10 MORE COMMANDMENTS FOUND!
'Apparently Moses was so enraged he forgot to tell the Hebrews about commandments eleven through twenty'
By CHUCK BRENNER
Religious Correspondent MOUNT SINAI, Egypt
-- Most people are familiar with the story of the Ten Commandments -- even if they can't name (or don't practice) all of them. They are the laws of life's conduct given to Moses by God on the peaks of Mount Sinai. After etching them into two stone tablets, Moses descended from the mountain to tell the newly-freed Israelites what God had ordered. The Biblical patriarch known as the Deliverer found his people worshiping golden idols -- already breaking Commandment number 2 about not celebrating graven images. Moses was so angry that he hurled the two tablets from the mountain. They shattered and, according to holy texts, were subsequently 'restored' and put into the ark of the covenant, later to be discovered by Indiana Jones. We now know that this is not the entire story. "Yes, Moses did destroy the tablets in his righteous fury, but the pieces were not put into the Ark of the Covenant." said Professor Edward Thomas Lawrence, head of a recent expedition to Mount Sinai. "It turns out the word 'restored' does not mean 'put back together.' In this case, it meant, 'Given a new copy.' We believe that someone -- probably Moses' brother Aaron -- used his sculpting skills to make a new set and copy them. But he only copied what he saw." After a painstaking and meticulous search, Professor Lawrence recovered all the pieces of the ancient stone tablets. They had actually been left where they landed. "Everyone just wanted to get on with their day," Professor Lawrence said. Remarkable as it is that Professor Lawrence found the original Ten Commandments, what is more astonishing is what archaeologists discovered after reassembling the tablets. "There were actually ten more commandments carved on the back!" Lawrence told us. "Apparently Moses was so enraged he forgot to tell the Hebrews about commandments eleven through twenty." Professor Lawrence brought in Dr. Ling Wul, an expert in ancient tongues. She translated the second set of commandments and gave the Weekly World News a sneak peek at what the rest of the world will soon be hearing about. "Unlike the first Ten Commandments, which outline an important set of moral laws, the next ten have more specific applications," Dr. Wul told us. "They are more accurately described as 'quality of life' commandments. Most are self-explanatory."
11 Thou shalt tolerate the faith of others as you would have them do unto you. ("This one seems to have been directed at those who objected to other Egyptian slaves who journeyed with the flock of Moses," Wul explained.)
12 In matters of business though shalt protect the rights of laborers, as Pharaoh shouldst have done. ("This is clearly a commandment to form workers' unions.")
13 Thou shalt not put thy animals before people, either in body or spirit. ("This refers to the animal-gods of Egypt, specifically cats, whose well-being was put before that of people -- much like today," Wul told us. "There were sheep traveling with the group and this commandment protected them."
14 Thou shalt not inhale burning leaves in a house of manna where it may affect the breathing of others.
15 Thou shalt renounce a portion of thy worldly goods to be collected by agents of the ruling body ("Tax evasion was a serious problem at the time," Wul said. "A government without a sound tax policy is one that tends to go to war and take slaves.")
16 Thou shalt not elect a fool to lead thee. If twice elected, thy punishment shall be death by stoning.
17 Thou shalt not cry "fire and brimstone" during a large public gathering.
18 Thou shalt not erect a temple of gaming in the desert, where all will become wanton.
19 Thy body is sacred and thou shalt not permanently alter thy face or bosom. If thy nose offends thee, leave it alone.
"The 20th commandment is too worn away to fully read," Wul said, "but after 'Thou shalt not' the words 'war' and 'oil' were legible. It's still a mystery." Scholars agree that it is too early to say how this discovery will change our society. "Will people begin to follow these new commandments?" Professor Lawrence asked. "Or will they be looked at as outdated set of rules? Who can say. One thing I do know: they're going to make someone else very, very rich." Word is that Mel Gibson has bought the rights to the tablets and is preparing to film The Ten Commandments II: the Back Side of Faith.
Saturday, February 18, 2006
Friday, February 17, 2006
Friday Night Fights
ahhh. it's nice, after a longlonglong week of working with and for imbeciles, to get home, turn up the heat (it will, after all, get to a low 19 degrees tonight) and tip a beer or 6.
it's amazing what my job has morphed into in only two and a half little months. my business card says "lab services manager". but i seem to be spending more and more time acting as a project manager. to be blunt, the two real project managers in my office are really: 1) a salesman, and 2) a glorified field inspector. not that they don't have their merits and strengths. i'm just hard pressed to visualize them when i'm asked to handle client needs and ignorance that only a certified engineer should be involved with. i can answer most questions regarding asphalt and concrete, but i have to preface every answer with "this is not the answer, this is only my experienced opinion". which, of course, should make a client wonder why they're even talking to me in the first place.
and, again, i wonder when clients call or email me directly as lab manager, because they are not getting a response from the project manager.
