps getting up, the more “Rocky” they see in him.

It’s not fair. It’s just true.

Lebanese Ambassador Nouhad Mahmoud: Not since Rick Santorum’s bravura fucktard fall-apart on “This Week...”, or Josh Bolten, pooping himself over his boss’ ludicrous position on stem cell research, have I seen a man so uncomfortable with his own Party and Party Line.

I can’t tell whether it’s a language thing, or if Hezbollah militiamen have his kids tied up in a basement with a gun to their heads, but here is a man who throws syllables around like gold bricks and sounds like he must have had his molars replaced with tungsten to prevent himself from grinding them to powder.

Then...Flathead Tom. Oh joy!

Let’s take that up in Part 2, shall we?

Saturday, July 29, 2006

Apoohcalypse Now!



I assure you, this is not turning into a vid-blog: In this case, blame Gilliard for catapulting me down a weird, twisty, never-to-be-reproduced path that led me to this hilarious clip.

Or maybe "the light and space of Pooh Corner really put the zap on my head." :-)

The ending is a little soft, but if you can set aside six minutes and forty seconds, settle in and enjoy.

Feel. Better. Now.

Commenter montysano offers the following cure for a wistful day:
“I miss him too, DG. But today's vinyl prescription for feeling better: Steely Dan's "The Royal Scam", and turn it up real, real loud.”

Now I cannot dispute montysano’s wisdom in this matter. Fine band. Fine song.

However, on a sweltering Chicago afternoon, there is really only one first choice for the Tune Most Likely to Get Your Blood Thumpin’.

(101st Chairborne of supporters of the most disastrous mannish-boy President in history are especially advised to listen up as Muddy not only explains what it means to be a man…



…but actually spells it out for the slower children.

How negotiate like a Republican


Or: "How to gratuitously piss off an entire planet and mint thousands of brand new enemies every time you open your pretzel hole."

In three, easy steps.


1. Never negotiate with the Enemy





2. The Enemy is anyone, anywhere who disagrees with you.




3. Therefore only "negotiate" with those who already believe


exactly as you do.


And bomb the holy Hell out of everyone else.

Here endeth the lesson, except for this snip of end-note from the former Mr. "Disco" Andy Coulter via this post down below:


Ms. COULTER: It’s reminiscent of a bathhouse. It’s just this obsession with your own — with your own essence.

DEUTSCH: But why is that homosexual? You could say narcissistic.

Ms. COULTER: Right.

DEUTSCH: You could say nymphomaniac.

Ms. COULTER: Well, there is something narcissistic about homosexuality. Right? Because you’re in love with someone who looks like you. I’m not breaking new territory here, why are you looking at me like that?

I miss Frank



How pitiful that he only gets more stick-in-your-eye relevant as time goes by.

Friday, July 28, 2006

Hills Like White Supremacists


(With apologies to Papa Hemingway -- whose title I filched and fiddled with.)

Sometimes I just like to write and see what comes out. This time, with great respect to Colorado – my heart’s home – a meandering piece about why encroaching totalitarianism is like a trip to Boulder.

Which one begins to notice as the irrigation machines get more prominent, and the type and frequency of the roadkill changes.

Then comes the line of clouds on the horizon. A sky as cornflower-blue as the eyes of the knockout waitress I had at my favorite hippy niche/enclave/restaurant where I wrote this, and against the rim of the western world, a rind of gray-and-navy clouds.

Or are they clouds?

Have the mountains finally, finally shown themselves?

No. Just clouds.

Like fascism, the mountains don’t leap out of the far-away fully formed. They sneak up on you a little at a time.

Sure, you know they're out there, but the dull routine of the journey gradually lulls you into a light trance, until you suddenly notice the mountains for real this time. Distant, but distinct -- how could you have ever have mistaken clouds for these? Still not there, still a long way to go, but now you see where it will end.

By night, the appearance would be a little different – you’d notice the moonlit horizon being truncated at a point unnaturally above the horizon. Cut too high -- like an old man's pants. Close enough and you may see lights moving in the sky and realize that there's traffic up there.

But even at a cloudy, moonless midnight if you just pay a little attention you'll know when you're close.

The quality of the air changes. Things get brighter as you begin to rise and the atmosphere thins. Humidity falls, but when are you "in the mountains"? The flora is still as scrubby and tough as ever, even if the land has a slight acclivity. The wind is cooler, but what does that mean when you can see -- far away -- such a pronounced granite wall?

And so you’re tell yourself that you’re not really a fascist if you can still see “real” fascism in the distance. If you don’t dress in brown-shirts, march by torchlight or advocate genocide, then you’re still safe, right?

These are such clear points of demarcation, and by your AAA map you are still about 1/2 a state away. So you're not nuts, right? Orwell is still a good bit off.

Stop at a gas station. Stretch. Get a pecan log at the Stuckey's across the way. The accents of the people with which you interact are slightly different that yours, but so what? They're polite and commerce is commerce.

So back in the car and back on the road. The long, unbroken road on which you can – if you were so inclined -- trace your path all the way back across a continent. You did not fall from the sky or materialize here, you got here step-by-step, one unremarkable mile-marker at a time.

So how could this be fascism? It’s so normal. The wars are so small. The stock market is happy. And the infringements on basic rights and protections are so…justifiable.

This did not come on like a storm or a fever; you know how you got here. You are aware of where you are going. And now, even inside the city limits, in the foothills, you can see that there are still mountains in front of you.

Your ears have popped a couple of times, and the signs along the highway have started listing altitude as a regular feature, but ahead of you there is still this sheet of stone rising up to the sky. And even once you have switchbacked up the first range -- still foothills really -- you can see snowcapped peaks stretching out in front of you for hundreds and hundreds of miles.

This is how inexperienced climbers and divers end up dying, and how somnolent citizens end up giving their country away.

The gradualness of the transitions between your starting point and each station along the way are so easy, and the internal adjustment you make to each point so subtle, that you never notice that your brain is starving and hallucinating a little more each minute. You're getting stupider and stupider while your internal monitors are telling you that you're fine.

Or maybe even getting smarter, until you find yourself walking naked through 3-foot drifts of snow, or believing that there really were WMDs in Iraq, or that Saddam really did plan 9/11, or that outing CIA spies during a time of war is acceptable, or that massive warrantless wiretapping of American citizens is a great idea, or that constant and escalating Presidential lying is A-OK…for reasons that seem perfectly valid at the moment.

And by the drunken abuse of Zeno’s Dichotomy Paradox,
“Dichotomy paradox: Before a moving object can travel a certain distance, it must travel half that distance. Before it can travel half the distance it must travel 1/4 the distance, etc. This sequence goes on forever. Therefore, it seems that the original distance cannot be traveled, and motion is impossible.”


you believe you can never arrive in the town-square of Naziville -- heiling Hitler and invading Poland -- because you delude yourself into thinking that if there is a further distance you could possibly travel, you're still safe and still have plenty of democratic margin to play with.

Which is why Conservatives almost unanimously demand that we only “look ahead”. On a so-reflexive-it's-almost-cellular level they have a sneering contempt for the past -- specifically their own past -- and live in yammering horror of being forced in the press, at the polls or in Actual Congressional Hearings (which I seem to remember Republicans had in gleeful, self-righteous multitudes when there was a Democratic President) to look back at where we were even mere days or weeks ago.

Because these delicate, cowardly Men of Iron Will, who are so casually profligate with the lives and limbs of others, would then risk catching a glimpse of what the rest of nation and the rest of the world can see all too clearly: Just how treacherously and catastrophically deep into darkness and madness the mindless, Christopathic Right has already dragged this country.

