Man wisdom

This probably belongs at TF&G, but what the hell. It's a subject near and dear to my heart. From Jen at Gillard:

[. . .]

If nothing else, most Smart Boys know that a) giving a lady an orgasm earlier in the night takes a lot of pressure off for "the main event" and b) decent "oral debate" skills make up for any, um, underendowment issues quite a bit.

[. . .]

I might not know the ins and outs of the political/government situation as well as I'd like, but pleasing a woman is something I'm eminently qualified to speak on. No bragging, statement of fact. Guys, please your woman (or man, but it's not the same) before you do your thing, or just after, or both. They are not objects solely for your gratification. If you don't know how (common, for some reason) ask her to show you. You'll thank me. And ladies, don't just lay there and fake it. If your guy ain't doing it right, show him what you like.

Here we go . . . again

(p)resident Dicknose:

"When democracy finally happens in Iraq, [people] in Iran will see what can be achieved."

Yeah, they will see burnt out cities, destroyed infrastructure, tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, dead and wounded. They'll see that they're better off with their Fundamentalist mullahs than having American troops tramping over their land like bulls in a china shop. Tell me, Chimp-man, are they already stocking up on rose petals to toss at our feet when we arrive? You're a fucking asshole, you mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging, retard.

Update: 05:45:

Pessimism from Dave Johnson:

[. . .]

These new attacks are presumably just the second stage in the multi-nation plan Wolfowitz spoke about right before the war. In other words, we can plan to be at war for five to twenty years.

The Army and Guard are already being pushed to the limit. Thus, there will have to be a draft. But in order for there to be a draft, anti-war groups and spokesmen will have to be marginalized and crushed. So those of us who are anti-war should prepare to be called traitors and cowards with an intensity that we haven't seen so far. Ann Coulter is soon going to go completely mainstream. [my emphasis]

[. . .]

Once more unto the breach, my friends.

And just to throw this out there: What do you think about the blue states threatening to secede if Bush goes into Iran? And just like my Iraq endgame, I know no one has the nuts to do it but humor me. Again, comments solicited. And thanks again to all the folks who left comments on that post. Some excellent and detailed ideas, even from the guy who compared me to Nixon.

Martin Luther King Would Fuck Bush's Shit Up

With all the nice stuff everybody's saying about Dr. King on his namesake day, this one from The Rude Pundit is most refreshing. RP says you don't have to scroll down anymore but if you do, it's 1/17.

And that's why King would fuck Bush's shit up, and the reason why Democrats oughta take a look at King beyond his having had a dream and his having been to the mountaintop and his having been assassinated. Because King knew - he fucking knew - that one thing that made him a leader of the disenfranchised is that he spoke their language. Even as those around him believed (and some still believe) that King made a mistake in his expansion of his movement, King knew that no one is truly free until we all are free. He had to bring whites into the movement on a broad basis or the fight was never going to end. He had to undercut the trump card of the powerful in their ability to divide the underclasses, and that meant owning the rhetorical God to the point that whenever God is mentioned, the automatic association is with the civil rights, economic justice, and anti-war movements (think of how successful the right is in the use of the word "Christian"). Look at the speech up there. King is not conditional here - he says, "when you are right, God will fight your battle."

The thing is that as Democrats scramble like rutting hedgehogs on the last day of the forest fuckfest to find someone, anyone who will represent them to "the people," they'd be wise to look at how King used "God" in his speeches. See, in the Sister Pollard story, "God" for King represents the poor, the beaten, the disenfranchised, and if that God is on your side, then how can the powerful win? If someone could genuinely lasso that rhetoric and have the balls to use God against Bush in very clear, unambiguous, loud tones, then the right will be thrown into disarray - what will they have if they don't have God? Bush? Oh, fuck, they'll be running into the streets of D.C., screaming, coming up with new gods to worship. There will be blood orgies at the Watergate the likes of which that town hasn't seen since Ronald Reagan smeared himself with pig feces and demanded the cherries of a dozen College Republican girls be popped in front of him as he masturbated slowly, deliberately, eyes glazed over with mad power and semi-deified glory.

Now that's more like it! I think he's advocating ripping the club of God out of the hands of those who have co-opted it and beating them to death with it. I was just gonna use a reg'lar ol' Louisville Slugger. Hey, whatever works.

Here's what Wolcott has to say about it:

He's right, of course. Because MLK was a man. The faith he embodied and professed wasn't fanaticism hiding behind pursed lips, as Bush's is. King faced down his fears. Bush represses his under rodeo bravado, strutting his stuff before applause-machine audiences that he reassure him that he's top gun.

Hey, James, when ya got an inferiority complex like Bush's, ya gotta make up stuff to strut.