this week i had to:
tell a project manager to clean up his equipment that he left lying around in my lab or he would find all of it on his desk the next morning;
force a project manager to define the word "we", because he kept asking me if "we" had made a phone call and had "we" gotten results from another lab and were we taking care of a client's needs (needless to say, "we" meant me and no, i hadn't and no, i wasn't about to);
inform that same manager that he was going to actually have to do some of his own work every now and then;
listen to the "salesman" expound on how we have control of 98% of all of the work on our peninsula, but in the same breath tell me how "we" couldn't afford to have someone spend a couple of hours creating 3 or 4 excel spreadsheets for the lab;
listen to several snide comments by the "salesman" about smokers, smoking, butts and lawsuits;
have the "salesman" take me over to another lab whose equipment we bought so i could inventory it and decide what goes to me and what goes to other offices and tell me that we're not in a huge rush to clear it out, then have him confront me each of the next two days about why i wasn't over there getting stuff out posthaste;
deal with another office's manager who hates mine (it's a hate/hate relationship evidently) about a sample that was not tested, because their manager claims i called him up and cancelled the test (when, in my reality, i told him he had two boxes of the same sample and to run the test on only one of the boxes so that my office wouldn't get charged twice);
learned over and over and over and over again that my "salesman" is a liar in the first degree and will not hesitate to cast blame on someone else if it deflects attention away from him;
heard a rumor that he wants to install a suveillance camera out back of the lab with the video monitor on his desk (hmmm, counting smoke breaks? or looking for cells of insubordination? i remember once at my first job in this industry when the office manager decreed that no more than two people could stand together outside the office at one time [mustang knows what i'm talking about]. we figured he was afraid that, because he was in the shitter with corporate, we were all outside talking about him. he was fairly right).
but then i arrive home an hour early (because when i work the weekend i take that time back during the week) and there is a brown package sitting on my doorstep. i call out to the gardener and say "hey julio, you dropped your unit on my porch. shearing accident?" but he says no.
lo and behold, it's a present from my very good friend blake. he sent me a present. two cds by the most excellent band the Pogues. plus, a couple of his own original compilations (by that, i mean that he is an amazing muscician who records his own music). by the way blake, i have that cd already, so i'll be damning people's souls to eternal purgatory when i give them out. just like i'm doing to you with this picture, but if aughra from badnewsblonde can give out naughty photos of herself in exchange for pressies, so can i. feast (and then scrub) your eyes on this!
so, i get to "end" the week with awesome music while sitting inside my toasty home with frosty beverages. okay, i'm not ending the week since i'm working in the lab tomorrow and sunday, but you get my drift. i'm getting drunk tonight (which i do so much less frequently than i did when in the 'no), eating a zucchini salad (now now, children. it's not what you think or hope unless you're lecram), listening to both the Pogues and the Trike Shop, and watching Wallace and Gromit's new movie.
does it get any better than that?
well, if you loathe ann coulter...it DOES!!!
“When contemplating college liberals, you really regret once again that John Walker is not getting the death penalty,” Coulter said in an address to the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). “We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed too. Otherwise they will turn out to be outright traitors.”
it's amazing what my job has morphed into in only two and a half little months. my business card says "lab services manager". but i seem to be spending more and more time acting as a project manager. to be blunt, the two real project managers in my office are really: 1) a salesman, and 2) a glorified field inspector. not that they don't have their merits and strengths. i'm just hard pressed to visualize them when i'm asked to handle client needs and ignorance that only a certified engineer should be involved with. i can answer most questions regarding asphalt and concrete, but i have to preface every answer with "this is not the answer, this is only my experienced opinion". which, of course, should make a client wonder why they're even talking to me in the first place.
and, again, i wonder when clients call or email me directly as lab manager, because they are not getting a response from the project manager.
this week i had to:
tell a project manager to clean up his equipment that he left lying around in my lab or he would find all of it on his desk the next morning;
force a project manager to define the word "we", because he kept asking me if "we" had made a phone call and had "we" gotten results from another lab and were we taking care of a client's needs (needless to say, "we" meant me and no, i hadn't and no, i wasn't about to);
inform that same manager that he was going to actually have to do some of his own work every now and then;
listen to the "salesman" expound on how we have control of 98% of all of the work on our peninsula, but in the same breath tell me how "we" couldn't afford to have someone spend a couple of hours creating 3 or 4 excel spreadsheets for the lab;
listen to several snide comments by the "salesman" about smokers, smoking, butts and lawsuits;
have the "salesman" take me over to another lab whose equipment we bought so i could inventory it and decide what goes to me and what goes to other offices and tell me that we're not in a huge rush to clear it out, then have him confront me each of the next two days about why i wasn't over there getting stuff out posthaste;
deal with another office's manager who hates mine (it's a hate/hate relationship evidently) about a sample that was not tested, because their manager claims i called him up and cancelled the test (when, in my reality, i told him he had two boxes of the same sample and to run the test on only one of the boxes so that my office wouldn't get charged twice);
learned over and over and over and over again that my "salesman" is a liar in the first degree and will not hesitate to cast blame on someone else if it deflects attention away from him;
heard a rumor that he wants to install a suveillance camera out back of the lab with the video monitor on his desk (hmmm, counting smoke breaks? or looking for cells of insubordination? i remember once at my first job in this industry when the office manager decreed that no more than two people could stand together outside the office at one time [mustang knows what i'm talking about]. we figured he was afraid that, because he was in the shitter with corporate, we were all outside talking about him. he was fairly right).