Thursday, July 27, 2006

In retrospect



I think the surgical and psychological communities now all concur that it was a huge mistake to have accepted blotchy, confused “Disco” Andy Coulter for sex reassignment surgery.

It did not slake his obsessively denied crush on Bill Clinton (and corollary over-the-top abhorrence of Hillary.)

Nor did it make a dent in the cancerous self-loathing brought on by his inability to face his uncontrollably stalkerish blowjob Clinton fantasies.

Nor abate his pathological need to project his own darkest passions onto the object of his desire...and then drive himself deeper and deeper into Crazyville with his need to destroy his eXXXternalized depravity.

Here, judge for yourself:

Coulter Comes Out Against Gay Clinton Marriage


You can only bash 9/11 widows for so long before your book starts slip-sliding down the charts. Solution: Call Bill Clinton gay. A source from “The Big Idea with Donny Deutsch” handed us this transcript from tonight’s 10 pm ET show, during which Deutsch notes that Coulter was talking about Bill Clinton off the air and goads her into repeating what she said.

Ms. COULTER: I think that sort of rampant promiscuity does show some level of latent homosexuality.

DEUTSCH: OK, I think you need to say that again. That Bill Clinton, you think on some level, has — is a latent homosexual, is that what you’re saying?
Ms. COULTER: Yeah.

The rest of this history-changing exchange is below the fold.

DEUTSCH: Before we’re off the air, you were talking about Bill Clinton. Is there anything you want to say about Clinton? No?

Ms. ANN COULTER: No.

DEUTSCH: OK. All right. Did you find him attractive? Was that what it was?

Ms. COULTER: No!

DEUTSCH: You don’t find him attractive?

Ms. COULTER: No. OK, fine, I’ll say it on air.

DEUTSCH: Most women find him attractive.

Ms. COULTER: No.

DEUTSCH: OK, say it on air.

Ms. COULTER: I think that sort of rampant promiscuity does show some level of latent homosexuality.

DEUTSCH: OK, I think you need to say that again. That Bill Clinton, you think on some level, has — is a latent homosexual, is that what you’re saying?
Ms. COULTER: Yeah. I mean, not sort of just completely anonymous — I don’t know if you read the Starr report, the rest of us were glued to it, I have many passages memorized. No, there was more plot and dialogue in a porno movie.

The conversation swings a bit before Deutsch moves it back to Big Gay Bill.

DEUTSCH: I’m not paying any attention. I’m still stuck on Bill Clinton. Don’t — now, isn’t that an example of mean-spirted? Isn’t that just a mean-spirited low blow? No pun intended.

Ms. COULTER: No. Which part of what I said?

DEUTSCH: I think this…

Ms. COULTER: Well, you can read high crimes and misdemeanors if he wants some low blows.

DEUTSCH: OK. No, no. Here’s a — here’s a president of the United States…

Ms. COULTER: There’s merely a comment.

DEUTSCH: …a former president of the United States, and just saying, `You know what? I think he has latent homosexual tendencies.’

Ms. COULTER: No. I think anyone with that level of promiscuity where, you know, you — I mean, he didn’t know Monica’s name until their sixth sexual encounter. There is something that is — that is of the bathhouse about that.

DEUTSCH: But what is the homosexual — that’s — you could say somebody who maybe doesn’t celebrate women the way he should or just is that he’s a hound dog?

Ms. COULTER: No. It’s just random, is this obsession with his…

DEUTSCH: But where’s the — but where’s the homosexual part of that? I’m — once again, I’m speechless here.

Ms. COULTER: It’s reminiscent of a bathhouse. It’s just this obsession with your own — with your own essence.

DEUTSCH: But why is that homosexual? You could say narcissistic.

Ms. COULTER: Right.

DEUTSCH: You could say nymphomaniac.
Ms. COULTER: Well, there is something narcissistic about homosexuality. Right? Because you’re in love with someone who looks like you. I’m not breaking new territory here, why are you looking at me like that?

Any guesses?


Me? I say live and let live. And if picturing yourself in a wild four-way with Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Knute Rockne and Flipper is the only way you can get your boat out of the harbor, well then you just go on ahead and indulge your imagination.

But Andy couldn’t stop hating himself for what he felt because, in the end, he didn’t hate his gender.

He hated his identity.

He hated his own soul and, in the end, injections and lopping off 3/4 of an inch of dirty-bad-sinflesh was easier than getting proper counseling.

Sad. Really sad.

Lost his fucking mind.

Kept his good hair though,


so I guess that’s something.

Tuesday, July 25, 2006

Chris Matthews is Vewy Qwanky.


And remarkably he manages to get the root cause of his existential bellyache both right and completely backwards.

Matthews has, on many occasions, professed his great and gooey man-love for George W. Bush.

A kind of relentlessly-affected, Joe-Tap-a-keg, regular-guy-with-loins-afire crush on Baron of the Lazy Dubya Ranch and his straight-shootin’, tough-talkin’ ways that sent Matthews into fluttery paroxysms of whatever the non-distaff equivalent of a Noonan Swoon might be whenever Dubya threw him a boy-wink.

But the days of lazing bask and besotted in Dubya’s alleged universal likeability, brilliance, and Brokeback Mount Rushmorehood are over. The long, tanning weekends basking in the “sunny nobility” of the Bicycle Chief are ended, and all of Chris’ friends who have been trying to tell him that Dubya’s was a bad seed -- no good…just a user…who only wanted him for one thing -- turned out to be right.

Dubya has du-du-dumped him! And this time it’s for really, really-real! And no crying pillow is safe as Matthews takes it all in stride with the cosmopolitan good grace of a jilted 17-year-old on a Mad Dog drunk.

With a microphone...

IMUS: "I had a conversation with Andrea Mitchell yesterday, from there, she had just landed in Beirut with Secretary Rice, they were going somewhere–they were going wherever they’re today, at the West Bank. I said, "Why don’t you go over to Syria and talk to that clown?" and you’re right–they, you know…"

MATTHEWS: "It’s all ideology with this crowd. All they care about is ideology. The President bought it, hook, line and sinker. He had– but you know, it was just put into his head, sometime after 9-11, and his philosophy is what he has given it. He didn’t have to have any philosophy when he went in, and they handed it to him. These guys– the guys–you know, the guys that you used to make fun of at school, pencil necks, the intellectuals, the guys you never trusted. All of the sudden he trusts the intellectuals, the guys you knew at school, yeah, they’re a bunch of pencil necks and now he buys completely, their ideology, because he didn’t have one of his own coming in.

That was his problem.

I don’t know what Bush stood for, except I’m a cool guy and Gore isn’t, and that was our problem. We elected the guy because he was a little cooler than the other guy, and, I hope the next election, it isn’t a problem of who goes to bed with their wife at 9:30 at night, or who knows how to tell a joke on a stage. But it’s who had the sense of strength that comes from having read books, most of their life, tried to understand history.

Uh, no Chris. “We” didn’t elect him, and “we” never thought having a halfwit sock puppet as the leader of the free world was a particularly good idea.

In fact "we" are the ones who have been practically running naked through the streets with our hair on fire for the last five years trying to get schmucks like you to spit the Dear Leader’s dick out your mouth for two minutes and wake the fuck up. Trying to get one or two of the hair-sculptures in the MSM to bother to notice that Dubya has been an unmitigated disaster at...everything.

Trying to figure out who cancelled the News and left us with in the hands of the Hannah Barbarians of Fox and CNN.

