A Fantastic Experience

First off, yes, I'm up early, not late....

So, I heard our fum-fuddled President say something a minute ago that pretty much sums up my problems with him. When asked if he had any tips for Obama he said, "you're in for a fantastic experience... the staff there and the people there will really make your time comfortable."

Obviously that isn't a tip, but to be fair, as far as non-sequitors go, Obama could give Bush a run for his money. But that's a different story. Also, I'm not sure if there is some political gamesmanship involved in this remark; if you can think of something, by all means, share bc I don't quite see it.

And on to my point... What the fuck does he think it means to be president? Does he think he won a pageant or something? I understand that elections are in some ways "contests" but really only a a cynical level. To see an election as a contest is to consider the public mindless automatons.... They are mindles automatons? Ok, can't really argue, except to say that welfare state works in mysterious ways. Anyway, the point is that an election is a selection not a contest: NO ONE "WINS" ELECTIONS. Alas, am I reactionary or retarded?

So, Bush has been amazed at the spoils of two electoral "victories". Did he deserve it? Certainly not, but that's irrelevant. So, maybe he thinks he needs to give something back? Maybe that's how he sees nationalizing the foundations of our economy --basically being the president who introduced socialism to the U.S. more than any president in history-- perhaps giving stuff to people is what you do when you feel like you don't deserve something...

And now we have Obama. How long do you think he can believe in his own phony "mandate"? Can he really be worse than Bush when it comes to proving his own importance to himself? I have a feeling Bush's "fantastic experience" will pale in comparison to the epic fabulousness Obama will be more than willing to share with us in four years.

The Anaesthetic From Which None Come Round

If you read Stefan Beck's entry to the New Criterion's blog the other day titled "Don't fear the reaper" (This is sad that I have to give instructions because I don't know how to link, does this hurt BPB's credibility?) you would have come across part of the Phillip Larkin poem below.

Is life meaningless without death? Beck doesn’t think so, and to a certain extent of course he’s right. Is life less meaningless without death might be the better question. Then Beck slaps us in the face with the reality of the discussion.

“…“Unresting death, a whole day nearer now”: A friend of mine joked recently that they should slap that line on birthday cards. But where jokes are little help, arguments are none at all.”

So I’ll just shut up and admire how Larkin can put his thoughts down in sums of words to make sense in perfect rhythm and form to be beautiful like flower…Damn it!

Aubade

I work all day, and get half drunk at night.

Waking at four to soundless dark, I stare.

In time the curtain edges will grow light.

Till then I see what's really always there:

Unresting death, a whole day nearer now,

Making all thought impossible but how

And where and when I shall myself die.

Arid interrogation: yet the dread

Of dying, and being dead,

Flashes afresh to hold and horrify.

The mind blanks at the glare. Not in remorse

– The good not used, the love not given, time

Torn off unused – nor wretchedly because

An only life can take so long to climb

Clear of its wrong beginnings, and may never:

But at the total emptiness forever,

The sure extinction that we travel to

And shall be lost in always. Not to be here,

Not to be anywhere,

And soon; nothing more terrible, nothing more true.

This is a special way of being afraid

No trick dispels. Religion used to try,

That vast moth-eaten musical brocade

Created to pretend we never die,

And specious stuff that says no rational being

Can fear a thing it cannot feel, not seeing

That this is what we fear – no sight, no sound,

No touch or taste or smell, nothing to think with,

Nothing to love or link with,

The anaesthetic from which none come round.

And so it stays just on the edge of vision,

A small unfocused blur, a standing chill

That slows each impulse down to indecision.

Most things may never happen: this one will,

And realisation of it rages out

In furnace fear when we are caught without

People or drink. Courage is no good:

It means not scaring others. Being brave

Lets no-one off the grave.

Death is no different whined at than withstood.

Slowly light strengthens, and the room takes shape.

It stands plain as a wardrobe, what we know,

Have always known, know that we can't escape

Yet can't accept. One side will have to go.

Meanwhile telephones crouch, getting ready to ring

In locked-up offices, and all the uncaring

Intricate rented world begins to rouse.

The sky is white as clay, with no sun.

Work has to be done.

Postmen like doctors go from house to house.

PHILIP LARKIN (1985)

Seasonal Pot and Kettle Meetup In Olympia

"May reason prevail" and may tolerence, class, and history be damned.

It seems as though these groups crusading against Christmas often define themselves as humanists. Now, I am natually inclined to make the argument that calling other humans who believe differently from you hard hearted mind enslavened superstionists, is hardly being a humanist. (whatever that means) Then I got to thinking, this sign represents an additude all too human. Who doesn't snark at people who are so obviously (say awwwviously) less intelligent than they are. (see the view from Lake Wobegonee which is simply mawwwvelous dawwwling) How could anyone compare Christ's views of "love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them that despitefully use you, and persecute you" to following the existential humanist track of "struggling to make freely willed humane choices in the absence of clear, unambiguous moral guidance"?

Oh that's right I forget, Christianity is just a ruse, using James Bowman's mocking reference to a humanistic view of literature, " [to] reinforce the patriarchal, imperialist, racist, and homophobic foundation on which traditional societies have been built."

This feels to me like more of the same progressive hogwash, that anything new is better precisely because of the reason mentioned above. Jesus Christ did exist, it's a fact of history just as much as King Solomon existed. This is just another sign of History's dissapearance. Anymore history is seen as nothing but an imperfect version of the present. Lest we forget though, as I think it was Gombrich that said, anytime there is a gain in one direction there is a loss in another.

Do I really care if these people want to put up this sign, no. That's everyone's right. Do I shudder at the prospects of a "Humanist" future? Youbetcha!

DFW: Dead on the Page?

Just read an essay by Michael Weiss at The Weekly Standard, linked to from TNC, on the great(?) David Foster Wallace. Predictably, it's not hagiography, which is probably why I enjoyed it. It's defnitely not a hit-piece. The concluding quotation from DFW gave me pause.

"The next real literary 'rebels' in this country might well emerge as some weird bunch of anti-rebels, born oglers who dare somehow to back away from ironic watching, who have the childish gall actually to endorse and instantiate single-entendre principles. Who treat of plain old untrendy human troubles and emotions in U.S. life with reverence and conviction. Who eschew self-consciousness and hip fatigue. These anti-rebels would be outdated, of course, before they even started. Dead on the page. Too sincere. Clearly repressed. Backward, quaint, naive, anachronistic. Maybe that'll be the point. Maybe that's why they'll be the next real rebels"

Hellcat, do you know what quote this is from, bc as long as it isn't Infinite Jest I want to read it.... My question is: Why wasn't DFW one of these rebels? Or was he? Did he consider himself one of them? If not, what was holding him back? Did he want to be one of them? etc, etc...

I bought the Rolling Stone that had the article about him. For me, it was pretty hard to read, and not because anything was wrong with it... I don't think I care to read much if any of of his fiction (his non-fiction is a different story) but my interest in him is growing...

Smoldering

I'm quitting smoking... Believe it, bitches. It's already hard as shit. I decided on a tapering approach at first, but after researching a bit I have decided is a poor solution. Nicotine only stays in the bloodstream for 40 minutes, so each "taper" after that time just starts the process over and is just a temporary "relapse" instead of any real tapering, so to speak.

I had 4 yesterday and almost died. I've had two today but now I'm freezing the fucking turkey. Anyone want to try it with me!?!?! Didn't think so, but you should probably send me money or something as incentives.

Anyway, feel free to tell me "You can do it!!" and all that shit, but I think "You're a goddamn failure, and always will be!" may work better in my case. I need your reverse psychology people!!!

No Pulled Pork

Stefan Beck and I would make great grazing buddies.

"...it reminds me that there are two sources of pleasure in this world: the thing that feels so good when you stop, and the thing that goes on feeling good until you decide to stop. I will always be a fervent devotee of the latter."

Everybody's A Goddamn Comedian

More fun from James Taranto over at WSJ.

Mixing It Up

During his press conference last week, President-elect Obama discussed the dog he's promised his daughters. He mentioned that he'd have to get a hypoallergenic breed. "Our preference would be to get a shelter dog, but, obviously, a lot of shelter dogs are mutts like me."
It was a charming reference to his own diverse racial and ethnic heritage--and some people are taking offense, the Boston Globe reports (last item):

One of the most thought-out [complaints] is from a woman who runs a blog for mothers of Korean-American children. "I've heard mixed-race people use that term to describe themselves before, usually in the same ha-ha way Obama did. I've also heard it thrown around as an insult, a pejorative, a slur. I've felt the slap of that word across my face" she wrote. "My fear, however, is that Obama, as the first mixed-race president, will shape the way most Americans view people of mixed race for at least a generation. And will Obama calling himself a 'mutt'--with humor, as if the word is nothing, nothing at all--make it socially acceptable for people to start calling me a mutt? My kids?"