but then i arrive home an hour early (because when i work the weekend i take that time back during the week) and there is a brown package sitting on my doorstep. i call out to the gardener and say "hey julio, you dropped your unit on my porch. shearing accident?" but he says no.
lo and behold, it's a present from my very good friend blake. he sent me a present. two cds by the most excellent band the Pogues. plus, a couple of his own original compilations (by that, i mean that he is an amazing muscician who records his own music). by the way blake, i have that cd already, so i'll be damning people's souls to eternal purgatory when i give them out. just like i'm doing to you with this picture, but if aughra from badnewsblonde can give out naughty photos of herself in exchange for pressies, so can i. feast (and then scrub) your eyes on this!
so, i get to "end" the week with awesome music while sitting inside my toasty home with frosty beverages. okay, i'm not ending the week since i'm working in the lab tomorrow and sunday, but you get my drift. i'm getting drunk tonight (which i do so much less frequently than i did when in the 'no), eating a zucchini salad (now now, children. it's not what you think or hope unless you're lecram), listening to both the Pogues and the Trike Shop, and watching Wallace and Gromit's new movie.
does it get any better than that?
well, if you loathe ann coulter...it DOES!!!
“When contemplating college liberals, you really regret once again that John Walker is not getting the death penalty,” Coulter said in an address to the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). “We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed too. Otherwise they will turn out to be outright traitors.”
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
Who Your Daddy? Dick Your Daddy!
Okay, I don't usually revisit stories. Shut up . I don't. But this is too, too interesting. Cheney's got a gun. Cheney sees a Quayle. Cheney shoots and scores...a lawyer. Cheney doesn't speak to local law. Secret Service denies access to local law. Cheney calls Rove who calls Bush (we think). Bush reacts with...we don't know what. Scott McClellan finds out the next morning. Gets bushwhacked by the White House press. Somehow. Gets in an argument with a journalist. Local law is evidently allowed to interview Cheney (but we really don't know that for sure). Word gets out that a local Deputy Sheriff approached Cheney's compound the night before to get a statement and was turned away. The main witness interviewed by everyone was sitting in a car, which means they might have been shooting from or close to the roadway or she was quite a distance away from the event. White House says the bottomfeeder, I mean lawyer, is stable while in ICU. Later, the doctors say the bottom-shit-...lawyer... is in stable condition in the ICU. Later, the press clarifies that ICU means InContinent Uvula, which all buckshot men get. Still later (today)., the doctors say that the (i'll get this right dammit) lawyer has had a "silent heart attack", because one of the pellets somehow got near his heart. The doctors estimate that between 6 and 200 pellets hit him. And they have no way of knowing if more of these might pose a risk.
Now, look at these two numbers. First there's 6. Then there's 200. Just for kicks I'm going to list some of the numbers that fall between those two.
7891011121314151617181920212223242526272829230313233
3435363738394041424344
54647484950515253545556575859606162
6364656667686970717273747576777879808182
83848586878888990919293949596979899
100101102103104105106107108109110111112
113114115116117118119120121122123124125
1261271281291301311321331341135136137
138139140141142143144145146147148
149150151...
get the picture? perhaps we're being lied to about how bad this guy was hit. between 6 and 200 is a large sward of denial.
but really the real story to me is why Cheney couldn't stand up to the local deputies at the scene and tell them what happened. a few stories abound that Cheney was drunk. a few abound that his friend was on the out-list. i might buy Cheney being drunk. i mean, come on. they got guns, they got immunity. they can do what they want. i'd be tipping back a few myself. never did fire my rifle sober anyway. way more fun that way. in fact, i'm looking for a good garbage dump on the peninsula where i can work my rifle back into shape and bring a six pack.
but what the fuck? accidently shot a bro out on the back forty. cut and dried accident. so why the delay, the blather, the sudden "complication not necessarily related to the shooting" with the victim? Cheney fucked up as a hunter. Is that so bad? So he doesn't get his picture in the Women In Waders Who love Geriatric Geezers Who Can't Shoot To Save Their Own Shit calendar.
Deal. Show. And let the pot go to the winner.
Unfortunately, we don't live in a society that can do that anymore.
We win or we kill.
And sometimes we kill in order to win.
Not that I'm suggesting Cheney did so. I think he really did fuck up, because he's too fucking old to be in possesion of anything more powerful than a lawn dart on a string.
Now, look at these two numbers. First there's 6. Then there's 200. Just for kicks I'm going to list some of the numbers that fall between those two.