But Matthews is on to his fourth gin-and-tonic and second box of Kleenex and like every freshly screwed and eschewed simp, is only just warming to his Operatically Magniloquent Rant Against His Evil Ex!

Every mistake we’re making in the Middle East right now, was made years and years ago by the British, by the French, but the mistakes they made in Vietnam were made by the French before. In Algeria the French made all the mistakes we’re making now. If you engage in an invasion you will face resistance from the local people based upon religion, and that, and nationalism. You will then have to put down that insurgency, and you’re going to have to use cruelty and torture to get information, because it’s the only way to get intel in a counter insurgency. Every single thing that’s happened to Iraq was predicted by history. It’s a standard pattern.

Ten, twenty years from now, when kids are reading this in high school–They are going to say, ‘Why were the Americans so dumb?’


Uh, no.

Again, hate to stop you mid-blubber, but there is no fucking WAY that I can let this pass.

“Americans” aren’t dumb you overfunded meatbrick.

“Americans” don’t still think there really are WMDs in Iraq.

“Americans” don’t think Saddam was the mastermind of 9/11.

“Americans” don’t think the Earth is 6,000 years old.

“Americans” don’t think that global warming is just stuff a bunch of corporate-hating tree-huggers made up.

No, it is “Conservative Republicans” who believe this insane, idiotic shit, not “Americans”.

It is Republicans who demonstrate again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again that they are, in fact, abundantly stupid and hateful enough to believe the same boldface lies told by the same treasonous liars over and over and over, and how fucking dare you try to “we” the rest of us into the cesspit with the swine that cheered this disaster of an Administration on for the last six years.

Because as we on the Left (who have been Right all along) all know, in the Age of Dubya, you can either be a Good American or a Good Republican, but you no longer be both.

But let the suppurations continue...

They committed the same mistakes that all the Europeans had done before. And it’s like these guys, everything is a surprise. The insurgency was a surprise. The no WMD was a surprise. Everything that happens, now he’s out there now, taking the Arabs side against this, that’s a surprise. Some of these guys are anti-Semitic. That’s a surprise? Everything is known, and the big thing about this crowd that came in around Bush’s.. they must have known it, but they didn’t want to know it, and Bush didn’t have the academic background to challenge them.

And I don’t know what this guy’s– The Vice President is. The Vice President is, you notice how he hides during difficult times. He’s in his bunker. He’s in his undisclosed location…


Of course he hides. He’s a coward and that’s what cowards do. And because he doesn’t want to remind the Chris Matthews' of the world of that last, unhappy reality they don’t want to face: That Bush doesn’t run this country -- Cheney does.

Which is where Matthews performance as the faithful, long-suffering wife now suddenly shocked and furious to find her Romeo is a peevish, abusive void, breaks down.

Going all the way back to the Potemkin “search” for the perfect VP candidate by Cheney…that ended up with Cheney as the only choice, to the original round of tax cuts for the wealthy…that was followed by a proposal for a second round of cuts for the wealthy, to shich Bush objected until Big Dick slung his decomposing arm around the boy and took him for a little walk around the block.

When they returned, Dubya was all for that second tax cut.

And the third.

And the fourth.

To letting the President tool around on his Big Wheel unawares while D.C. has a terror alert because of an unidentified plane over the city.

To Cheney blowing off White House protocol for alerting the press and his "boss" should he, say, shoot an old man in the face.

The press -- Matthews and most of his Sunday flea market included -- have spent the last six years practically laughing us all to death over how funny it is that Dubya says stupid things, and does stupid things. And ain’t it cute and “plainspoken” and Texan that he falls of his bicycle, can’t do simple math or remember what he said yesterday. That he aggressively over-enunciates or simply mispronounces the big words like a drunken eight-year old. That he just fucking lies. That he whines and bitches like a spoiled pussy when he gets caught lying.

And that he does it all with the biggest “Fuck You All” smirk in American history plastered to his face.

Then when the rumors get too thick that Cheney is pulling the strings Cheney comes oozing out of Dis to let Dubya order him around in front of the camera until the press dutifully returns to talking about Dubya's "strength" and "independence" again.

Because for five years, people like Matthews have been on strike. Have refused to see or speak the truth about the halfwit Dauphin from Crawford and his malevolent Regent.

It is a major part of why I believe David Brooks is such a malignant little hack; the constant spinning of ludicrous theories out of air and spittle arguing that Bush didn’t know. Bush didn’t mean it. Bush wasn’t told. No one could have anticipated the ________. His aides deserted him. His base failed him. He is, in fact, a Sekrit Fucking Genius.

It is also why Bobo is constantly getting his nuts sliced off, dipped in scalding chocolate fundu-style and mailed back to him COD in his endless, losing razor-fight with William of Occam.

So while I’m glad that Matthews has apparently decided to rouse himself from his potato-coma and notice that Dubya is and always has been a reeking disaster, he seriously needs to be walked out of his plush digs by security guards with a pink slip in one hand and his Matthews Meter in the other.

By EOB tomorrow.

The fact that in his chosen profession of journalist, his professional judgment has led him only now to faintly detect the faint outlines of the biggest story of the decade – namely that the President of the United States is, at minimum, dangerously incompetent, has committed a host of crimes and atrocities while under the influence of fascists, and is possibly insane – while legions have been screaming for the last five years to pull his head out of his ass and for God’s Sake Notice should automatic mean walking papers and the ritual immolation of his MSNBC ID.

And as far as a replacement, I can only think of 40-50 million people who would qualify as lavishly-paid pundits on the only score that matters:
They got it right.

This isn’t really my area.

Much more Watertiger's line of country,

But when I see this...


I just can’t help but think of this.


Which I realize makes me a bad person.

The word “hero” is often overused. - UPDATE

Lincoln Davis on house floor


It sure as shit would be here.

UPDATE: I got schnooked. He was doing satire. A cocked eyebrow or a Colbert interval (that tiniest of lags-and-looks that lets us in on the joke) woulda been nice, especially from the behind the mike and on the record in the House, but I was taken, good and proper and no two ways about it.

Here's the real story --
UPDATED: Tennessee congressman now says proposal to outlaw divorce was political satire

By BILL THEOBALD
and MICHAELA JACKSON
Staff Writers - THE TENNESSEAN

U.S. Rep. Lincoln Davis was trying to make a point - and not being serious - on the House floor Tuesday when he proposed outlawing divorce and adultery.

But not everyone picked up on his use of sarcasm.

The Pall Mall, TN Democrat's straight-on delivery during the House debate on gay marriage, broadcast live on C-SPAN, left many believing he was serious. The remarks, and video of them, have ping-ponged throughout political blogs on the Internet and prompted calls to his office from all over the country.

"The intent of the congressional speech was not to say that he intends to introduce legislation making divorce and adultery a felony," said Davis spokesman Tom Hayden. "Rather the intent was to point out the purely partisan nature and timing of the" constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage.

"As he rhetorically pointed out, if the Congress' true intent is to protect families and marriage, why limit the scope of this amendment?" Hayden added in a written statement released later Thursday. "Should we not look at factors that have more of an impact on families such as child and spousal abuse, adultery and divorce?"
...


Well, there ya go, but WTF: I managed to live down having a couple of thousand cubic yards of pompous gas let out of my younger-know-it-all-driftglass self after holding forth imperiously that Hemingway's "The Hills Like White Elephants" was obviously about the Spanish Civil War. My teacher let me have juuust enough smartass rope before she pointed out that the story was published in 1927...and the fascists began running their pre-Nazi experiments in Spain in 1936.