So what is the politically correct term? Mongrel-American?

Remember Capitalism?

Yah, me neither... It's existence was only imagined in the minds of Marxists and those who couldn't help but to use the language of such a beautifully explicative false-narrative.

Anyhow, James Bowman makes me feel smart again in his latest piece from TNC. It's subscribers only, so here's some snippets...

"Well, the old stories are always the best, I suppose. The day before, the Post had run a front-page “Analysis” piece by Anthony Faiola titled “The End of American Capitalism?”.... Certainly, after the government’s $700 billion bailout of the credit markets, followed by a partial nationalization of the major banks, he had a point. Suddenly everyone was reviving the saying attributed to the British liberal statesman Sir William Harcourt in Victorian times that “We’re all socialists now.” So it could hardly be surprising if we were using socialist language to tell a socialist story based on the Marxist legend about something called “capitalism” which was once supposed to exist precariously poised between the two historical eras of “feudalism” and “socialism,” one of which hadn’t happened yet but doubtless would in short order.

"It seems to me an attractive idea to classify Marx not as a great philosopher or economist—still less, of course, as a prophet—but as a great journalist. For he did what all journalists seek to do, which is to construct a story (or “narrative” as even quite ordinary people are now learning to call it) that accounts for confusing, complex, and often unwelcome events in a way that becomes widely accepted not only by his readers but also by the readers of his readers and even by people who don’t read at all. The enduring nature of his story was obviously owing to the fact that it had clear-cut heroes and villains, that after many a difficulty and setback the heroes were portrayed as triumphing (or bound to triumph) over the villains, and that there was a sense of fate or inevitability, even divine guidance—with “History” in the role of God—about this happy ending. Most importantly, it encouraged a mass audience to identify itself with the good guys and their sense of grievance against the bad guys who were few in number and different from them in having lots of money. One of the things that people demand from journalism, now as then, is guidance as to whom to hate...."

"..those who positively repudiated the Marxist narrative also retained the Marxist language, proclaiming themselves proud capitalists and insisting that the capitalist system must bring about, in fact and for everybody, the workers’ paradise that socialism could only promise. It should have been foreseeable that this would get them into trouble when hard times came along the next time. “You said capitalism ‘worked,’ didn’t you?” the socialist might reasonably ask. “So what have you got to say now?

"Of course, “capitalism”—the socialist word for economic reality—does work, just not to produce the utopian dream of easy abundance for all. That remains a fantasy no matter what the words used to describe it."

That's what I would have said if I were a better writer...

Americn Idolatry or "Exercises in Unreality"

James Bowman sums up my views on American Politics. His description of Sarah Palin's role happens to be exactly what I think, but that's not what the article is about.

Everyone says the show is finally over. I have been so eagerly awaiting the end myself I haven't done much else in, well... too long. Alas, the show never ends. It's just the next scene: Implementation. Thank God I get a breather, I'm tired. But then again, I can't watch the rest anyway...

The Party Of Trimmers

To follow up on "Shame" in the previous post, the inhabitants of "Shame" might be known, using Dante's term, as trimmers. In his 'Inferno' Dante describes trimmers as "individuals who make changes for reasons of expediencey...prefer to avoid any commitment that would compromise issues of self interest...because they did not choose good or evil they are deserving of a residencey in a kind of no man's world."

You can see more and more this direction our country is heading. No one is willing to take a stand "Save to be thought inoffensive." The idea of things, not being right or wrong, but merely different. Surely other nations, if only we sit down with them, will see we want peace and understand that we are all part of one big global community. For of course we cannot get by without each other's blessings. (hogwash)

How deep is the "national shame"?

I fear it is about to corrode the foundation of core truths to which our nation was founded.

How deep is the "national shame"?

Deep enough to elect someone who would like us to "break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the constitution". Who would like to focus on the "actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change".

How deep is the "national shame"?

Dare I say that I too have found myself "shying at cracks in the sidewalk" after a long talk with a black friend of mine, or after listening to long political rants of America's dicatorship backing past.

How deep is the "national shame"?

The link is a reading from the Times, and I'm afraid of the times.

The Road to Scusi

It has often been said that Obama supporters, and the left in general, are Anti-American, or some derivative thereof. I'd like to propose an alternative hypothesis. To do so, I have chosen to conscript America's second Poet laureate, Richard Wilbur.

It is a cramped little state with no foreign policy,
Save to be thought inoffensive. The grammar of the language
Has never been fathomed, owing to the national habit
Of allowing each sentence to trail off in confusion.
Those who have visited Scusi, the capital city,
Report that the railway-route from Schuldig passes
Through country best described as unrelieved.
Sheep are the national product. The faint inscription
Over the city gates may perhaps be rendered,
"I'm afraid you won't find much of interest here."
Census-reports which give the population
As zero are, of course, not to be trusted,
Save as reflecting the natives' flustered insistence
That they do not count, as well as their modest horror
Of letting one's sex be known in so many words.
The uniform grey of the nondescript buildings, the absence
Of churches or comfort-stations, have given observers
An odd impression of ostentatious meanness,
And it must be said of the citizens (muttering by
In their ratty sheepskins, shying at cracks in the sidewalk)
That they lack the peace of mind of the truly humble.
The tenor of life is careful, even in the stiff
Unsmiling carelessness of the border-guards
And douaniers, who admit, whenever they can,
Not merely the usual carloads of deodorant
But gypsies, g-strings, hasheesh, and contraband pigments.
Their complete negligence is reserved, however,
For the hoped-for invasion, at which time the happy people
(Sniggering, ruddily naked, and shamelessly drunk)
Will stun the foe by their overwhelming submission,
Corrupt the generals, infiltrate the staff,
Usurp the throne, proclaim themselves to be sun-gods,
And bring about the collapse of the whole empire.

I believe Plato described his Republic as "man writ large", but then again, who would know if he didn't?? Without elaborating I will just say that interactive relationships among mutually exclusive entities (aka language, or talking to each other) is is what makes such a description inaccurate. Why we shouldn't see a society/city/nation or whatever as functioning similarly to an individual person is my point. We need each other to function as human. Nations don't work like that; they ARE the people.

So, we have Richard Wilbur playing on that kind of idea except his Republic or "cramped little state" is one in which the man being "writ large" is in a state of chronic shame. The "moral" if you will, (I will...) is that we should be able to see how being so ashamed of ourselves can lead such ugly ridiculousness. The denizens of Shame are beyond help. Only a Messiah could save them. Left unchecked, their influence will only metastasize.

Get over it.
McCain '08

Predictions and/or Predilections?

How about the winner gets a beer from the other two losers at Thanksgiving? Not sure how we want to do this, but we could guess winner of popular and electoral vote winner and electoral vote count......? CAAMMAWWWN!! Here's mine:

Popular Winner: McCain
Electoral Winner: Obama
Electoral Count: 306(O)-232(M)

Predilection: I want a beers or a McCain win... but I really like beer........

UPDATE: Go here if you want to play with a map

I Got Bored - Obama: Buddy Christ

Mutual Mental Masturbation Among Marxists

According to Wikipedia, my Jew-bro, Jon Stewart, "describes his political affiliation as independent." It used to say something different. I know this because I remember having read it. The citation points to this transcript from CNN. Go ahead and search for the word "independent" in that transcript and you will find this:

KING: I think you're a Democrat, Jon.

STEWART: I think that's probably correct. I think I would say I'm more of a socialist or an independent

Ok, yes, the categorical assumption that being a socialist is comparable to being independent is insane. He says he's more of a socialist than a Democrat, fine, and someone at Wikipedia doesn't want people to know he said that... corruption at Wikipedia!!! SHOCKING!!!

So, Obama was on The Daily Show tonight...

Quotes from the show:

"Everything that needs to be said has probably been heard by a lot of voters" ~Obama (HAHAHAHAHA!!)