7891011121314151617181920212223242526272829230313233
3435363738394041424344
54647484950515253545556575859606162
6364656667686970717273747576777879808182
83848586878888990919293949596979899
100101102103104105106107108109110111112
113114115116117118119120121122123124125
1261271281291301311321331341135136137
138139140141142143144145146147148
149150151...
get the picture? perhaps we're being lied to about how bad this guy was hit. between 6 and 200 is a large sward of denial.
but really the real story to me is why Cheney couldn't stand up to the local deputies at the scene and tell them what happened. a few stories abound that Cheney was drunk. a few abound that his friend was on the out-list. i might buy Cheney being drunk. i mean, come on. they got guns, they got immunity. they can do what they want. i'd be tipping back a few myself. never did fire my rifle sober anyway. way more fun that way. in fact, i'm looking for a good garbage dump on the peninsula where i can work my rifle back into shape and bring a six pack.
but what the fuck? accidently shot a bro out on the back forty. cut and dried accident. so why the delay, the blather, the sudden "complication not necessarily related to the shooting" with the victim? Cheney fucked up as a hunter. Is that so bad? So he doesn't get his picture in the Women In Waders Who love Geriatric Geezers Who Can't Shoot To Save Their Own Shit calendar.
Deal. Show. And let the pot go to the winner.
Unfortunately, we don't live in a society that can do that anymore.
We win or we kill.
And sometimes we kill in order to win.
Not that I'm suggesting Cheney did so. I think he really did fuck up, because he's too fucking old to be in possesion of anything more powerful than a lawn dart on a string.
Monday, February 13, 2006
Cheney Steps Up War On Lawyers: Shoots One (stole this, but damn it's funny)
I'm still trying to hunt down info from a CBS news story about Cheney shooting his buddy. Right now, everyone is talking about the delay between the shooting and the public announcement. However, CBS evidently had a news bit on the fact that Cheny's Secret Service entourage would not allow local law enforcement to question him about the incident. Standard procedure in this kind of case includes questioning of all involved on the offchance that criminal complaints may be filed. The Secret Service refused to allow any questioning. Local law was alerted to the incident when the ambulance was summoned by Cheney's party and showed up at the scene. But no questioning. None. Nada. Nichts. Niente. Null set. Zippo. Don't know really if they even asked, but I think they did.
As for the delay in a public announcement (or even an internal one for that matter...Bush didn't know for about 2 and 1/2 hours. Scott McClellan didn't know until the next morning. Evidently, Cheney called Rove instead of Bush) it's interesting, but not to my mind noteworthy...yet. I would like to know if, in fact, local law officials were really not allowed to interview Cheney about his role in the shooting. If I tried that I would be arrested for obstruction of justice or fleeing the scene of a crime (even if none were actually commited). I could, also, be arrested (along with everyone with me) for conspiracy after the fact to commit a crime. All three can be contrued as potential felonies. Instead, I'm sure the Secret Service called on them good old boys down there to pass on a little professional courtesy and let Dick tend to his friend in the hospital. Most local law folks will do that, but they will still want a personal statement from Cheney. And I don't mean a fax from the White House.
Personally, my first thought when I heard about it was that his buddy criticized the War or something and Cheney tried to fire a warning shot over his head. Something along the lines of his telling a Senator on the floor of the Senate to "go fuck yourself" (remember that little gem?).
As for the delay in a public announcement (or even an internal one for that matter...Bush didn't know for about 2 and 1/2 hours. Scott McClellan didn't know until the next morning. Evidently, Cheney called Rove instead of Bush) it's interesting, but not to my mind noteworthy...yet. I would like to know if, in fact, local law officials were really not allowed to interview Cheney about his role in the shooting. If I tried that I would be arrested for obstruction of justice or fleeing the scene of a crime (even if none were actually commited). I could, also, be arrested (along with everyone with me) for conspiracy after the fact to commit a crime. All three can be contrued as potential felonies. Instead, I'm sure the Secret Service called on them good old boys down there to pass on a little professional courtesy and let Dick tend to his friend in the hospital. Most local law folks will do that, but they will still want a personal statement from Cheney. And I don't mean a fax from the White House.
Personally, my first thought when I heard about it was that his buddy criticized the War or something and Cheney tried to fire a warning shot over his head. Something along the lines of his telling a Senator on the floor of the Senate to "go fuck yourself" (remember that little gem?).
Tuesday, February 07, 2006
Thursday, February 02, 2006
Bedwetters Make Moist Lovers
oh well now. here's some good reading. pdf files about internet usage and how to rake in the bucks, supervise us invisibly, and control what we can do with our computers. brought to you by the industry itself.
and hey, if that doesn't give you the warm fuzzies and make you want to go out and buy ice cream for the whole family, how about this? Got a problem child? Send him (or her) to Jamaica! In the land of ganja and great music, it's got to be THE way to help them sort themselves out. i and i give it two thumbs up, mon.
aren't you glad you don't live in Florida? if not, here's a reason. it's run by one of the worst crooks ever to be elected to a seat of power. and he's bringing in the Texans for some proper frontier...uh...well, they're probably breaking the law, too. hard to say with Texans.