So I think I'll survive this too :-)

Here's my original post, the sentiment of which I'll still proudly cop to.

The facts, not so much...

This ingrown little monkey thinks that everything that jumps out from the bushes and threatens the institution of marriage -- from those irritating but oh-so-pump-primingly-useful queers, to divorce and adultery, to, presumably, flatulence and football and “women’s groups” -- needs to be outlawed. Right now. (click on the pic for the whole ramble, flown in fresh to you from 1821.)

Which is just...nutty. And what he’s doing in the Democratic Party is a profound mystery to me. But it does give me a chance to toss you over to Susie Bright – a self-described “...author, editor, performer, sex guru, teacher, mom, seamstress, pumpkinhead” – who writes “about sex and politics every day of the week.”

Which, c’mon, is a pretty terrific alloy.
(Her essay below is also followed [or preceded, depending on how you count such things] on her site by this wonderful meditation on sex, drugs and growing old entitled “The First Psychedelic Wives Club”.

In case I hadn’t mentioned it recently, Susie writes better and more truly –- and more regularly and voluminously -- about human sexuality and the thousand aspects of the business of being alive in the field of time that intersect with our horny, damaged, splendid, non-mitosis-reproducing natures that anyone I know.)
Anyway, on with the show...

Round Up the Fornicators!

Meet a Southern Democrat who thinks the anti-gay marriage amendment doesn't go nearly far enough. If you're going to crack open the Constitution, boys, get out your stone tablets and wreck it!

Rep. Lincoln Davis of Tennessee wants divorce, of any kind, to be be outlawed, and adultery made into a felony. Fornicators would never be allowed to elected office, naturally. Straight people need to be taught a lesson.

A lot of people thought Davis was being satiric, brilliantly deadpan, but it was no joke. He's been on the record for this line of thought since Day One. He's not alone, as many of his religious persuasion are quite serious about saving marriage. Homosexuals are just one fly in the ointment, as far as they're concerned.

Think Progress gives some extra depth to the story by counting at least 29 members of Congress who are divorced. They lament that there is "no official data on how many members have committed adultery."

Davis is also very concerned about child abuse, so I guess we do have some common ground.


I have only one quibble to register with Ms. Bright’s fine assay of this lawmaker’s astonishingly rustic, antediluvian attitude, and that is that I feel a flicker of something akin to admiration for the messed-up old rutabaga.

Not for his attitudes, certainly – nothing about his “What” is anything but absurd and repellent.

But the “How” of his “What” is oddly laudable. Or would be, if it existed only as a historical footnote from a long dead age. He is, at least, consistent. Which as we all know, in foolish quantities – such as here -- is the hobgoblin of little minds.


Like Bob Barr -- that bent little scrap of 90s-vintage irk who made a cottage industry picnicking on the Real and Imagined Sins and Peccadilloes of Bill Clinton –– at least has the courtesy of being outraged by the actual high crimes and frontal assaults on the Constitution by George Bush.

Of course, waging his orc-war on Clinton and clamping his pincers onto the Big Dog’s hind leg garnered Barr fame and power and almost weekly face time on the major networks.

Now, his indignation over the genuine and deliberate threat the Dubya regime poses to the foundational principles of our democracy gleans Bob Barr a brief appearance on PBS’s “Now” on Sunday morning, slotted between "Maya & Miguel"
(This week...”The Adventures of Rabbit-Bird Man”, which sounds like Dubya’s worst nightmare -- A Human-Animal-and-Public-Teevee hybrid on the Lord's Day!) and "Martin Yan Quick & Easy."

I’m sure there’s a lesson there somewhere.

Monday, July 24, 2006

Meanwhile, down in the Fuhrerbunker…


“And how are my loyal Snowflakesturm today?”

(photo from the excellent film “Downfall”)

When you add the ravings of “Chickenhawks are from Mars”, Bill Kristol

The right response is renewed strength--in supporting the governments of Iraq and Afghanistan, in standing with Israel, and in pursuing regime change in Syria and Iran. For that matter, we might consider countering this act of Iranian aggression with a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. Why wait? Does anyone think a nuclear Iran can be contained? That the current regime will negotiate in good faith? It would be easier to act sooner rather than later. Yes, there would be repercussions--and they would be healthy ones, showing a strong America that has rejected further appeasement.


To the clear-eyed and as-always well-written analysis of Billmon @ Whiskey Bar
Losing an Army

Earlier this week I linked to a commentary from William S. Lind in which he warned that war with Iran could result in the loss of the 140,000 man army America currently has bogged down in Iraq. This may have seemed far-fetched, given the enormous military disparity between the two sides. But Col. Pat Lang, a former intelligence officer, explains how and why it could happen:
American troops all over central and northern Iraq are supplied with fuel, food, and ammunition by truck convoy from a supply base hundreds of miles away in Kuwait. All but a small amount of our soldiers' supplies come into the country over roads that pass through the Shiite-dominated south of Iraq . . .

Southern Iraq is thoroughly infiltrated by Iranian special operations forces working with Shiite militias, such as Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army and the Badr Brigades. Hostilities between Iran and the United States or a change in attitude toward US forces on the part of the Baghdad government could quickly turn the supply roads into a "shooting gallery" 400 to 800 miles long.

(Christian Science Monitor, via No Quarter)

...

You end up...where exactly?

With a fistful of President Wimpy’s ludicrious IOUs promising that he will gladly pay you Tuesday for an Armageddon today?

With a lot of “The Rice Man Cometh” pipe-dream smoke-and-terror happytalk about warwarwarwarwar?

With Kristol announcing to the entire planet that this brilliant strategy



is somehow the perfect fucking model for coping with real enemies in a real world where we are about a half-a-million troops short of being able to get it up, get it in and get it on, anywhere?

And you gotta ask yourself, since the war junkies on the Right are classic cowards who will never, ever pony up the flesh of their own flesh to go and fight their wars, where oh where do they think they’re going to be able to scare up hundreds of thousands of warm bodies to throw into the kill box?

But then you add Chief of Staff Mother Goose reading aloud from “There was an Old Dubya...”

(The “bad” version of which goes…
There was an old Dubya who lived in a bubble.
With all these snowflake babies...and election-year trouble.
So he posed them for cameras, then left them for dead
When they could have helped us cure Alzheimer’s instead.)

But the “good” version of which goes...

"...the president sincerely hopes that all 400,000 fertilized embryos can be adopted to grow into beautiful children like the ones you saw..."


And the realization dawns that the Neocons have their future cannon-fodder staffing needs all worked out.

And “Begun, this Snowflake Baby war has.”

Sunday, July 23, 2006

Sunday Morning Comin’ Down.


Special William Carlos Williams edition

More later if I have time, but flensed of all surplusage and run through my hand-crafted Iambicizer, all of the sage pronouncements from the Sunday Mouse Circus regarding the Republican strategy for victory in the Fall come to nothing more or less than this:

so much depends
upon

a red stater’s
fear

glazed with Holy
water

beside the white
chickenhawks.

Saturday, July 22, 2006

The Fall Of the Stockholm SynDemocrats


From Sully to Boxer to Lieberman, a wail of pain goes up as they beg:
“Please don’t pick on my abuser! He gives my life meaning!”

File under: The “soft bigotry of cowering conciliation.”

A script has been running in D.C. for far too long now. You and I know it, and it is what makes us rage. In fact everybody knows it, but by mutual consent, no one in the City of Broken Dems, no one in the MSM, no one on Hate Radio, no one inside the DLC go-along-get-along gulag is allowed to talk about openly.