***

"So much of this has been about fear of you: an elistist, a celebrity, muslim, terrorist sympathizer, a socialist, marxist, a witch. That's right, they've been calling you a witch. The whole socialism/marxism thing, if you do win is that a mandate for socialism in this country? Has any of this fear stuff, do you think it's stuck with the electorate? Are you finding that on the trail? " ~Stewart

"You know it just hasn't. I mean I think there is a certain segment of hardcore Sean Hannity fans that probably wouldn't want to go have a beer with me.... [talking points]... The whole socialism argument, that doesn't fly too well. The evidence of this seems pretty thin. I said today that I think they found proof that when I was in kindergarten I shared some toys with my friends and that clearly a sign of subversive activity. [oo aa] I will tell you Jon, that being on your program is further evidence of these activities." ~Obama

***

What a couple of fucking douchebags...

Terrorism and Socialism are moral equivalents now? You said it, not me...

"The evididence of this seems pretty thin" Can you fucking IMAGINE if anyone else said that about ANYTHING, in ANY situation!?!? If you can't see through that, you are a self-deluded drone, end of story. Is that like speaking in the 5th person or what was that? This whole thing is just hard to watch, the show and the state of the country.

"being on your program is further evidence of these activities." *wink*wink* Look at us Leibowitz! We're tricking everyone! I'll suck you off later! Haha! We will rule soon!

Fliuck That House

Ok, so this article slightly changes my view on the financial crisis, if anyone cares. Instead of the being directly influenced by the affirmative action aspect of the CRA, it was more more of an unintended consequence, I think.

This is the same guy from City Journal I had read before. He says it wasn't really a subprime crisis at all, but a adjustable-rate (ARM loans) crisis.

In a nutshell, the Flip That House mentality made possible by the CRA caused the problem, not massive job loss.

Thoughts on "The Gap"

Ya know, if you look at what is happening on Wall Street, the gap between the rich and poor is as low as it's been in a long time.This happens every time you have a big downturn in the stock market and the economy. Hmm...the rich get poorer...which means they don't have anymore jobs for the poor and middle class...but the poor don't get any poorer because of entitlement programs...but the middle class is knocked down to poor now because they don't qualify for the programs. (not yet at least) So basically redistribution of wealth just means everybody is brought down to the level of poor? Help me out here am I making any sense?

A Hundred and Fifty Second Nature

This is news???

No, it isn't... Can you be blinder than blind? What's the opposite of being unable to see? Seeing too much? Too much light? Like looking at the sun? Blinded by the light?

Wait, am I being racist?

UPDATE: "It's not redistribution of wealth, it's tax cuts for the middle class." Unreal.

There Is No Capitalism

"Capitalism" was invented by socialists/anarchists: Proudhon (don't know much about him) may be the first, but mostly Marx. Before them, it was known as "how shit works". There is no "free-market ideology". Marx popularized the word "ideology" too, btw. Before him it was called "right and wrong". All this talk of "The Death of Capitalism" makes my eyes glaze. There are no "market forces" or "invisible hands". As soon as you mention capitalism, invisible hands, self-interest, or the like, you've already conceded the "argument".

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need," should have been the 11th commandment: big fuck up there, "God". He would (naturally) know everyone's needs and abilities, but why on Earth would I trust another fallible soul to decide what people can do and what they need? The hubris of Socialism is to think everyone would, could, and should agree. To think it possible to decide everyone's abilities and desires is the "fatal conceit" of Socialism, as they say.

So anyhow, you ask if I think Obama is a Socialist. Sure, fine, we can call him whatever we want. I just prefer "promoter of innefectual, pernicious policies, and of self". Palin said "pallin' agound with terrorists" but she could have said any number of different things. The truth is so unbelievably damning to Obama as to not be believed, and so it goes. If Palin was going to bring up the issue, it shouldn't have been sound-bite worthy. The fact that Ayers is teaching anything, anywhere, to anyone is a disgrace to anyone ever "associated" with him. He should obviously be somewhere turning big rocks into smaller rocks for the rest of his days. I'd settle for him locked up, ghostwriting more of Obama's memoirs, I suppose.

I don't even know how to respond to whether I'm worried about "a connection to terrorism". What does that even mean? Do I think Obama ever tried to kill people? No. But Ayers stopped doing that a long time ago. He found something that worked better: "education". Obama and Ayers have the same educational "theory" as far as I can tell. The media code-word for this is "educational reform" btw, as if were undoubtably swell.

I do have to say though, it is an easier talking point when someone looks the other way about the always hot-button issue of terrorism. I can't argue with that.

So, I had actually read that Reason article before you linked it, Reason being my 3rd bookmarked site (non-blog) behind New Criterion and City Journal. I agree with about two-thirds of everything they say, and when I don't, I usually have a pretty good idea why, meaning they present their arguments well. I think that article is an attempt to further weaken the Republian base in order to make room for some Libertarian policies in the future. I think that would be a VERY good thing to have happen, but a little dangerous: the DailyKos guy also calls himself a Libertarian. So anyhow, I think the article is a little translucent, if not transparently self-interested, but they are Libertarians, what else would you expect. You can see this from the title "Must Lose", what is that supposed to mean? Years of being ignored (by both sides) strangely effects one's rhetoric methinks. Mealsothinks it's a little naive to believe that defeat would "put the GOP back on its limited government track" and not just make it even worse.

BPB is All Growns Up

Whoa! I'm away from BPB for a while and look what I missed: a redesign, Conrad wants to punch Ayers in the balls and the Great Crusade Against McClatchy. Sic semper tyrannis!

I'll swallow my pride regarding the McClatchy piece on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. I was much too reactionary to claims made that Democrats forcing these agencies to offer affordable housing to low-income buyers was the sole (or at least prime) reason of the financial crisis. A quick search for something to debunk those claims led me to the McClatchy article. I read the first paragraph, saw that David Goldstein wrote it (he was formerly the KC Star's Washington correspondent, so I was familiar with his writing and had invited him on the show I produced in school a few times) and fired it off as another "view." I'm certainly not conceding to Heritage (I'll explain later), but I'll admit that it was a flippant, lame way to counter. And, in all seriousness, I'm embarrassed: I have a hard time digesting this complex topic and it was horribly lazy of me. But that's no excuse. I've done this before and no matter how many times I do it, it never restores any dignity lost. Go figure. Now to several asides:

- Take it or leave it, but I don't see McClatchy as some subversive, longarm-of-the-Left news organization. Columnists like Lewis D. are a different subject: All publications have columnists from all over the political spectrum. And for the Heritage Foundation to cast aspersions on something as a tool of a party is laughable. Come on, the Heritage Foundation would call my grandmother a communist for making sure everyone got a piece of pumpkin pie on Thanksgiving.
(Special secondary Heritage Foundation aside: I was a pizza place not far from my house, eating a late lunch on their patio the other day. The restaurant is right next to Heritage's headquarters, a stone's throw from the Capitol. So I'm sitting there and a pack of young Heritage cronies walk out their front door. It was like a Skull and Bones 5-year reunion: pink shirts a-blazin', the glare off their cufflinks and $500 shoes burning a hole in the ozone, their $100 haircuts slightly tussled by the wind. Seemed like a charming group ... there I go again, judging. I apologize.)

- My point in finding something to counter in the first place was that despite my lack of in-depth knowledge on the intricacies of our financial situation, I think it's ridiculous to blame one party or ideology. I agree the Clintons and Dodds of the Democratic party had a hand. But let's not forget who had both executive and legislative branches for most of Bush's two terms. The Bushes and Phil Gramms of the Repubican party are to blame as well. And just today, Greenspan, SEC chair Chris Cox and former Treasury Sec. Snow, all conservatives, admitted that Fannie and Freddie aren't at all solely to blame. Greenspan even publicly questioned the validity of his own market ideology and failure to properly address regulation. That looks like a fresh pile of guilt lying in the middle of the floor if you ask me. Both parties are to blame in their own ways. While, as I mentioned, I'm embarrassed by my laziness, I want to say that I'm no Dem. party apologist ... again, take it or leave it. But it wreaks when someone pins this on Democrats alone when Republicans had a stranglehold on the federal government for most of this decade.

- Socialism? Really? Ayers? Really? Are you guys really calling Obama a socialist? If you didn't, set me straight. And you're really worried about his association with Ayers as some kind of connection to terrorism? Really? I mean, "palling around with terrorists" is a fear tactic. I know no one explicitly said that here, but you know who did.