but aren't you glad you live in America where the most powerful "private" attorney in the whole wide world would nevernevernever lie to Congress or the People? Alberto, you got some 'splaining to do! (cue canned laughter)
and, finally. on the heels of my announcing to you that Exxon had reported record profits for last year while continuing to argue in court that it should not be held financially responsible for its massive spill up in Alaska, SHELL!!! is reporting record earnings based in LARGE part on soaring gas prices. Of course, it will say (as did Exxon) that record profits are misleading. Records don't necessarily mean they made any profit at all! you know, there's the costs of paying off corrupt leaders, soaring gas prices for shipment, millionaire shareholders unhappy with staying millionaire shareholders...um...that's all i can think of.
better yet, just go to my Thursday Night Crush.
and hey, if that doesn't give you the warm fuzzies and make you want to go out and buy ice cream for the whole family, how about this? Got a problem child? Send him (or her) to Jamaica! In the land of ganja and great music, it's got to be THE way to help them sort themselves out. i and i give it two thumbs up, mon.
aren't you glad you don't live in Florida? if not, here's a reason. it's run by one of the worst crooks ever to be elected to a seat of power. and he's bringing in the Texans for some proper frontier...uh...well, they're probably breaking the law, too. hard to say with Texans.
but aren't you glad you live in America where the most powerful "private" attorney in the whole wide world would nevernevernever lie to Congress or the People? Alberto, you got some 'splaining to do! (cue canned laughter)
and, finally. on the heels of my announcing to you that Exxon had reported record profits for last year while continuing to argue in court that it should not be held financially responsible for its massive spill up in Alaska, SHELL!!! is reporting record earnings based in LARGE part on soaring gas prices. Of course, it will say (as did Exxon) that record profits are misleading. Records don't necessarily mean they made any profit at all! you know, there's the costs of paying off corrupt leaders, soaring gas prices for shipment, millionaire shareholders unhappy with staying millionaire shareholders...um...that's all i can think of.
better yet, just go to my Thursday Night Crush.
Thursday Night Crush
It's been a long day and longer week, which won't end until next week officially starts. Classes all day today (5 a.m. until 7 p.m.) and more tomorrow. plus work on both weekend days (not to fear, i will be safely ensconced on my couch for the Super Bowl commercials).
so, i got nothing. no juice tonight. only a triple shot of beauties (because in the northwest no one has just one shot) who make my cinematic experiences something akin to spiritual transcendence:
so, i got nothing. no juice tonight. only a triple shot of beauties (because in the northwest no one has just one shot) who make my cinematic experiences something akin to spiritual transcendence:
Tuesday, January 31, 2006
WARNING: RANT AHEAD. PROCEED WITH CAUTION
breaking news: cindy sheehan was arrested inside Capitol chambers and "escorted" to jail after she had been invited by a chamber member to attend. reports are muddled. some have her wearing a tee shirt sporting the number of troops killed in Iraq. others have her unfurling a banner. that's all i've got right now.
but it leads me to this new twist on the Patriot Act renewal. Mind you, Bob Barr is no longer a darling of the right wing. But it sends a very troubling message. So far as I know there have been no threatening instances of citizens attempting to express their views at events of this type. Those who wish to be arrested tend to let that be known beforehand. Suddenly, security for "VIPS" is an issue? I think not. I think that the issue is more about "VIPS" not wanting opposing viewpoints to be heard during their photo ops. What I think we have here is an attempt by the Roman Senate to distance themselves from the reality of the people's unrest. I mean, we have a president putting out photographs of himself at functions where the press is not allowed. Many of these functions had been open to the press up until this administration came into power. We have an administration "scrubbing" photos so we can't see Jack Abramoff standing next to the president. The Congress shakes its finger at the president for wiretapping without jumping through the normal legal hoops (as morally minimal as they are), but doing nothing to ensure he toes the line in the future. Republicans call for "investigative committees" that may or not convene during this century. Democrats get on their high horse and talk about how everyone would have free access to the internet if they are voted back into power.
None of them care about you and me. None of them remember the thin times, the years without, months where bills had to be juggled and the phone wasn't paid in order to keep the hot water on. Most of them have known this life. Most of them like giving themselves pay raises and justifying it by telling us that being a politician is hard work (i.e. away from home all the time and the junkets and the bad food and the lousy golf and the slimy lobbyists who try and bribe them successfully and the press that won't let them alone and the late nights drinking martinis while they try to coerce multinationals and gimungous corporations into flopping a throwaway to the masses in return for gimungous tax breaks and the speeches they can't charge $100,000 for yet because they're still a public servant and the book deal they signed and haven't ghostwritten a lick of yet). Do you think that one of these politicians truly gives a damn about you or me? The new guys are always the wave of the future, the ones who get elected because they're pissed off at the way things are run. We listen and we vote with our hearts. But time and again we are let down by the very "reformers" who hold us for the moment in their sway. Until we find out that they compromised the very values they insisted were the ones they would never let go of. The values elected them for. Politics is not a clean affair. Don't let anyone tell you different. There is almost no way in which a politician can stay truly clean. Compromises ARE made. Deals ARE cut by enemies if only to ensure that one amendment is included in a bill. BUT.