It is a template that no one I know has ever approved of, or even seen, but one that has been imposed as holy writ and is acted out as rigorously as kabuki, and through which mile after mile of Common Wisdom has been extruded like so much Political Play Doh

through the Pundit Fun Factory.

The one that says that the rise of hard Right Conservativism is inevitable.

That the fractious, pussy Dems cannot pull together in the face of a threat to the nation from the Right fast enough to stem the tide.

That Dems must lose, but not on the basis of ideas or ideals or by a toe-to-toe punch-up over the morality of Liberal precepts versus the degenerate ideology of the Right, but simply because the script demands that the Dems eternally take a dive in the sixth.

An "everybody knows" mentality where Dems are supposed to play the hapless Washington Generals to the GOP Globetrotters, forever.

Dems are contracted to strut and fret their hour upon the stage -- prisoners to GOP casting directors -- playing the coin-toss-losing Redcoats to the GOP colonials from this classic piece of early Cosby...

Click here for Windows MP audio

(Courtesy of this Barnes & Noble site)

That Dems -- based apparently on the Sekrit Mondale Treaty of ’85 -- are required to fight clad in ruffled shirts and powdered wigs in some arcane, roundabout form of Queensbury-rules, thumbs-in fisticuffs where challenges to manly virtue are delivered via engraved invitations of hand-painted batik by manservants -- while Conservative are free to fight WWF-style with whips, chainsaws, snipers and impeachment.

And we are finally tired of it.

I, for one, would be content to honorably win or lose a principled fight, shake hands with my principled opponent, and live to fight another day. Through such struggle, new truths can be learned, and the fact that I may actually be wrong about this or that can be revealed. There is no shame in this: That’s how I was taught. How I was raised.

But that’s not how this Culture War has been fought. For waaaay too long, the leadership of the Democratic Party has been content to march in formation into partisan machine-guns, and fall back, wounded, blathering of honor and collegiality while the GOP stayed in their pillboxes, laughing and reloading.

This is not about being the loyal opposition; this is about playing the chump.

And we’re tired of it.

Had it.

Done.

Digby, as usual, takes these tart apples and bakes a feast of well-analyzed and articulated outrage.

Here’s a snip




There is a little tremor in Rush's description of the "powerful" Democratic base (he realizes it and tries to amend his statement.)The opposition actually has him rattled for the first time in recent memory.

Unfortunately a good part of the Dem establishment is not just rattled but virtually hysterical. Ezra wrote this today:

I've really been saddened, in fact, by how often, when I drill down into anti-Lamonter motivations, I find their ideological and electoral motivations mere sandrock obscuring a core rage at this affront to tradition and orderly succession.

I didn't believe this even a few months ago, but I've been forced to conclude that what scares folks about Lamont is that he represents an assault on privilege -- Joe Lieberman's, to be sure, but also theirs, no matter what sector of politics they currently represent.



Apparently these comfy Democratic insiders don't mind the Republicans treating them like neutered farm animals --- but I do. I take it personally when a propaganda industry makes millions spreading lies that liberals are terrorists or traitors. Yet the political establishment, including the media, doesn't seem to think I should care about such things --- even as I've seen my party and my country degraded and humiliated for years by this virulent strain of rightwing politics.


This is not simply about Lieberman or Lamont: This is about the fact that the days of “Lead, follow or get out of the way” have dawned for Democrats. The stakes are too high to demand any less.

We know the failed GOP has left us, on every side, one godawful mess after another to clean up, and we cannot begin the long, hard work of binding up our national wounds and bleeding out the Limbaugh/Cheney/Falwell poison that is killing our culture while Vichy Dems range freely inside our perimeter, setting fires, smashing cars, counciling defeat and cutting our tendons on behalf of our enemies before the battle is ever joined.

They must sober up and join the fight, or be kicked to the electoral curb, tagged as the vacillating appeasers they are.

For those not familiar with this kind of melee -- the one Bobo Brooks shrieks is some kind of "Inquisition" -- the proper nomeclature for it is “democracy”, and it is the Fort Sumter of that wider struggle that’s playing itself out right now in Connecticut.

The fact that Brooks reacts so viscerally and hysterically -- ranting that the very idea of a Democratic incumbent being challanged in the Democratic primary is some kind of primal betrayal -- exposes the shape and scope of the Conservative infiltration of the Democratic Party: That Conservatives have come to believe axiomatically that the leadership of the Democratic Party are their obedient chattle. Veal, to be passively marched into the hate-and-scapegoat machine as required by the Party Overlords, and Bobo is infuriated that a buncha smelly, angry peasants have laid their filthy paws on his Precious.

Be with us, or stand with the Neocons, but now you must stand on your hind legs and pick a side...or hit the fucking bricks.

Because we’ve had enough of the Liebermans and their “soft bigotry of cowering conciliation.”

“Come to my arms, my beamish boy!


O frabjous lie! Callow! Calley!”
He chortled in his joy.

File this under: Folie imposée.*
* "...subtype A of folie a deux, is the most common form in which the dominant person imposes a delusion into a person who was not previously mentally ill. Separation of the two results in improvement of the non-dominant person."

Cross reference under: You and what army?

I was trying to remember where I had last heard the kind of negligent, delusional gibbering that has been emanating from Bill Kristol’s bilge-nozzle of late. Well, him and other leading lights of a certain Party of God that impeaches for indiscrete fellatio, and ballyhoos reckless escallatio.

You know, the smirky, bloodless academician touting the dumping a couple of thousand metric tons of napalm on a wildfire from the deep-cover of his Fox Hole?

A war junkie who fears that Cheney has let Dubya’s leash slip from his paws, and now feels the sudden, desperate need to try and continue the frantic folie imposĂ©e of the Neocon Dogma of Forever War on the Bicycle Chief?

The who one who writes this kind of piffle (emphasis added)

(print-friendly version; the ASP version makes my screen hurt.)

For while Syria and Iran are enemies of Israel, they are also enemies of the United States. We have done a poor job of standing up to them and weakening them. They are now testing us more boldly than one would have thought possible a few years ago. Weakness is provocative. We have been too weak, and have allowed ourselves to be perceived as weak.

The right response is renewed strength--in supporting the governments of Iraq and Afghanistan, in standing with Israel, and in pursuing regime change in Syria and Iran. For that matter, we might consider countering this act of Iranian aggression with a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. Why wait? Does anyone think a nuclear Iran can be contained? That the current regime will negotiate in good faith? It would be easier to act sooner rather than later. Yes, there would be repercussions--and they would be healthy ones, showing a strong America that has rejected further appeasement.


So, folie imposée?

Or is it, perhaps, Ganser's syndrome?
Although this disorder was previously classified as a factitious disorder, the American Psychiatric Association has redefined Ganser's syndrome and placed it in the category called "Dissociative Disorder Not Otherwise Specified." Sometimes called "the syndrome of approximate answers," Ganser's syndrome is most often seen in male prisoners. In the past, this was so much the case that early clinicians called the syndrome "prison psychosis," despite the fact that it is not a true psychosis. (Psychosis is characterized by a radical change in personality and a distorted sense of reality.) The disorder has also been referred to as hysterical pseudodementia…

Ganser's syndrome is usually sudden in onset and, like malingering, seems to arise in response to an opportunity for personal gain or the avoidance of some responsibility. The patient will offer nearly correct replies when asked questions about facts of common knowledge, such as the number of days in a year, the number of months in a year, subtracting seven from 100, the product of four times five, etc. To such questions, the patient may respond by stating that there are 360 days in a year, 11 months in a year, 94 for the result of subtracting seven from 100, and that 21 is the product of four times five. These persons appear to have no difficulty in understanding questions asked, but appear to provide incorrect answers deliberately.