If you don't agree with his policies or ideas, fair enough. But can you make these two claims about him with a straight face? I agree that it was blatant opportunism to go along with the liberal status quo in Chicago at a time when he was trying to work his way up in a tough political climate. Ayers was accepted in Chicago, so Obama looked the other way. At least that's how I interpret it. He's a politician. This is what they do. Unfortunately, Obama happened to "look the other way" with someone associated with the ever-hot button issue of terrorism, so it's an easier talking point. I'm not condoning Ayers' actions or Obama's corner cutting. But I don't think it speaks to larger concerns of his character at this point.

- As conservatives, I'm curious as to your respective thoughts on this article from Reason, a Libertarian publication as you probably know. This runs along the same thread as the many conservatives like Will, Noonan, Buckley, Powell etc. that have wavered on McCain/Palin. I'm just wondering what you think of the Obamacon movement, as well as Reason's logic in this instance.

Finally, I sincerely hope nothing I've said or posted has been taken personally. We disagree on things. It's human nature. I look forward to discussing this election with you post-Nov. 4, maybe around Thanksgiving ... I should be around. It's been fun and certainly exciting (i.e. Palin), but I for one am ready for a shift in focus of my favorite sport, politics. But make no mistake, these next 12 days, and maybe more, should be icing on the cake.

Au Revoir. (Too socialist?)

More McClatchy Mongerism

When did Socialist become "an old code word for black"? Is there any term a race baitor cannot turn in to a deragoatory term for black people? Shame on you Lewis Diuguid! Shame on you Kansas City Star, of course a McClatchy enterprise...big suprise!

"J. Edgar Hoover, director of the FBI from 1924 to 1972, used the term liberally to describe African Americans who spent their lives fighting for equality."

Of course when using the word socialist you are more interested with skin color than ideas. Isn't that kind of crap what the civil rights movement was fighting so hard against? Falsly judging something based on skin color. Once again I'm so confused!

The Love Song Of 'O'

I guess it should come as no suprise that our first rock star president would appoint fellow celebs to public office. So I think this is how it would really go; Obama appoints Oprah to ambassador as a thanks for all the support. Oprah gets to go live in this beautiful mansion and hobnob with the brits. Service? I think not, although she will probably convince herself that having "tea and cakes and ices" is actaully doing some great service for the country. Even if a situation did arise where she could truly do some good, does anyone think she will "have the strength to force the moment to it's crisis" Again I think not.

Bonus points for anyone who can point to the quoted allusion. Maybe even an ambassadorship!

Asessing Idiots: Usuability

After I got out of college and dried out a little, a began reading. Things I had always wondered about began to find their appropriate context in the world of ideas. As it went, I continued running up against this thing called "Socialism" that I had never heard anyone discuss. After I exhausted Wikipedia on the subject, I faced up to the horse and read The Communist Manifesto. It was the second serious book I ever read on my own. It was the most enlightening thing I could have hoped to do; I understood.

Everything it said was the logical conclusion of so many thoughts I had had before. Why hadn't it worked? More reading... I had heard about a man named Willie Munzenberg who was the Comintern's chief propagandist (the Communist version of Goebbels). That's how I came across The New Criterion: an article titled Lying For Turth: Willi Munzenburg and the Comintern (It used to be available on their website but I can't find the link now). It showed how deep the Communist propoganda machine had been embedded in world affairs to a level I had only imagined. It was an actual conspiracy. I had imagined something of the sort before: what would need to happen for the world to be perfect? I had my ideas, but here was there actual implementation. Marvelous. My ideas weren't original; I was just getting the hint.

From TNC I learned of the ideological connection between Socialism and things I have hated my entire life: (post)modern art, modern architecture, anything with with "social" as a prefix or "studies" as a suffix, etc, etc. I came to understand contradictions of such worldviews; contradictions so conspicuous as to become innocuous. I became furious that there was an entire well-defined "ideology" that people use to justify intentionally creating the things that were a catalyst for so much of the anxiety and nihilism of my younger years. That no one in any position of authority over me had ever bothered to mention the things I saw as immensely important rubbed me incredibly raw. Not jsut that, but apparently I was part of the problem...

Which brings me to the point of this post. Everyone knows about Obama's (alleged, HA!) kick-off party in Billy Ayers living room. Yah, he bombed stuff and wishes he did more. But what was his rationale? Misguided SDS member? Well, yah... but is that it? NO. Ayers stands for everything I hate in the world, EVERY-THING. If I was ever made aware of the fact I was in the same room with such an individual, I'd get a chance to fulfill all the fantasies of violence which "occasionally" hijack my mind; those which I've been told are probably "an issue".

Forget how close they were or how well Obama knew him, even though the evidence points to very well. Ayers is a Communist (or is it communist? Does it matter? No) plain and simple. I'll leave it to the reader to learn of the connections between the two, they are too extensive to mention here. Obama is either an active subversionary or the most useful idiot in the history of the world, beyond the use of those "idiots" by the Comitern all those years ago. Ayers plan to stop bombing and work on "organizing" communities has worked better than they could have ever imagined. So, which is it? I'm pretty confident it is the latter, but again, does it matter?

Yes We Candid!

Not sure what this site is,
Probably not very important.

I think they said one time that they didn't just want the Republicans to lose, but to be humiliated. Perogovative, indeed.

The Right's Unibrow

So, Mr. Roger Kimball (my co-chief aesthetic "inspirator," along with The Scrut) has just referenced The Zombie in his latest blog piece. The content doesn't really matter for my purpose here, but there might be something strange happening on the righty blogosphere.

Zombie's website, which he runs anonymously, is a favorite link for the (us) righties. Check it out for yourself if you have a burning desire to see some pictures of Mohammed (so THAT's what he looks like!! I'd seen half of them before and didn't realize what they "were") or undercover photo-essays of some fucking creepy ass St. Fransisco happenings and other lefty rallies.

My point is that there seems to be some strange coallescence up and down the right side of the cultural divide, as opposed to accross it. I wonder if this is just an election-cycle event or something more substantial. I guess the former, but we shall see.

I have always kept my New Criterion/City Journal/Foundry writers separate from my Ace of Spades/LGF and the rest. (For a visual representation of the blogosphere check this and this out. I love abstractions like these, the second is fascinating to me) So what to make of the comingling? Temporary alliance before an election or the beginning of a virtual conservative-action-conglomerate? Again, I guess the former, but we shall see...

The Burden Of The Thirty-First Day

Stephen Baldwin 'treats' us to some thoughts for the upcoming holliday.

For my part, I'm passing out sugar free gum this year along with a copy of the South Beach Diet. Anyone have any costume ideas?

In Related News: "Koolaide" Stock Up Another Point

The Washington Post endorses Obama and what is the first reason listed...

"Mr. Obama is a man of supple intelligence, with a nuanced grasp of complex issues and evident skill at conciliation and consensus-building."

- Yes his intelligence is supple, supple in that it floats with the wind of the latest polls. This of course leads to a "nuanced grasp of complex issues"...or...never taking a stand on anything, well maybe perhaps a nuanced stand. "evident skill at conciliation"...conciliation with who? Anyone and everyone regardless of past or present actions or aggressions?

"At home, we believe, he would respond to the economic crisis with a healthy respect for markets tempered by justified dismay over rising inequality ..."

- I guess we can just turn off the 'inequality' switch on the 'free market machine'? Or we could just buy the 'Marxist machine'...but I hear that doesn't come with a 'Quality' switch.

"Abroad, the best evidence suggests that he would seek to maintain U.S. leadership and engagement, continue the fight against terrorists, and wage vigorous diplomacy on behalf of U.S. values and interests."

- Pullout of Iraq = fighting terrorists? Can someone ask him where he would like to fight them.

"Mr. Obama also understands that the most important single counter to inequality, and the best way to maintain American competitiveness, is improved education..."

- Why don't we actually talk about how Obama wants to improve education? The only thing I know to be true of his possible education philosophy is that he helped raise money to promote the educational philosophy of Bill Ayers. I want to hear something different from just throwing more money at it.

All right I won't pick the whole thing apart. Pretty good read overall. I have much more respect for the Wasington Post than for quite a few others. But even they are not immune to 'Obamatization.'

Heritage on McClatchy

So remember when I said it would take me forever to pick out all the problems with that McClatchy article? Well someone else did it for me!! They call the article, "a masterpiece in half-truths and opinion journalism disguised as hard news." and that "There are few better outlets through which one can propagate leftist lies," than McClatchy's, in general.