But it seems to me that more and more our "elected officials" are cutting and running from the basic paltforms which got them into their hallowed positions. More and more they are "listening" to their consituents and disregarding all. When the public says that Bush is not doing a good job, why are they not en masse arriving at his doorstep and demanding accountability? When the public says that Alito is untrustworthy why are they not stopping the proceedings and calling for more questions? When the public thinks that Iraq is a big, fucking mess why are they not addressing this in the Senate or the House in any meaningful manner? The president once said that he didn't run his business according to polls or something like that. But the polls are based on talking to the very people who vote. The very people who care enough to speak up. The very people who stood up to the British and said "enough is enough" (no offense to living Brits unless, of course, you think another invasion is warranted).
And that brings up another point of contention. Why are we being forced to go all the way back to original signers of the Decalration of Independence and the Constitution in order to argue the merits of Democracy? Democracy is the reason we are here. Democracy is the foundation. But it seems that (after almost 250 years) we still don't get it. Every one of us wants power. Still. Every one of us wants our person in a place of influence in order to promote our narrow frame of thinking. We have no tolerance for those who think differently. We have no ability to accept that we are all free thinkers and we continue to exist precisely because of that. We are because we can. But every other word out of our political mouths is "can't". If we continue to be so obsessed with "can't", then we probably deserve to be looked at as an empire and deserve to reap the consequences of an empire.
but it leads me to this new twist on the Patriot Act renewal. Mind you, Bob Barr is no longer a darling of the right wing. But it sends a very troubling message. So far as I know there have been no threatening instances of citizens attempting to express their views at events of this type. Those who wish to be arrested tend to let that be known beforehand. Suddenly, security for "VIPS" is an issue? I think not. I think that the issue is more about "VIPS" not wanting opposing viewpoints to be heard during their photo ops. What I think we have here is an attempt by the Roman Senate to distance themselves from the reality of the people's unrest. I mean, we have a president putting out photographs of himself at functions where the press is not allowed. Many of these functions had been open to the press up until this administration came into power. We have an administration "scrubbing" photos so we can't see Jack Abramoff standing next to the president. The Congress shakes its finger at the president for wiretapping without jumping through the normal legal hoops (as morally minimal as they are), but doing nothing to ensure he toes the line in the future. Republicans call for "investigative committees" that may or not convene during this century. Democrats get on their high horse and talk about how everyone would have free access to the internet if they are voted back into power.
None of them care about you and me. None of them remember the thin times, the years without, months where bills had to be juggled and the phone wasn't paid in order to keep the hot water on. Most of them have known this life. Most of them like giving themselves pay raises and justifying it by telling us that being a politician is hard work (i.e. away from home all the time and the junkets and the bad food and the lousy golf and the slimy lobbyists who try and bribe them successfully and the press that won't let them alone and the late nights drinking martinis while they try to coerce multinationals and gimungous corporations into flopping a throwaway to the masses in return for gimungous tax breaks and the speeches they can't charge $100,000 for yet because they're still a public servant and the book deal they signed and haven't ghostwritten a lick of yet). Do you think that one of these politicians truly gives a damn about you or me? The new guys are always the wave of the future, the ones who get elected because they're pissed off at the way things are run. We listen and we vote with our hearts. But time and again we are let down by the very "reformers" who hold us for the moment in their sway. Until we find out that they compromised the very values they insisted were the ones they would never let go of. The values elected them for. Politics is not a clean affair. Don't let anyone tell you different. There is almost no way in which a politician can stay truly clean. Compromises ARE made. Deals ARE cut by enemies if only to ensure that one amendment is included in a bill. BUT.
But it seems to me that more and more our "elected officials" are cutting and running from the basic paltforms which got them into their hallowed positions. More and more they are "listening" to their consituents and disregarding all. When the public says that Bush is not doing a good job, why are they not en masse arriving at his doorstep and demanding accountability? When the public says that Alito is untrustworthy why are they not stopping the proceedings and calling for more questions? When the public thinks that Iraq is a big, fucking mess why are they not addressing this in the Senate or the House in any meaningful manner? The president once said that he didn't run his business according to polls or something like that. But the polls are based on talking to the very people who vote. The very people who care enough to speak up. The very people who stood up to the British and said "enough is enough" (no offense to living Brits unless, of course, you think another invasion is warranted).
And that brings up another point of contention. Why are we being forced to go all the way back to original signers of the Decalration of Independence and the Constitution in order to argue the merits of Democracy? Democracy is the reason we are here. Democracy is the foundation. But it seems that (after almost 250 years) we still don't get it. Every one of us wants power. Still. Every one of us wants our person in a place of influence in order to promote our narrow frame of thinking. We have no tolerance for those who think differently. We have no ability to accept that we are all free thinkers and we continue to exist precisely because of that. We are because we can. But every other word out of our political mouths is "can't". If we continue to be so obsessed with "can't", then we probably deserve to be looked at as an empire and deserve to reap the consequences of an empire.