Such as suggesting that we should go out of our way to beat the Mideast hornet’s nest even harder with a flaming stick? And actually tell the world that we are doing it to deliberately and publicly trigger an all-out, regional war with nary a functional military, actual coalition, budget or exit strategy in sight -- and everyone knows it, so no SDI busted-flush bluff is possible -- and that the “repercussions” ”would be healthy ones.”?

Or could it be Vorbeireden?
In vorbeigehen or vorbeireden, a patient will answer a question in such a way that one can tell the patient understood the question, although the answer itself may be very obviously wrong. This condition occurs in Ganser's syndrome and has been observed in prisoners awaiting trial. Vorbeigehen (giving approximate answers) was the original term used by Ganser but Vorbeireden (talking past the point) is the term generally in use (Goldin 1955).

I dunno, and I’m no professional, but it seemed so familiar.

And then I remembered this...

Fail Safe.

The opening scene, where Professor Groeteschele [Walter Matthau] is entertaining jaded party guests with his tales of thermonuclear war, which he delivers with a bit of a leer, and a side of relish...


MR. FOSTER: 60 million?

PROFESSOR: I say 60 million is perhaps the highest price we should be prepared to pay in a war.

MR. FOSTER: What's the difference between 60 million dead and a hundred million?

PROFESSOR: 40 million.

MR. FOSTER: Some difference.

PROFESSOR: Are you prepared to say the saving of 40 million lives is of no importance?

MR. FOSTER: You miss the point, professor. The saving of those 60 million lives is what's important.

PROFESSOR: Fact facts, Mr. Foster, we're talking about war. I say every war, including thermonuclear war, must have a winner and a looser. Which would you rather be?

MR. FOSTER: In a nuclear war, everyone looses. War isn't what it used to be.

PROFESSOR: Still a resolution of economic and political conflict.

MR. FOSTER: Well, what kind of resolution with 100 million dead?

PROFESSOR: It doesn't have to be 100 million.

MR. FOSTER: Even 60?

PROFESSOR: Same as a thousand years ago, sir, when you also had wars that whipped out whole peoples. The point is who wins and who looses: the survival of a culture.

MR. FOSTER: A culture, with most of its people dead, the rest dying, the food poisoned, the air unfit to breathe. You call that a culture.

PROFESSOR: Yes I do. I am not a poet; I am a political scientist, who would rather have an American culture survive than a Russian one.

WOMAN: Yes, but what would it be like really? What would it be like? Who would survive?

PROFESSOR: Who would survive? Interesting question. I would predict convicts and file clerks. The worst convicts, those deep down in solitary confinement, and the most ordinary file clerks, probably for large insurance companies. Because, they would be in fireproof rooms, protected by tons of the best insulator in the world, paper. And imagine what will happen: A small group of vicious criminals will fight the army of file clerks for the remaining means of life. The convicts will know violence; but he file clerks will know organization. Who do you think will win?

Ha Ha. All hypothesis of course, but fun to play around with. And time to go home. I didn't mean to hold court so long. I don't usually come to a supper party and talk right through until breakfast.

HOST: How's that professor, we were fascinated. I just hope we didn't keep you from your work.

PROFESSOR: Not at all. I have a ten o'clock meeting at the Pentagon. I still have time to go home and change.


While driving Ilsa Wolfe home from the party, and hearing her thinly-veiled erotic pleasure at flirting with the idea of nuclear war and mass death, Professor Groeteschele sizes her -- and himself -- up.

PROFESSOR: I make death into a game for people like you to get excited about. I watched you tonight. You'd love making it possible.

You'd love pressing that button. What a thrill that would be.

Knowing you have to die...to have the power to take everyone else with you...the mob of them with their plans, their little hopes, born to be murdered and turning away from it, closing their eyes to it.

You could be the one to make it true, do it to them. But you're afraid, so you look for the thrill someplace else.

And who better than a man who isn't afraid?


Shit. Might as well be Charles Krauthammer driving Coultergeist back from a particularly exhilarating Two Minutes Hate.

Later, the Professor addresses a wargaming seminar at the Pentagon…

BLACK: We're talking about the wrong subject. You've got to stop war, not limit it.

PROFESSOR: That, that is not up to us General Black.

BLACK: We're the ones who know most about it.

GENERAL: You're a soldier Blacky, you carry out policy.

BLACK: Don't kid yourself. The way we say a war can be fought is making policy. If we say we can fight a limited war with nuclear weapons, all we do is let everyone off the hook. That's what they want to hear. We can just keep on doing what we're doing and nobody really gets hurt. Well you can't fight a limited war and you know it.

PROFESSOR: For my part, I'm not so sure.

BLACK: There's no such thing as a limited war anymore. Not with hydrogen bombs there isn't. Once those bombs start to drop you won't be able to limit a damn thing.

PROFESSOR: Are you advocating disarmament, General Black?

BLACK: I don't know.

PROFESSOR: It's the logic of your position. Peculiar reversal, the press would be interested. The military man who is the dove and the civilian who is the hawk.

BLACK: We're going too fast. Things are getting out of hand.

SECRETARY: Can you be more specific, General?

BLACK: We all try to make war more efficient.

GENERAL: That's our job.

BLACK: And we're succeeding; we now have the capacity to blow up the whole world.

PROFESSOR: Which does not mean we must do it.

BLACK: We won't be able to stop from doing it. That's the logic of your position, Groeteschele. We are setting up a war machine that acts faster than the ability of men to control it. We are putting men into positions that are getting too tough for them to handle.

PROFESSOR: Then we must toughen the men.

GENERAL: Suppose they launch a first strike against us?

BLACK: Then we retaliate, and we're all finished.

PROFESSOR: Oh, would you prefer that only we were finished?

GENERAL II: We have to prepare.

BLACK: We're preparing. We've got to slow down.

PROFESSOR: I disagree; we've got to speed up! Naturally, that means taking risks. But our intention is always to minimize those risks. Of course, we can only control our own actions. Our concept of limited war is based on equal rationality on the part of the Russians. It also presupposes there will be no accidents on either side. But, suppose for an example that unidentified flying object was one of their 50-megaton missiles that had gotten loose by mistake. What could be done? How could they prove it was really an accident? Would it make any difference if they could? Even if we believe them, should we still think in terms of limiting our response, or should we hit them back with everything we have?


(Spoiler Alert, sort of. Although if you actually haven’t seen “Fail Safe” in the 42 years since it was shot, well, shame on you)

And after an accident has inadvertently committed American bombers to a nuclear strike on Moscow -- after WWIII seems imminent and everyone is working feverishly to stop the world from exploding -- what advice does the Professor offer to help understand and deal with the enemy?

--

PROFESSOR: In my opinion, they will take no action at all.

GENERAL: They won't just sit there.

PROFESSOR: I think if our bombers get through, the Russians will surrender.

SECRETARY: Will you explain your statement, Professor?

PROFESSOR: The Russian aim is to dominate the world. They think that Communism must succeed eventually...if the Soviet Union is left reasonably intact. They know that a war would leave the Soviet Union utterly destroyed. Therefore, they would surrender.


PROFESSOR: These are Marxist fanatics, not normal people. They do not reason the way you reason, General Black. They're not motivated by human emotion such as rage and pity. They are calculating machines. They will look at the balance sheet, and they will see they cannot win.

SECRETARY: Then you suggest doing what?

PROFESSOR: Nothing.