Just another "view" on the subject..... Which happens to articulate my point much better.

Speaking Spoof to Plumber

Is this real journalism or a spoof? Hard to tell these days... Onion could not have written a better story.

"...he [Joe the Plumber] and her sister never met Gov. Sarah Palin, who is now Sen. John McCain’s running mate."

"...bloggers discovered the Wurzelbacher name in sled-dog race results online — and that the musher was from Palin’s part of Alaska — and questions began flying about a a possible Doug-and-Joe connection and whether Joe, who confronted Obama in front of television cameras in Ohio, was a plant."

Hmmm, sounds fishy. Stay on the case McClatchy!

Question

Since there are only a handful of people with comprehensive knowledge of our economy who would know what to do right now, with the two presidential candidates not being in that category. Why would you vote for president based on the economy?

Just a thought...and a dumb one I'm sure.

Common Ground? You bet'cha!

I feel like I've been divisive. Should I go to church or an O'rally and bask in atonement? I doubt it, but here's another article from (conservative) City Journal about Palin. Maybe we can agree on her detestable philistinism.

I still think she'd be good in the white house, no thanks her cutesy, intellectual vapidity.

And If They Hit 'Ignore,' They'd Be Accused Of Racism

From WSJ Best of the Web Today...Again


Thanks to several readers, we think we've figured out how officials in Rensselaer County, N.Y., rendered Barack Obama's last name as "Osama." It's the same thing that tripped up Dan Rather: Microsoft Word. Some versions of this software--including the one we use, Word 2002--do not recognize "Obama" when doing a spell-check, and suggest "Osama" as a correction.
This almost certainly means the person responsible was a Democrat. After all, who else would see "Obama" and reflexively respond by clicking "Change"?

The Clinton Administration's Robinhoodism: A Clarion Call

"Back in the day when I was young I'm not a kid anymore but some days I sit and wish I was a kid again"..." I remember way back when"...

Sorry for the musical interlude but I remember way back when in 1995 when the Clinton Administration passed the new CRA regulations effectivley sending out a clarion call to community organizer groups across the country to come and get their piece. I'll quote City Journal's Howard Husock speaking on the matter in a 2000 article;

"Crucially, the new CRA regulations also instructed bank examiners to take into account how well banks responded to complaints. The old CRA evaluation process had allowed advocacy groups a chance to express their views on individual banks, and publicly available data on the lending patterns of individual banks allowed activist groups to target institutions considered vulnerable to protest. But for advocacy groups that were in the complaint business, the Clinton administration regulations offered a formal invitation. The National Community Reinvestment Coalition—a foundation-funded umbrella group for community activist groups that profit from the CRA—issued a clarion call to its members in a leaflet entitled "The New CRA Regulations: How Community Groups Can Get Involved." "Timely comments," the NCRC observed with a certain understatement, "can have a strong influence on a bank's CRA rating."

The Clinton administration's get-tough regulatory regime mattered so crucially because bank deregulation had set off a wave of mega-mergers, including the acquisition of the Bank of America by NationsBank, BankBoston by Fleet Financial, and Bankers Trust by Deutsche Bank. Regulatory approval of such mergers depended, in part, on positive CRA ratings. "To avoid the possibility of a denied or delayed application," advises the NCRC in its deadpan tone, "lending institutions have an incentive to make formal agreements with community organizations." By intervening—even just threatening to intervene—in the CRA review process, left-wing nonprofit groups have been able to gain control over eye-popping pools of bank capital, which they in turn parcel out to individual low-income mortgage seekers. A radical group called ACORN Housing has a $760 million commitment from the Bank of New York; the Boston-based Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America has a $3-billion agreement with the Bank of America; a coalition of groups headed by New Jersey Citizen Action has a five-year, $13-billion agreement with First Union Corporation. Similar deals operate in almost every major U.S. city. Observes Tom Callahan, executive director of the Massachusetts Affordable Housing Alliance, which has $220 million in bank mortgage money to parcel out, "CRA is the backbone of everything we do." In addition to providing the nonprofits with mortgage money to disburse, CRA allows those organizations to collect a fee from the banks for their services in marketing the loans. The Senate Banking Committee has estimated that, as a result of CRA, $9.5 billion so far has gone to pay for services and salaries of the nonprofit groups involved. To deal with such groups and to produce CRA compliance data for regulators, banks routinely establish separate CRA departments. A CRA consultant industry has sprung up to assist them. New financial-services firms offer to help banks that think they have a CRA problem make quick "investments" in packaged portfolios of CRA loans to get into compliance.

The result of all this activity, argues the CEO of one midsize bank, is that "banks are promising to make loans they would have made anyway, with some extra aggressiveness on risky mortgages thrown in." Many bankers—and even some CRA advocates—share his view. As one Fed economist puts it, the assertion that CRA was needed to force banks to see profitable lending opportunities is "like saying you need the rooster to tell the sun to come up. It was going to happen anyway." And indeed, a survey of the lending policies of Chicago-area mortgage companies by a CRA-connected community group, the Woodstock Institute, found "a tendency to lend in a wide variety of neighborhoods"—even though the CRA doesn't apply to such lenders.

If loans that win banks good CRA ratings were going to be made anyway, and if most of those loans are profitable, should CRA, even if redundant, bother anyone? Yes: because the CRA funnels billions of investment dollars through groups that understand protest and political advocacy but not marketing or finance. This amateur delivery system for investment capital already shows signs that it may be going about its business unwisely. And a quiet change in CRA's mission—so that it no longer directs credit only to specific places, as Congress mandated, but also to low- and moderate-income home buyers, wherever they buy their property—greatly extends the area where these groups can cause damage."

Look, I'll never assume to know anything about the economy. I do think it is clear there are many reasons for what has happened. The fact that the Clinton Adminstration all but forced banks to funnel their money through left wing activist groups is completely disgusting.

Race, Energy, and Bubble Blowing

Given that it's impossible to know anything about anything having to do with the economy, I have a long term vision (don't stop reading) on the whole bailout/financial crisis fiasco. I just read Hayek's Prophetic Skepticism in The New Criterion and I'm starting The Road to Serfdom after I get done with this post.

So, the government created the bubble by forcing banks to finance houses (the American dream apparently) for low-income (black) people; lending went awry faster than you could say, "I want prime to be me too." -> "Can't make a ho a housewife" -> yada, yada, yada -> a bunch of houses sit around with no one paying for them -> banks have huge debts -> can't lend anything to anyone anymore..... Enter: tax-collector.

First, the fraud of considering owning a home the quintessential American Dream. COMAWN! Ok, having your own place to live is a worthy accomplishment (void when awarded), but most of the houses we're talking about are suburban crap-houses for the gullible inner-city folk, and the ridiculous spec/vacation houses built after non-subprime or 'prime' borrowers got involved in the racket.

Second, how silly it is to use home ownership as a basis for a life well-fulfilled. I don't think THAT even exists in Black Liberation Theology, but I'm probably wrong. The people responsible HAD to know they were providing a mirage --double wamey.

Finally, the establishment of this idea of home-ownership being the fruition of the American dream comes at an amazingly bad time. From here on out the suburbs will be on the decline. Energy prices will put an end to suburbs the way we know them as Gary and I know from Kunstler.

Which all brings me back to the financial crisis. They are pumping a gabazoolian dollars into the housing market that is destined for failure for multiple reasons. The free market didn't cause the crisis, the artificially created housing market did. Bailout = Bubble Blowing.

Down-Home American Politics

This is the side I'm rooting for :-( *sigh*

Gotta love American politics....

I Love Southwest Missouri or Head North Fast

Article from the news leader down here. I don't even know what to say anymore just check out the sign.