Monday, January 30, 2006
We Now Return You To Your Regularly Broadcast Porn
in case you weren't aware, Exxon has posted record corporate earnings. Not "record" as in their largest ever, but as in the largest ever by any entity. ever. it's worth more than Indonesia (this last year's profits alone). and it is still in appelate court trying to get out of punitive damages for the Exxon Valdez spill, claiming that all of its cleanup resulted in almost no harm to the environment or livelihoods of the fishermen up there in Alaska. the punitive damages sit in the mid-single digit billion dollars. their profits from last year alone are in the high double digit billions. now is as good a time as any to stop filling up at Exxon's pumps.
as loath as i am to criticize our administration in its attempts to quell that little hiccup known colloquially as "global terrorism" and "growing global hatred" i must point out this article. and note that it is a war crime (see the Geneva Convention rules) to hold a non-combatant hostage in order to force a suspected enemy to surrender. in this case, wives of suspected terrorists have been arrested and held as ransom (in a sense. i doubt that the wives would have been let go if the husband turned himself in). what has happened to the women in these instances i don't know. one memo states a wife was released after an American military person complained officially. is that we are willing to do ? shout out: "give yourself up or the bitch gets it and your little dog, too"?
makes me want to post more porn:
as loath as i am to criticize our administration in its attempts to quell that little hiccup known colloquially as "global terrorism" and "growing global hatred" i must point out this article. and note that it is a war crime (see the Geneva Convention rules) to hold a non-combatant hostage in order to force a suspected enemy to surrender. in this case, wives of suspected terrorists have been arrested and held as ransom (in a sense. i doubt that the wives would have been let go if the husband turned himself in). what has happened to the women in these instances i don't know. one memo states a wife was released after an American military person complained officially. is that we are willing to do ? shout out: "give yourself up or the bitch gets it and your little dog, too"?
makes me want to post more porn:
Saturday, January 28, 2006
House Warming
so, this is my house, my back yard (fairly vertical) and my sky. not so pornographic...if you're not anti-dry sleep. personally, i love this backyard. it's absolutely unmanageable. i couldn't really do a damn thing with it. it will be what it is.
the house itself is warm. cozy. enough room for the cat to bounce and bounce. that light on a stand in front i will look at soon to see if i can get it lit. these free standing, connected outposts can be tricky. i know i'll suss it. i only hope that it gets sussed before i'm soused. i only say that, because i can.
but when i look out my window and i see a huge explosion behind a large tree i have to take a look. you see, the clouds fly low over my house. and sometimes they are gigantic. sometimes, i think i should run for cover, because they can look like a tornado.
and that's all i have to say about that.
the house itself is warm. cozy. enough room for the cat to bounce and bounce. that light on a stand in front i will look at soon to see if i can get it lit. these free standing, connected outposts can be tricky. i know i'll suss it. i only hope that it gets sussed before i'm soused. i only say that, because i can.
but when i look out my window and i see a huge explosion behind a large tree i have to take a look. you see, the clouds fly low over my house. and sometimes they are gigantic. sometimes, i think i should run for cover, because they can look like a tornado.
and that's all i have to say about that.
Wednesday, January 25, 2006
Porn 24/7 Hot Nasty Kinky Sex Poodles HNT
In my new, ongoing effort to help the government root out "evildoers" of the online porno community (and, yeah, Lecram and Zonthar have already fallen into my little honeytrap) I feel commited to showing you yet more pornographic images (not that Penelope is by any means pornographic...except in my dreams!).
So, feast your eyes, dirty little commies!:
So, feast your eyes, dirty little commies!:
Had enough? Want more? Huh? Do ya? Like I said, 24/7. Tune in tomorrow when you're done scrubbing your optics with a brillo pad and scraping the white-out off of your moniter screen.
p.s. if pictures aren't your gig, if you like reading porn more, then this is for you:
MANAMA, Bahrain -- Pop star Michael Jackson was spotted shopping in a Bahrain mall on Wednesday, hiding his face behind a veil and donning a black robe traditionally worn by women in the Gulf.
Did you like my porn? The first pic's of me and my BIGBIGBIG nostrils breathing the CLEANCLEANCLEAN air of the 'NO. Do you like HNTHNTHNT? Then go here and absorb all you can. There's nothing like absorption to make you feel fresh. and it will help me further my porno entrapment cause and win me big lobbying bucks.
Tuesday, January 24, 2006
Aaaaand The Winner Of This Week's Obsession Goes To...
Penelope Cruz! And to those of you who think any nudity is porn, you're dead wrong. This is a wonderful picture from Open Your Eyes. Open Your Eyes is the original movie that they copied for Vanilla Sky. Vanilla Sky is just one more example of why Tom Cruise should not be allowed to attempt to act. Or breed (the movie's not the reason, he is).