Next up, Iran 2

. . . Bush has an aggressive and ambitious agenda for using that control—against the mullahs in Iran and against targets in the ongoing war on terrorism—during his second term. The C.I.A. will continue to be downgraded, and the agency will increasingly serve, as one government consultant with close ties to the Pentagon put it, as “facilitators” of policy emanating from President Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney. This process is well under way.

[. . .]

Sy Hersh in the New Yorker. Read it and weep.

Update: 18:20:

Pudentilla dissects:

[. . .]

If we are, as Mr. Hersh asserts, sending troops into Iran via Afghanistan, it would seem that we are using forces against the territorial integrity of Iran. If we have done so, it would seem that we have committed acts of war against Iran. But wait, only Congress can declare war, you may say. Well then, must we conclude that Il Ducetto has violated the Constitution in a not trivial way?

[. . .]

Update: 18:35:

The Dog:

. . . The lessons the White House believes it has learned from the Iraq fiasco? Political. I wonder what that means: arresting protestors?

Indeed. We are doing things under the guise of democracy and freedom that amount to an Imperial manifest. America has begun to be, and will become if we don't do something, a totalitarian state.

And all the Pentagram has to say? The article was "riddled with errors". They don't deny shit though, do they?

Scrambled Eggs At Leavenworth?

An article in today's NYTimes describes investigations and possible prosecutions of senior people, military and civilian, in the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse outrage. It concludes with:

Lawyers for the low-ranking soldiers who have been charged say they remain skeptical that higher-ups will ever be charged.

"The higher up they go, the more problems they have with people leading to the Pentagon," said Harvey Volzer, who represented Megan Ambuhl, who was discharged from the military as part of a plea bargain in the Abu Ghraib abuses. "Pappas gives them Sanchez, and they don't want that. Sanchez can give them Rumsfeld, and they don't want that.

"Rumsfeld can lead to Bush and Gonzales, and they definitely don't want that," Mr. Volzer said, referring to President Bush and to Alberto R. Gonzales, the White House counsel and attorney general nominee, who argued in a memorandum that parts of the Geneva Conventions were "quaint" and "obsolete."

Mr. Bergrin noted that when he asked a military judge to allow testimony by Colonel Pappas, Colonel Jordan and others at Sergeant Davis's court-martial, he was told they could not testify because prosecutors planned to charge them.

"I think the military is using these young enlisteds as scapegoats," he said.

Like, Duh! A few incidents might have been instigated by enlisted men, but as an ongoing deal it came down the chain of command. Colonels don't think this shit up as they're well aware this kind of abuse violates U.S. and International law. Neither do generals, for the same reasons. What generals do is follow orders from their civilian controllers. I think Bush and Rumbo would be fine cellies. They should give them a cell with a nice view. Of the construction of their gallows.

Back to 'this'

The DNC leadership thing. Shakespeare's Sister and I were on this last week, and I found this at That Colored Fella's place this morning.

TCF was very impressed with Peter Beinert (Editor The New Republic), sitting in this week as a panelist on The McLaughlin Group. He held his ground, leaving no doubt he would not be an intimidated appeaser (see Chicago Tribune’s Clarence Page), however his prediction that Simon Rosenberg would be the next Democratic National Committee chairman, annoyed me.

[. . .]

I saw the show too. And that old fool McLaughlin said that Tim Roemer would be the next DNC Chair (the only reason I watch is for Eleanor Clift). Now, I am instinctively leaning towards Howard Dean, just 'cause I liked him from square one; when he announced his candidacy for President. He might be a nut, but he has convictions and he stands by 'em, come what may.

Thing is, I heard a lot of good things about Simon Rosenberg. I like the co-chair solution someone offered, because they have complimentary strengths. Rosenberg the administrator, Dean the agitator, out rousing the base while Rosenberg works within the Beltway. That ain't happening, not when Pelosi and Reid are leaning Roemer. Note: write to them and tell them they are backing the wrong guy.

Gotta learn more, but us Dems should take an active role in this leadership decision. Let's not leave it to the politicians, let them know your feelings on the subject. Let your local Party people know too. We need the best chance to win the '06 midterms, and maybe reclaim one Chamber of Congress. We need the momentum going into '08, and the next leader of the DNC is the first step toward achieving that goal . . . or not.

Sour Krauthammer

James Wolcott lays into hardly-ever-right-wing pundit and columnist Charles Krauthammer, my number one pick for "Wheelchair Bound Guy I'd Most Like To Help Down The Capitol Steps". In a non-partisan manner, of course.

Don't conservatives ever get bored spouting the same old tailpipe exhaust? I know they don't care about boring the audience--they assume that you can't tell those dumbies anything often enough--but don't they ever bore themselves? Don't they ever experience an inner slump when they're about to repeat an anecdote as tired and stale as a downtown hooker after Fleet Week?