Hey There's An Idea

From the Wall Street Journal's 'Best of the Web Today'

More Fact-Check Follies During Tuesday's debate, John McCain repeated an assertion he had made before:
In Lebanon, I stood up to President Reagan, my hero, and said, if we send Marines in there, how can we possibly beneficially affect this situation? And said we shouldn't. Unfortunately, almost 300 brave young Marines were killed.
The finest minds in American journalism set out to check McCain's claim and discovered it to be true.
The finest minds in American journalism set out to check McCain's claim and discovered it to be false.
Seriously! Here is CNN explaining why McCain's statement was true:
The U.S. Multinational Force operated in Beirut, Lebanon, from August 24, 1982, to March 30, 1984, as part of an international peacekeeping operation in the war-torn country.
McCain was a freshman member of the House of Representatives in September 1983 when it approved legislation "that would invoke the War Powers Act in Lebanon and authorize the deployment of American Marines in the Beirut area for an additional 18 months," the New York Times reported.
The resolution had the backing of House leaders of both parties and President Reagan, and it passed by a vote of 270 to 161, the Times report said. But McCain "argued that his military training led him to oppose the continued deployment of troops in Lebanon," the Times reported.
But here is how ABC concluded it was false:
This is an issue that came up in the first presidential debate, as well. And in both cases, McCain exaggerates his position. Marines were already in Lebanon when McCain arrived on Capitol Hill in 1983, and his vote was to prevent invoking the War Powers Act to extend the Marines already deployed. McCain did vote against that, but as he did in the first debate, McCain is wrong to imply that he opposed sending the Marines to Lebanon.
Note that these two "fact checks," despite reaching opposite conclusions, agree on the underlying fact, namely that McCain voted against what CNN calls the "continued deployment" in Lebanon.
ABC has a niggle--that the vote was not on the initial deployment, which occurred before McCain took his seat in the House. ABC does not mention that when Reagan deployed the Marines in August 1982, he did so on his own authority. Congress's 1983 vote on "continued deployment" was the first time lawmakers weighed in on the subject.
It is fine, indeed quite useful, for reporters to present relevant facts that voters can use in evaluating candidates' campaign claims. In this "fact check" form, however, journalists play prosecutor, judge and jury, deciding what evidence to present, what evidence to admit, and what it all means (CNN actually calls the conclusion a "verdict"). Why not just report and let the reader decide? (emphasis added)

The Dow is down? I'm screwed ... maybe.

I understand the dire circumstances of the economy right now, but isn't it funny how concerned or interested everyone is on how the market's doing or where the Dow Jones is? They ask with a look of consternation, then when they hear it's worse (which they fully expected), they walk away shaking their heads like they completely know what it means. I don't know what it means myself, but I also don't act like I do either. Maybe I'm speaking out of insecurity....

And what's with the complete lack of originality in the "bad stock market" pictures in every newspaper? The trader with his head in his hands or whatever. We get it, it's bad and visuals are few. But come on, it's a cliche by now. I'm waiting for The Onion to parody this ASAP.

Agonizing pain, humiliation, embarrassment and possible loss of dignity and a job. Hilarious.

My Team Sucks

I went to see An American Carol the other night... [please... stop, don't think that about me] I'm not the greatest with words but -it's the worst movie I've ever seen. Utterly unfunny. I read that some theaters were giving people tickets to other shows so the creators would get as much revenue. Jes and I were the only people in the theater. I wish we had been duped into not seeing it, they can have my money, I guess....

Poll-ution

Yes, I'm a poll-rat... Not proud of it. It's an addiction. Anyhow, the polls are doing some crazy things coming down the backstretch. John, you got any info on polling methodology? One thing I know is that Gallup shows an 11% lead for The O, Rasmussen 6%, and Zogby's at 2%. They have been pretty strongly correlated throughout the race (I watch them constantly) until now. What I do know is that Gallup polls "registered" voters and Rasmussen "likely" voters. I wonder if the polls are being influenced by The O's huge registration drives. I wouldn't care at all, but that I heard Begala, Carville, et al talking about how an Obama loss, given a big lead in the polls pre-election, would besmirch and befuddle the Obamatons so much as to precipitate non-post-racial trauma in the streets (race riots).

Anyhow, this is going to get REALLY ugly...

Confession

I am writing this post to admit something I've been hiding for a long time. I was visiting a friend once in a college town in Missouri where the current Democratic presidential candidate, Barack Obama had been holding a rally. At our rally afterparty, the Senator showed up to all of our surprise. While there I was privy to Mr. Obama engaging in lewd sexual acts towards a squirrel -a baby squirrel. I know this because I was the other half of what he called an "Eiffel Tower". While high-fiving he swore me not to tell anyone, but I think the time has come to rid myself of the crushing guilt.

This is all the God's-honest truth. I was going to release the story on wikileak, but I don't think their security is very good anymore. I pray for mercy...

Sweeney

Fantastic!

A New Theory

James Bowman offers his take on "war war what is it good for".

How Depressing.

Unbelievably depressing. Here he is reading from his ass-kicking essay on a baton-twirling contest at the Illinois State Fair (courtesy of Harper's Magazine).

Holding Up Our Trousers with Extension Cords

Saw Silver Jews last night. See the pictures of it here. If you want to hear about it, you're gonna have to call me. "In 1984, I was hospitalized for approaching perfection...."

THE Classic Line

When did my family go to New York?

The August of Our Decline

This blog used to just suck. Now it royally, supremely, routinely chokes on the world's (fill in favorite body part here). We need to pick it up. Whoever wrote that Radiohead entry should write more. I think it won some awards ... a Bloggie, maybe? John Q. Public loved that one ... or someone like that.

Call the Enquirer

Oh my God you guys, check this out: the Virgin Mary appeared in my pillow case this morning. The back of my head must be kissed by the wet tongue of Jesus.

Late Update: OMG you guys. I just Googled "wet tongue of Jesus" and I'm the only entry. I'm the first person to say "wet tongue of Jesus" on the Internet. Crowning Achievement! And ... Copyright!

"BBC" or "Blind By Choice"

Some interesting news about the BBC's charitable spirit. It seems as though they don't actually know where the money is going, but they still care about the cause of course. They just don't care enough to follow through. I mean it makes them feel good so...

Also check out http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7392213.stm

And somebody please comment on how to link without actually doing what I did above, where I would just put "this article". I just can't seem to keep up.

Who's Afraid of the Big Bad Booze?

Mr. Kimball is a conservative. He is "hoping that sanity [will] prevail against the neo-temperance activism that would have us endeavor to prevent college students from legally enjoying a few, or even several, beers." The libertarians must also be in favor of lowering the drinking age I can only assume... Who thinks it should be 21??? The God-forsaken religious right? (not a pun) Those who selfishly believe in perpetuating the same unfairness they once endured?

Kimball says he thinks the drinking age drives drinking "underground." Reading that, I couldn't help thinking about all those nights waiting outside Ghetto Gerbes for a friendly mid-Missouri methhead or thug to come save us from our sobriety. One time we made the mistake of driving one of them home in exchange for our Aristocrat and wine-coolers. He offered us an amazing deal on a flat screen television.

I think this story might help explain the real reason people don't want to lower the drinking age. The underground electronics market from theif to thirsty teen-ager is obviously a booming industry. The current drinking age is obviously a socialist-inspired policy driven by hatred of private property. Those lefties are so clever sometimes!!!

When will Jesus bring the pork chops?

The Springfield city council recently hired a new city manager and I believe are paying him one of the highest salaries in the county for that position (relative to the size of the city and all that jive whatever). The main whine I am hearing from the backwoods on this one goes as such: The city has had a hard time coming up with the money for our police and firefighter's pensions. They have made all kinds of cuts in all kinds of places to come up with what they need so far, but still say it will remain a major problem. So, the whine goes, how can the city council justify paying someone, with no experience they point out incessantly, such a high salary when they are having to make cuts yada yada. You get the point.

So here's the question, Can you justify paying this man so much money saying the problems are so big that is just how much it costs to get someone in who can fix them? Does the fact that he has zero city manager experience eliminate that justification? Does anyone care about local politics? Did 'Sarah Steelman' even actually exist? Can I vote for Micheal Phelps for president? Is anyone listening anymore? Is BPB real? Does anyone love me? Ok, well then does anyone have any drugs?

Free Coiffures For the (Un)Fortunate

If they give free haircuts to the homeless, I have a feeling John Edwards didn't actually pay for that $300 haircut. I smell a scandal!!!!!

Raise your hand if you're tired of baby boomers....

then take that hand down and slap a baby boomer. Selfish pricks.

Dr. Huckstable's diagnosis spot on

Bill Cosby and NPR's Juan Williams are taking on Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson as to the reasons many black communities are struggling. It remains to be seen if the people with the power to change things are listening, and/or have the courage to stand up and fight the enablers.

Lobotomized Masses. With Pictures.

I know what you're thinking: Hey, didn't you go to All Points West Festival last weekend to see Radiohead, Kings of Leon, Animal Collective, et al? Well, yes, I did. Thanks for asking. Let me tell you about it.