SECRETARY: Nothing?

PROFESSOR: The Russians will surrender...and the threat of Communism will be over forever.

PROFESSOR: Mr. Secretary, I am convinced when the Russians know bombs will fall on Moscow, they will surrender. They know that whatever they do then, they cannot escape destruction. Don't you see, sir? This is our chance.

We never would have made the first move deliberately...but Group Six has made it for us by accident. We must take advantage of it. History demands it. We must advise the President not to recall those planes.


A bloodthirsty call for a sneak attack.

A rationale for preemptive war, based not a specific threat but on a radically dehumanized perception of the enemy’s “real” nature as filtered through an extreme, right-wing ideology.

And at the moment of maximum chaos and crisis, when any false move could set the Earth on fire, a shrill council to pump up the volume

Sound familiar?

And then finally we must come inevitably to “Dr. Strangelove” for the final detailing, from whence the opening photo for this post was snatched.

(Note: This is from the original script, which was changed quite a bit by Kubrick during production. For instance, General Buck Turdigson [George C. Scott] was originally called “Buck Schmuck”, and quite a lot of the lines that were originally allocated to Brig. Gen. Jack D. Ripper [Sterling Hayden] were reassigned or recut for Turgidson. So if the who-said-what of this doesn’t quite jib with your memory, well, there you go. That, or maybe you’re just losing your mind.)


We pick up the completely unhinged General Ripper and the increasingly alarmed Major Mandrake talking about the horrors of a nuclear war and we hear the Proto-Neocon’s flatly affected disregard for human life…

GENERAL RIPPER
You're absolutely right. You forgot to mention
their nuclear subs. But it wouldn't matter.
Sure we wouldn't get off without getting our
hair mussed, but we'd prevail. I don't think
we'd lose more than fifty million people, tops.

MAJOR MANDRAKE
(hesitatingly)
But if you just let things alone, we wouldn't
lose anyone.


...their certainty that is you do not agree with them, you must be dangerously naĂŻve...

GENERAL RIPPER
Major Mandrake, I guess you don't follow what's
going on too closely, do you?

MAJOR MANDRAKE
Where, sir?

GENERAL RIPPER
(smiles patronisingly)
Where? Everywhere, Major. Everywhere.
...

GENERAL RIPPER
(the prosecutor makes
his point)
Then don't you realize the Bomb gives us
Peace not War? And, if that's the case, I
ask you again: Why do they want disarmament?

MAJOR MANDRAKE
(despairing)
Well, sir, like I said, for the same reasons
we do. I mean, all the experts say the most
likely way for War to start nowadays is by
an accident, or a mistake, or by some mentally
unbalanced person --
(lets his voice trail off)

MANDRAKE's discretion was unnecessary for it would never occur
to GENERAL RIPPER that anyone would think him mentally unbalanced.

GENERAL RIPPER
Go on, Major.

MAJOR MANDRAKE
(gaining confidence)
I was just going to say, as long as the
weapons exist, sooner or later something's
going to happen -- and that'll be it for
both countries.

GENERAL RIPPER
I've heard the arguments. Like Napoleon's
quote, "There's one thing you can't do with
a bayonet, and that's - sit on it."

MAJOR MANDRAKE
That's right, sir. And don't forget in a
few years a lot of other countries will have
the bomb. What if they start something?

GENERAL RIPPER
Go on, Major. You fascinate me.

MAJOR MANDRAKE
Well, sir, I remember an example that pointed
out that if a system was safe on 99.99% of the
days of the year, given average luck it would
fail in thirty years.


Their perfect, ideological faith that “the enemy” is, in toto, so utterly irrational and alien that none of them can even be trusted to act in the interests of their own survival…

GENERAL RIPPER
I still ask, why do they want disarmament?

MAJOR MANDRAKE
Well, for the same reasons we do, sir.
Don't you see?

GENERAL RIPPER
No, Major, I don't. They have no regard
for human life. They wouldn't care if
they lost their whole country as long as
they won.

MAJOR MANDRAKE
Gee, sir, that last remark doesn't exactly
make all the sense in the world.



And their unshakeable belief that if you disagree with them to any degree, you must be a traitor or a fool or a dupe of the crafty and all-powerful Enemy Other…
GENERAL RIPPER
(angrily)
Major, you're talking like one of them!

MAJOR MANDRAKE
(shook)
Well, I'm not, sir. Honestly, sir.

GENERAL RIPPER
Don't be offended, Major. Our President
holds the same views.



MAJOR MANDRAKE
Look, sir. I'm no expert on the subject,
but I've read some pretty sharp ideas the
big boys have. Like, say, both countries
agreeing to a million dollar reward and
international protection for anyone who
gives evidence of cheating to the inspectors.
You can't hide those things without a lot of
people knowing about it. And if I were
going to try and hide a few, I wouldn't want
to depend on the fact that some poor slob
isn't going to run and blab for a million
bucks. We're as smart as they are, and if
they cheat, or even hold back information,
we'd pull right out.

GENERAL RIPPER
(shaking his head)
Major, I hate to say this, but I think you've
been enemy indoctrinated, and you don't even
know it.



The Kristols of the world have been with us since the beginning.

And because their ideological bacilli can only flourish in the flesh wounds on the body of Democracy – in a that very particular and febrile Petri dish of fear, paranoia, constant external and internal threat and xenophobia – this is the world they seek to create, expand and defend.

Wednesday, July 19, 2006

"I believe in Jebusland."


Over on Mr. Gilliard’s site, Steve asks the musical question…

“Who will stand with the commander?”

And points out here, in response, to an article from the Hartford Courant about Joe’s problems as the Disorganization Man...

...
He's got greater problems then that.

He doesn't have a field operation now? With weeks to go? And he wants to make an independent run? Who is he kidding?

Look, this is amazing. If the locals aren't going to help him, who can he get. He would normally reach out to the locals, who would put their people on the street and get paid for it.

Without that help, he's going to be grabbing anyone who comes along and that doesn't get you the best staff. In fact, it can lead to trouble. In many of the small towns, he won't be covered at all. And from this article, Lamont will be getting unexpected help. He should have had a field team in place after the convention, not wait while Swan reached out to the pissed offs.

...



To which my response is, I suppose he could always reach out for help to is good friends on the Righteous Right...


Of course first, he must confess loyalty.

FADE FROM BLACK: Int. of James Dobson’s office



Lieberman (seated in front of the Dobsons desk, facing the camera): I believe in Jebusland.

Undercutting my Party and selling-out Democratic principles has made my fortune, and I ran my political life in this way. I let things go. I did not protest when the Dear Leader put up extremist judges. I tried to help him eliminate Social Security, and was key in making it much harder for the poor to declare bankruptcy.

I consorted with right-wing radio hosts and told my party they dishonored themselves when they disputed the Dear Leader’s infinite wisdom.

I let him kiss me.

I let him put his hands on me like I was a common Germany chancellor…


Then, comes the “ask”.

Lieberman: I will give you anything you ask.

Dobson: We've known each other many years, but this is the first time you ever came to me for counsel or for help. I can't remember the last time that you invited me to your house for a cup of coffee or that godawful sweet wine crap that you hebes sozzle...Let's be frank here. You never wanted my friendship. And uh, you were afraid to be in my debt.

Lieberman: I didn't want to get into trouble with the smelly Liberals.

Dobson: I understand. You found paradise in Dubya's pants. You had a good trade, you made a good living. Incumbency protected you and the courts of public opinion were under control. And you didn't need a friend like me. But uh, now you come to me and you say -- “Don Jimmy, give me votes.” But you don't ask with respect. You don't offer friendship. You don't even think to call me Reverend. Instead, you come into my house and you ask me to do re-election for money.