No, I don't believe they do. They use those faded anecdotes the way Reagan used his, as wadded-up insulation to stuff in the holes of their brain and prevent any new or unsettling notions from breezing in and rattling their convictions. Even Charles Krauthammer, considered to be one of the more "thoughtful" conservatives (depth perception being a matter of degrees--compared to Fred Barnes, a fossil shell looks thoughtful), is as mechanical as a player piano. Put a quarter in the slot, and he churns out a column that sounds like senility set to a ragtime rhythm.

Wolcott has an amazing way with words. Go read. You'll get a kick out of it.

Next up, Iran

Michael Hawkins on Seymour Hersh.

Housekeeping

I added a link to the Truckee CA City Cam in the sidebar. This way it'll be easy for all of us to keep an eye on Gordon.

I know

I've been bitching about this fiasco in Iraq since Bush first started dropping hints, back in '02. Wasn't a blogger then, but I bitched to anyone who'd listen. Well, we went anyway. I was hoping the election last November would have settled this, but now I've had to think about what I'd do to get us out of Iraq in the best way possible. I'm a mechanic, fixing broken shit's in my nature.

My idea of the best way possible? Leaving Iraq as a functioning state (not necessarily democratic) with a minimum of bloodshed and loss of human life. I believe the best way to do this, in a modicum of time, is with a draft.

Were I President (one who'd inherited this crisis, as John Kerry would have) I would go before the American people and spell it out:

1.) I would get us out of Iraq in a little over two years.

2.) To do it, I will enact a draft for two years.

3.) I would immediately (as fast as time would allow) increase troop strength on the ground in Iraq to between 250 and 500 thousand.

4.) Iraq's borders would be sealed and a genuine 'occupation force' would be put in place. There would be units dedicated to law enforcement, and those detailed to hunting down and killing the terrorists/insurgents/'dead-enders'/whatever. City by city would be pacified and security maintained by American troops (not that stupid bullshit we did in Fallujah).

5.) Iraqi police and National Guard units would be trained properly during this time, without fear of retribution (suicide bombings, drive-bys, kidnappings etc). That's because there'd be enough U.S. troops to keep order, and hunter-killer units hunting and killing the insurgents. Hel-lo, if the borders are sealed, you have a limited number of agitators to deal with. We win the war of attrition, baby, hands down.

6.) Iraqi and Middle Eastern businesses would be given the contracts taken away from Halliburton to rebuild the infrastructure. The contracts taken away from Halliburton to support the U.S. military would be voided and military personnel would be doing those jobs, the way it was done before Halliburton had a stranglehold on the DoD supply chain.

7.) Halfway into this plan (about a year, give or take), if all is going well (safe streets, no daily car bombs and IEDs), I would call Iraqi elections. This would give us a year to turn over power to the new Iraqi government and National Guard and police. A phase-in, so to speak.

8.) 6 months after the election, if things are going smoothly, the U.S. troop drawdown would begin, ending 6 months after the draft runs its two-year course.

It probably wouldn't get me reelected unless I pulled it off perfectly, but to straighten this mess out, it'll take some leadership from someone not concerned about reelection. Am I crazy or in the ballpark? Comments solicited.

No surprise

This is why, when I'm somewhere outside the U.S., I try to avoid Americans at all costs. You can pick out an American in a crowd so easily because they're usually the most obnoxious.

LONDON, Jan. 15 (AP) - American-led troops using the ancient Iraqi city of Babylon as a base have damaged and contaminated artifacts dating back thousands of years in one of the world's most important archaeological sites, the British Museum said Saturday.

For example, military vehicles crushed a 2,600-year-old brick pavement, and archaeological fragments, including broken bricks stamped by King Nebuchadnezzar II, were scattered at the site, a museum report said. The dragons at the Ishtar Gate were marred by cracks and gaps where someone tried to remove their decorative bricks, the report said.

[. . .]

Link via Peter at Blondie's.

Strength vs. Control

An excellent essay by the Sister:

[. . .]

In contrast, Liberals’ vision of America has everything to do with strength and little to do with control. Liberals argue that America’s greatest strength has always been her progressiveness, her awkward struggle for egalitarianism, her existence as a melting pot where all people are meant to be free. The opposite of control, the Liberal view is about personal freedom and finding the balance that ensures the expression of one person’s right doesn’t infringe on another’s.

[. . .]

Pack a lunch, it's long, but oh so right. And she links to my post, so what could be bad?

Dreams

Toner Mishap on MLK.

Empires

My quasi-weekly chapter is up over at creativity . . .

Update

To my post yesterday on Bush using the SS Administration to push his bullshit policies. Dave Johnson at Seeing the Forest:

. . . This is using the government itself to propagandize the public to support the policies of one political party. The Congress will not investigate. The FBI will not. The Justice Department won't. The media will drop it in a day or two. This is bad. The Party has merged with the State.

Disclosure

You're only as good as your reputation. Steve Gillard explains.