Quick wrap-up of Animal Collective and Kings of Leon: First off, the crowd reception at these festivals is hit or miss. When you sandwich a band like Animal Collective between KoL and some shit-brick neo-80s dance-rap band Chromeo, three very different bands, there's a weird vibe ... an odd mix of annoyance and patience. People aren't as open to new music as they claim. AC was average. I think most of what they played was new, so I was lost, but "open to new music." KoL, though, were a bit of a disappointment. I can't put my finger on it, because they played essentially the same set from when I saw them twice last year, and I thought those shows were good. The more I think about it, the more I don't like their third album. And they lean on it heavily, so there you go. Or maybe I was distracted by the buzzing in my head.

Fast forward an hour or so. The buzzing has only intensified as the lights above Liberty Park dull. I'm thinking it has to be the crowd; if I see one more faux-hawk or ironic mustache, I'm going to intentionally choke to death on my own puke. That'll solve things, right?

My 18'' x 18'' box of living space amid the mass of followers gets tighter with every passing minute. My ear starts to ache and the buzz-hum has morphed into a shrill ringing. I try to ignore it, but it feels like I've got one of those ear worm-things from 'Wrath of Khan' rooting around in my brain, first burrowing, then feasting on whatever matter its jaws can handle. Facial tics and minor muscle spasms kick in ... "The show's about to start," someone says in the distance. Not only has the sun disappeared for the night, but the stage is pitch black. The noise that's engulfed my brain for the last 30 minutes is now blasting from the speakers, as if my own brain waves are being transmitted for all to know. Can they hear my thoughts? Will everyone know my inner-monologue? Stop thinking, I think.

A voice from the loud speaker interrupts the pulsating cacophonic melody that has engulfed the atmosphere. "Attention," a bland female voice insists of us as the stage lights activate, flooding the crowd with a yellow hue. I look around wondering if anyone can hear this, or if I'm purely lost in my own hysterical thoughts. I'm not alone; every other concertgoer faces the stage attentively, eyes concentrated on the speaker waiting for what comes next. Silence. The rooting influence in my ear is only getting worse, but I'm too fixated on the stage to care. "Attention," the speaker barks again. "Radiohead will not present themselves tonight. Rather, you will be automatically entertained by projectile holographic replication." The revving engine in my head begins again, but to a degree unlike ever before.

The crowd waits, transfixed on the empty space. I notice the stage lights are now off, but some kind of lighting still exists. It begins from behind me. It's getting ever brighter. I'm starting to sweat, a cold, profuse sweat. My face is paralyzed, and the crux of my headache has moved to my frontal lobe, down to my eyeballs. The lights to the stage are brighter and brighter, but nothing appears. The pressure on my face is immeasurable, as if a team of horses has been harnessed to it in an attempt to pull it off my skull. I'm blinded by the glow coming from my own eyes. The stage is littered with tiny sets of golden beams, as we all supply our own contribution to the fully-lit platform. The beams begin to coagulate into coordinated shapes of differing size. The defined figures begin to move on their own, controlling the beams that shoot from each in the sea of people. Our heads and bodies must follow suit. They control us now.

The five fully-formed illuminated holograms stay silent as they move about in spastic activity. Our beams supply instruments, three guitars, a bass and a drum kit, microphones, amplifiers and a litany of machinery that flicker, as if animate objects themselves.

The smallest of the figures approaches the microphone and opens his mouth. The buzzing and ringing I've heard for the last what seems like hours shoots from him, but in a soothing cadence that is a welcome respite. A fuzzy, hypnotic rhythm comes from the side of the stage. A drum beat from the back. A crunching from yet another side. The beams from our heads begin to change color, flashing and cutting across the air. Words spew from his mouth now in perfect sync with the sounds unleashed from behind him, onto us.

"I have no idea what I am talking about!" he screams. "I am trapped in this body and can't get out!" My head no longer aches, my body no longer twitches, my pores no longer sweat. They dictate the feeling now. "They got a skin and put me in ... all the lines wrapped around my face ... and for anyone else to see!" he directs to us. "I'm a liiiiiiiieeeeeeeee!"

That's when the drugs kicked in.

Here's a Question...

Why is Dilbert so god-damned funny?

Democrats turn to not so subtle tactics

Apparently libs have run out of campaign ideas, so now they are setting donkeys loose in key battleground states. Actually come to think of it I did see an elephant story on fox news.

Is this what politics has come to folks? I sure hope so.

Obama's Fact Checkers Should Stick To Checkers

I just finished reading Unfit For Publication, O'Shaman's response to Crazy Corsi's silly book. So I will jump on the everyone's-facts-are-wrong bandwagon and point out another part of Corsi's book that is inaccurate, one that apparently evaded the Obamans.

The "line-by-line" refutation includes a quote from the book for each point; a mention of City Journal caught my attention: "LIE: 'Sol Stern, a contributing editor of Chicago's City Journal, has observed that while Ayers today 'is widely regarded as a member in good standing of the city's civic establishment, not an unrepentant domestic terrorist,' the impression of Ayer's good citizenship is incorrect.' " The quote can be found in this article.

City Journal (as the latest copy next to me says) is published by the Manhattan Institute, out of New York, not Chicago. Also, for Corsi to say Stern's "impression of.. good citizenship is incorrect" is insane. From the original article...

"In the ultraliberal Hyde Park community where the presidential candidate first earned his political spurs, Ayers is widely regarded as a member in good standing of the city’s civic establishment, not an unrepentant domestic terrorist. But Obama and his critics are arguing about the wrong moral question. The more pressing issue is not the damage done by the Weather Underground 40 years ago, but the far greater harm inflicted on the nation’s schoolchildren by the political and educational movement in which Ayers plays a leading role today."

The Obamans should never have given this guy a second of their time. I think it was just to take attention off what I can only assume is the better book on the subject. I have a feeling the entire rebuttal will backfire...

Six Degres for Certification

Charles Murray, the guy who co-authored The Bell Curve (which I happen to be making my way through at the moment) has an essay about what he thinks should be done to the education system. As someone who falls into the category of people his idea is supposed to disadvantage, I still agree.

Rockin in the free world

The title link (since I cannot figure out how to link the way I want in the article, whatever.) contains some groundbreaking new evidence to the age old question: Are all bass players gay?

Polymeme, meme, meme, meme, meme........

I decided to google the world-renouned Back Porch Burner. Some website called Polymeme has linked us to a story about China's Great Firewall. The site is barely a month old, but may be interesting. I don't have high hopes.

I see Dawkin's "memes" basically as the sociobiological equivalent of the identity property of multiplication. It is an "operation" on a concept which yields nothing informative or interesting about the the original concept (Vinny, it's also dividing by 1, I know how much you love that idea). It's "absolute" science. Manifest objectivity. Allowing emotionless consideration of anything communicable. What could be more powerful?

The problems are obvious. We are people, we (will) have emotions.

Memetics is a signpost for ulterior motives.

I wonder what a website based around the idea of memes could hope to accomplish. I think I'll try to find out regardless.

Al Jazeera: Peninsula of Preconception

***Warning*** The following may only be interesting to Conservatives***

Al Jazeera is trolling the list of the 100 Most Popular Political Websites (according to rightwingnews.com) looking for people to contribute "some brief interviews... on the political news of the week."

David Frum commented on his experience with the channel last Thursday.

LittleGreenFootballs got their request a couple of days ago and posted a response.

Hey Hellcat, what's the opinion of Al Jazeera over at the Post?

The Return of Religion

"That is what religion promises: not a purpose, necessarily, but something that removes the paradox of an entirely law-governed world, open to consciousness, that is nevertheless without an explanation: that just is, for no reason at all."

This is a good reminder that while science may give us the causes of so many things about ourselves and our world, it can never give us reason. Science, which is what is used by most Atheists to belie religion, will not allow you to question anything further than that thing's cause. Religion attempts to provide reason, whether the particular religion is right or wrong is irrelevant, in a very clever way:

"...people are satisfied that they understand the world and know its meaning when they can see it as the outward form of another 'I' - the 'I' of God, in which we all stand judged, and from which love and freedom flow."

He also says that atheists see all faiths as being in the condition of Islam today: rooted in dogmas that cannot be safely questioned. Do you guys think most "nonbelievers" see religion that way?

Government Harasses Amerithrax Suspect?

A lot of articles I've read are talking about how the government harassed Bruce Ivins and that led him to kill himself. Why didn't Steven Hatfill kill himself when he was presumably "harassed" at least as much? We got the right guy....