Lieberman: I ask you for justice.

Dobson: That is not justice. Your own people are rejecting you.

Lieberman: Let the Liberals suffer then, as I suffer. How much shall I pay you?

Dobson (after standing and turning his back): Joementum, Joementum. What have I ever done to make you treat me so disrespectfully? If you'd come to me in friendship, then this scum that is ruining your Party would be suffering this very day. And if by chance a Holy man like yourself should make enemies, then they would become my enemies. And then they would fear you.


Then, inevitably, comes the price.


Lieberman: Be my friend - - Reverend.

(Dobson shrugs. Lieberman bows toward him and kisses his pale, puffy ass.)


FADE OUT.

Tuesday, July 18, 2006

In one sense, Conservatives are right.

Because this...

(AP Photo/Alaa al-Marjani)

...isn’t a Civil War.

This is Total Civil War.

From the AP...


Iraq civilian toll spikes to nearly 6,000

By NICK WADHAMS, Associated Press Writer2 hours, 59 minutes ago

Nearly 6,000 civilians were slain across Iraq in May and June, a spike in deaths that coincided with rising sectarian attacks across the country, the United Nations said Tuesday.

The report from the U.N. Assistance Mission in Iraq describes a wave of lawlessness and crime, including assassinations, bombings, kidnappings, torture and intimidation.
Hundreds of teachers, judges, religious leaders and doctors have been targeted for death, and thousands of people have fled, the report said. Evidence suggests militants also have begun to target homosexuals, it said.

"While welcoming recent positive steps by the government to promote national reconciliation, the report raises alarm at the growing number of casualties among the civilian population killed or wounded during indiscriminate or targeted attacks by terrorists or insurgents," the U.N. said in a note accompanying the report.

In the last two days alone, more than 120 people were killed in violence in Iraq. In the worst attacks, fifty-three perished in a suicide bombing Tuesday in Kufa, and 50 were slain Monday in a market in Mahmoudiya.

According to the report, 2,669 civilians were killed in May and 3,149 were killed in June. Those numbers combined two counts: from the Ministry of Health, which records deaths reported by hospitals; and the Medico-Legal Institute in Baghdad, which tallies the unidentified bodies it receives.

The report charts a month-by-month increase in the number of civilians killed, from 710 in January to 1,129 in April. In the first six months of the year, it said 14,338 people had been killed.

The report's figures were higher than some other counts, but even the U.N. said many killings go unreported.

According to an Associated Press tally based on its daily reporting, at least 1,511 civilians were killed, in May and June, with at least an additional 289 police and security forces killed.


It also details the rise in kidnappings, particularly of large groups of people. On May 17, for example, the report said 15 Tae Kwon Do athletes were kidnapped in western Iraq.

"There is no news regarding their whereabouts," the report said.

Women report that their rights have been rolled back by extremist Muslim groups — both Shiite and Sunni. While under Saddam Hussein's largely secular regime, women faced few social restrictions, they say they are now barred from going to market alone, wearing pants or driving cars.

And children are frequently victims, perishing in large crowds or sometimes even targeted themselves, the report said.

"Violence, corruption, inefficiency of state organs to exert control over security, establish the rule of law and protect individual and collective rights all lead to inability of both the state and the family to meet the needs of children," it said.
The government still has not pursued many allegations of torture and other inhumane treatment in prisons and detention centers, the U.N. said.


Jesus Christ. Nearly 6,000 dead in two months.

Six thousand.

How can you fathom that?

Do you start by simply observing that this is twice the number who died on a pretty Fall day in America in September of 2001?

Or perhaps consider the estimated population of Iraq as of 1997 was 22 million and change, and the population of the United States is a hair under 300 million.

And ask yourself what would we do if factions fighting in the United States killed a proportional number of civilians over the same period of time?

What would we call it if, in the two months between the “Day Without Immigrants” protests and the day they paraded pictures of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s corpse for the cameras, warring factions of Evangelicals Christians had slaughtered 81,000 Americans in the streets of New York, Atlanta, Phoenix and Miami?

Or consider that at First Manassas/Bull Run, 2,708 Union soldiers died, and 1,981 Confederates.

And at the battle of Antietam, approximately 5,000 died on both sides (various figures depends on various definitions, but 5,000 is a fair compromise.)

The American Revolution itself -- the foundational moment when we first started calling ourselves “Americans” -- cost 4,435 American lives.

Now consider this definition of "Total War" from "Total War: The German and American Experiences, 1871-1914" (emphasis added):
"...Total war is fought heedless of the restraints of morality, custom, or international law, for the combatants are inspired by hatreds born of modern ideologies. Total war requires the mobilization not only of armed forces but also of whole populations. The most crucial determinant of total war is the widespread, indiscriminate, and deliberate inclusion of civilians as legitimate military targets."


The battles of Iraq’s Total Civil War are not fought for forts or fields or the high ground. They are fought for time.

They are fought to create and maintain horror and chaos over time.

And since this a Total War whose short- and medium-range goal is control of time and calendar, and not space, I can say three things that are true:

First, during the Battle of The Fourth May, 2,669 Iraqis perished. That is more than all the American forces who died during the War of 1812 (2,260).

Second, during the Battle of The Fourth June, 3,149 Iraqis perished. This is more than all American losses during the Spanish-American War (2,446).

And, third, anyone who still maintains that what is going on in Iraq is not a Civil War is either deliberately lying or insane.

Good Shit


From Downstairs.

Commenter werebear elegantly sums up the philosophical battlespace:

“…
Most thinkers use "concepts" which are abstract formulations that are flexible enough for new information. I am a human, Drifty is a human, therefore he should have human rights I feel should be extended to all humans.

However, those like Teh SheFly don't organize their brains around "concepts" because then their casual condemnation of other humans would not come so easily. So they use "realms."

Anyone who dwells in their realm is good, no matter what they do. And anyone who dwells in the "liberal" realm is bad, no matter what they do.

When you figure out that they are literally not thinking as we normally term it, many things became clearer.”

And bitterharvest meticulously decorates it in genuine, flocked “NeoCon Chic” wallpaper with the original “Manufactured Outrage” accents:

Why stop with Schafly, D? Here are some other choice quotes from 1999 when a democrat dared to lead the country to war:

"Clinton's bombing campaign has caused all of these problems to explode"
-Tom Delay (R-TX)

"These international war crimes were led by Gen. Wesley Clark...who clicked his shiny heels for the commander-in-grief, Bill Clinton."
-Michael Savage

"This has been an unmitigated disaster...Ask the Chinese embassy. Ask all the people in Belgrade that we've killed. Ask all the refugees that we've killed."
-Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

"I cannot support a failed foreign policy...There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory."
-Tom Delay (R-TX)

"You can support the troops but not the president."
-Tom Delay (R-TX)

"My job as majority leader is to supportive of our troops...not to march in lock step with everything the president decides to do."
-Sen. Trent Lott (R-MS)

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is."
-Gov. George W. Bush (R-TX)

"President Clinton is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home."
-Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)

"You think Vietnam was bad? Vietnam was nothing next to Kosovo."
-Tony Snow, Fox News, 3/24/99

"No goal, no objective, not until we have those things and a compelling case is made, the I say, back out of it, because innocent people are going to die for nothing."
-Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/5/99

Craven, partisan vipers, all of them. Sorry to post such a huge "comment," but I had to get that out of my system.

I have nothing to add except my kudos.

Well done.