Powell: "We're Losing." Bush: "Hit the Bricks."

From the Financial Times.

Mr Powell's bleak assessment, less than three weeks before Iraqis are due to elect a parliament, reflects what advisers close to the administration and former officials describe as an understanding in the State Department and Pentagon of the depth of the crisis.

But, they say, this is not a view accepted by President George W. Bush.

One counterinsurgency expert said Donald Rumsfeld, defence secretary, had a "brutally accurate" picture of the situation and the potential dangers.

But a member of an influential neoconservative policy group said that such warnings "stop well short of the president".

He said Mr Rumsfeld, criticised for the conduct of the war, had an interest in hiding the true picture from the president.

According to Chas Freeman, former US ambassador to Saudi Arabia and head of the independent Middle East Policy Council, Mr Bush recently asked Mr Powell for his view on the progress of the war. "We're losing," Mr Powell was quoted as saying. Mr Freeman said Mr Bush then asked the secretary of state to leave.

Analysts are concerned that with the departure of Mr Powell and his replacement by Condoleezza Rice, the president's loyal national security adviser, the White House will be further shielded from dissent.

Bush, you started this fuckin' war on a lie and it's not going the way you wanted it to, and now you don't want to hear about it? You're a fucking asshole.

Outta here

Stolen fully and completely from Skippy 'cause it was so good:

subject: california's secession letter to bush:

dear president bush:

congratulations on your victory over all us non-evangelicals. actually, we're a bit ticked off here in california, so we're leaving. california will now be its own country. and we're taking all the blue states with us. in case you are not aware, that includes hawaii, oregon, washington, minnesota, wisconsin, michigan, illinois, and all of the north east.

we spoke to god, and she agrees that this split will be beneficial to almost everybody, and especially to us in the new country of california. in fact, god is so excited about it, she's going to shift the whole country at 4:30 pm est this friday. therefore, please let everyone know they need to be back in their states by then.

so you get texas and all the former slave states. we get the governator, stem cell research and the best beaches. we get elliot spitzer. you get ken lay. (okay, we have to keep martha stewart, we can live with that.) we get the statue of liberty. you get opryland. we get intel and microsoft. you get worldcom. we get harvard. you get old miss.' we get 85% of america's venture capital and entrepreneurs. you get all the technological innovation in alabama. we get about two-thirds of the tax revenue, and you get to make the red states pay their fair share. since our divorce rate is 22% lower than the christian coalition's, we get a bunch of happy families. you get a bunch of single moms to support, and we know how much you like that.

did i mention we produce about 70% of the nation's veggies? but heck the only greens the bible-thumpers eat are the pickles on their big macs. oh yeah, another thing, don't plan on serving california wine at your state dinners. from now on it's imported french wine for you. ouch, bet that hurts.

just so we're clear, the country of california will be pro-choice and anti-war. speaking of war, we're going to want all blue states citizens back from iraq. if you need people to fight, just ask your evangelicals. they have tons of kids they're willing to send to their deaths for absolutely no purpose. and they don't care if you don't show pictures of their kids' caskets coming home.

anyway, we wish you all the best in the next four years and we hope, really hope, you find those missing weapons of mass destruction. seriously. soon.
sincerely,

california

Bullshit's gettin' deep

NYT:

WASHINGTON, Jan. 15 - Over the objections of many of its own employees, the Social Security Administration is gearing up for a major effort to publicize the financial problems of Social Security and to convince the public that private accounts are needed as part of any solution.

[. . .]

But agency employees have complained to Social Security officials that they are being conscripted into a political battle over the future of the program. They question the accuracy of recent statements by the agency, and they say that money from the Social Security trust fund should not be used for such advocacy.

[. . .]

So the Repub Noise Machine is gonna inundate us with horeseshit until everybody believes Social Security is going down the tubes in 20 minutes. You can bet Fox already has the red staters lining up to 'git us one of them thar private accounts'.

[. . .]

Deborah C. Fredericksen of Minneapolis, who has worked for the Social Security Administration for 31 years, said, "Many employees believe that the president and this agency are using scare tactics to promote private accounts."

[. . .]

No shit, darlin'. If Chimpy didn't scare everybody, people would see his bullshit for what it is. It's their standard operating procedure, flood us with propaganda and slide legislation through once enough people believe it. His bonehead policies wouldn't stand up to objective scrutiny otherwise. The fact that using the fund's money to promote this propaganda is probably illegal, but you can be sure that wasn't given a second thought.

Update: 16:00:

[The Good] Roger Ailes adds:

[. . .]

George Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice and their respective flacks lie to you. Repeatedly. Willfully. Without remorse. And they will continue to do so. Today. And tomorrow.

[. . .]

The list

Of donors to Chimpy's inaugural is up over at PSoTD. Modify your purchasing decisions accordingly.