Post-Sovereign Tactics

Canada's "Human Rights" Commission... think, The "Peoples'" Republic of China...


*The quote in the last paragraph of the Time article includes "...a big favor — but only for the time being." Can favors expire?

Obama Supporters Hurt, The One Remains Strong

Obama backers Bernie Mac and Morgan Freeman both hospitalized

I'm speechless... Should have getted meself a English Dagree. Will mentioning people here-to-fore be prefaced with political affiliation??

Don't call it a comeback...

For the first time ever, McCain is ahead in one of the polls, when "leaners" are taken into account. I think it was all about those ads. Thoughts?

Oh Gawd!

To continue the ongoing atheism talk, I thought this was interesting in as far as sports and religion, as the writer mentioned about baseball, are linked quite often. Which again makes me think: What if an athlete or a major politician or the like was open about his or her atheism? I'm not talking about flaunting it, or taunting Christians, but if they weren't afraid to talk about it publicly if asked or confronted with a religious situation where the person had to make a choice. I still think they would be demonized. And very few care. It's just interesting to me. I'm not equating it with racial or sexual discrimination (it certainly isn't close), but it falls somewhere in the ranks of ridicule.

Slow and Steady Finds the Weed

The truth behind why turtles move so slow.

Hell of a way to get busted.

Employment and Politics

Check out this story....

On a related note, I don't have a job anymore.

The overblown, smoke-huffing 800-pound elephant in the room.

Intriguing look here, from an insider on the Chinese and expectations of their global control. He says we project too much onto China, and give preemptive credit to their rise as the world's unflappable superpower.

A smooth read.

Scrubbed

Chilling. On many levels.

From the article:
"If the conflict in Vietnam was notable for open access given to journalists — too much, many critics said, as the war played out nightly in bloody newscasts — the Iraq war may mark an opposite extreme: after five years and more than 4,000 American combat deaths, searches and interviews turned up fewer than a half-dozen graphic photographs of dead American soldiers."

Complex issue (I see respecting the families), but isn't this part of our overall lack of care as a country for what's going on? The fact that the government won't let us see it?

Barack-N-Roll-ing in the dough

Barack Obama will never take money from lobbyists. Just like Barack Obama will use public campaign financing. Just like Barack Obama was sure the surge would not work. I'm no patternoligist but my truthiness radar does detect one.

Oh by the way the media is soooo not biased. Check out the link. Fox News $0 to Republicans? Just one more reason not to trust statistics.

Plug In or Zone Out?

Friends and acquaintances, confidants and colleagues, and the rest of you ... whom I probably don't really like, I have one question.

It may be more of a personal-preference inquiry than a question, but I want to get as many takes as possible: If you know you're going to see a band in concert soon (i.e. one Radiohead, or whatever your band of choice might be), do you A) listen to them as much as possible in the build up to the show, maybe to create excitement or re-familiarize with the music , or B) completely ignore them in hopes that the music's relative newness showers over you at the show and you appreciate it that much more?

I ask because I'm seeing Radiohead live for the first time in about 3 weeks in New York, at All Points West Festival. I'm hoping for a near-religious experience (it's their last show in North America this year, I believe) at the most, a fucking awesome show at the least (which is probably a given unless the band dies in some horrific plane crash on the way there ... knock on wood ... or get I dysentary that weekend or something).

Anyway, no right or wrong answer, just wondering.

Where have you gone James Stewart?

I recently stumbled across this article just after watching "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington". Very good insight in to what has happened to the hollywood hero. I could also guess that much of the same could be said about literature. I think it is time to start watching the original versions of all these remakes we see today. I'd bet it is very interesting.

It aint easy being "green"...or is it?

Perhaps the most frustrating thing about the "green" movement is in its simplistic ease. For all the things we know to be true about our climate, the Earth is warming, there are also a lot of things we don't know. True, there is a correlation between high CO2 levels and high temperature, but is this a cause and effect relationship? The truth, we really don't know. (See precession of the equinoxes) So, the story goes, what's the harm in taking precautions to lower CO2 levels just in case it is true. Seems easy enough right? Forget about worrying whether or not we are right or wrong, Al Gore has books to sell! The trouble is the ease to which this "cause" has been taken up by Hollywood and the media. What could make you feel better than believing you are saving the planet? I liken it to watching Bono or Angelina Jolie flying their private jets to third world countries and donating millions of dollars to their "cause". Never mind the fact hat it doesn't work. Never mind the fact that all those millions of dollars given to these countries through the U.N. just go through the hands of the leaders who are keeping the people down where they need them to be to stay in power. NO, buy up Mr. Gore's books so he can keep his private jet to pollute the world he is "trying to save". True, you will sleep better at night but will you actually be making a difference? Yes, lets follow California's lead and cut emissions by half over the next thirty years. If you want to know a little secret I can tell you how California is able to provide the vast majority of the energy needed for the state without polluting it. They have it produced in other states! So while California's emissions go down, a handful of other states' go up. (Look for my video post of me laughing during the next California blackout) Bottom line, no unrealistic federal emissions cuts. Our economy is already in bad enough shape, we have time.

Man accuses universe of...Racial Insensitivity?

Somebody tell Jesse Jackson his protege is ready.

Racist Children

A little hot sauce with your nipple? I didn't think so you fucking fascist!!!

D.C.'s Finest

I guess we all know by now that if you really want to mix it up with uninhibited beasts, raw and thoroughly bizarre behavior of the Earth's most primitive and just the overall disgusting and depressing that walk among us, you go to one place: a free zoo. And I'm not talking about the assorted cages, aquariums and fake Serengetis manufactured to wow the gawkers. I speak of us ... you and me ... the damn, dirty humans. (I won't get into the ethical dilemmas that arise when strolling through such a soul-crushing place like a zoo in July ... okay, maybe I will. Once vibrant and exotic beings are rendered lifeless and morose in shabbily-kept pens. And it's not as if all of the animals are completely unaware of their situation; the two lions promptly ran to, then paced around, the door that led to the indoor area of their facility just before 4:00, the time when they are allowed out of their dusty display field and into whatever is better inside. Not fun for anyone apparently.)

Yeah, I know, it was July 4, the temperature hovered somewhere in the 85 degree neighborhood and the laws of simple human biology require our bodies to release moisture to cool off. I get it. But does everyone have to act, look and seem so miserable? Is there anything more embarrassing then to see what should be a relatively intelligent person stand underneath one of those mist sprinklers like some kind of livestock in heat? And people, is the cutoff shirt really a necessity? I think I've come face-to-pit with the dead raccoon languishing under some walking sweat stain's sleeveless arm one to many times. I'd rather be slinging shit around with the orangutans.

Yes, I should have known what I was getting into. But if there's any day I have the right to bitch about my fellow Americans, it's on our country's birthday. I guess I've seen worse; I could've gone to a county fair.

Where is everybody going anyway?

An article in the latest issue of Time Magazine looks on the bright side of $4 gas. (click on the post's title to read) Is there any doubt left that our dependence on cars has scarred us forever. Suggested reading: http://www.amazon.com/Geography-Nowhere-Americas-Man-Made-Landscape/dp/0671888250/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1215024700&sr=1-1

The Fog of Noise

All through our culture creeps the fog of noise. From the strangulated cry of the pop star's protest against the impossibility of protest. To the whimper of the elders too tired to scream above it, I've been there! To the nihilistic hum of those caught in between. The rites of passage into adulthood once available to the young are all but gone or unrecognizable. Our education has failed to teach us where we come from. So where does one who comes from nothing go? Perhaps the answer is as simple as, here. For all of our coming and going in our ever busier lives we are always here. Nothing more than a constant state of existence. Some would say, as the pop group Bright Eyes did, of course! "I just do what I do and at least I exist, what could mean more than this?" While it is true that we cannot exist anywhere but here, and to realize that is one of the foundations of happiness, we must also realize there is a difference between existing and existing well. So many aspects of our lives are uncontrollable. We are all born into our own circumstances with a unique set of obligations. Our decisions through life create more of these obligations that we must fulfill. To ignore them is to take for granted the privileged place which our ancestors have given us. But all too often our obligations are smothered by the fog of noise. Let us then search for the pious whispers of our forefathers telling us it is okay to not merely exist, but to excel. To not be ashamed of the faults of our past but to learn from them. Lift the fog of noise and let the pious whispers guide us to excel to a place where future generations will not know what it is to exist, only to exist well.