Penelope, on the other breast, is a fine, fine actress and should you need further proof just rent Woman On Top.
Ah, Penelope. You make my life bearable even in the darkest of hours.
Monday, January 23, 2006
Letter To The Spinners (not the music group)
well, i sent these questions to all of the "guests" on the McLaughlin Group. If any answer (and Tony Blankly has in the past) I'll let you know whether you like it or not.
Her are the questions:
1) How do you not call for presidential impeachment proceedings when it's becoming clearer and clearer that Bush circumvented the FISA law? FISA was set up to make it as easy as possible for a president to obtain a warrant for wiretapping. The threshold for evidence of need is the smallest legal modicum possible. Why, then, would Bush attempt an around-end of this law if he felt his actions were legal? Time being of the essence cannot be an argument concerning FISA. Bush could start his wiretapping three days before approaching the FISA judges. And these judges have granted nearly all requests (only four denied) since FISA's inception. So, where (to you) is the legal basis for Bush's actions regarding this?
2) As a follow-up: If Bush was legally entitled to circumvent FISA, then why did he lie about it at first? And, after that, why did he claim the 5th, then admit it, then claim that Clinton and Carter did it (which they didn't), then assert that had he been doing this before 9/11 he might have been able to prevent 9/11? It's a fact that Bush knew bin Laden was planning to attack us with airplanes. It's a fact that Bush knew law enforcement was surveilling illegal aliens on our soil who were taking flying lessons and had direct ties to bin Laden. It's a fact that Bush did nothing about it and shooed away those who tried to clue him in to the information. And Bush's current argument that announcing he was covertly wiretapping phone conversations would alert terrorists and cause them to shut up or find new ways to communicate doesn't seem to hold water in light of the information we know he had prior to 9/11. So, why did he need to lie about the existence of wiretapping ("When we talk about wiretapping, we're talking about getting a court order. That hasn't changed...")? Terrorists have to know that any communication of theirs is being sought by the very people they seek to harm. If I was a terrorist I think I'd be smart enough to figure that out.
3) This wasn't on the show, but I'd like to know your thoughts. Jack Abramoff has claimed that he met with George Bush, that he knows George Bush. Bush's office has claimed the opposite. In fact, TIME has a photo showing Bush and Abramoff together at a meeting. Bush's office has said Abramoff wasn't present at the meeting, but key Indian tribe clients who were there assert the opposite. Key Indian clients who were in the same picture. So, the question is: Who do we believe? The constituents present or the Office? Abramoff has been tied to more than two dozen Republican politicians and the White House. There is photographic proof that Abramoff was at a meeting (not a party) with Bush and the White House is trying to tell us it never happened. Who do we believe? This administration has a detailed and public record of lying and dissembling in the face of known facts. Who do we believe?While I hold no hope that you will reply to this, I thank you for hopefully reading it.
Her are the questions:
1) How do you not call for presidential impeachment proceedings when it's becoming clearer and clearer that Bush circumvented the FISA law? FISA was set up to make it as easy as possible for a president to obtain a warrant for wiretapping. The threshold for evidence of need is the smallest legal modicum possible. Why, then, would Bush attempt an around-end of this law if he felt his actions were legal? Time being of the essence cannot be an argument concerning FISA. Bush could start his wiretapping three days before approaching the FISA judges. And these judges have granted nearly all requests (only four denied) since FISA's inception. So, where (to you) is the legal basis for Bush's actions regarding this?
2) As a follow-up: If Bush was legally entitled to circumvent FISA, then why did he lie about it at first? And, after that, why did he claim the 5th, then admit it, then claim that Clinton and Carter did it (which they didn't), then assert that had he been doing this before 9/11 he might have been able to prevent 9/11? It's a fact that Bush knew bin Laden was planning to attack us with airplanes. It's a fact that Bush knew law enforcement was surveilling illegal aliens on our soil who were taking flying lessons and had direct ties to bin Laden. It's a fact that Bush did nothing about it and shooed away those who tried to clue him in to the information. And Bush's current argument that announcing he was covertly wiretapping phone conversations would alert terrorists and cause them to shut up or find new ways to communicate doesn't seem to hold water in light of the information we know he had prior to 9/11. So, why did he need to lie about the existence of wiretapping ("When we talk about wiretapping, we're talking about getting a court order. That hasn't changed...")? Terrorists have to know that any communication of theirs is being sought by the very people they seek to harm. If I was a terrorist I think I'd be smart enough to figure that out.
3) This wasn't on the show, but I'd like to know your thoughts. Jack Abramoff has claimed that he met with George Bush, that he knows George Bush. Bush's office has claimed the opposite. In fact, TIME has a photo showing Bush and Abramoff together at a meeting. Bush's office has said Abramoff wasn't present at the meeting, but key Indian tribe clients who were there assert the opposite. Key Indian clients who were in the same picture. So, the question is: Who do we believe? The constituents present or the Office? Abramoff has been tied to more than two dozen Republican politicians and the White House. There is photographic proof that Abramoff was at a meeting (not a party) with Bush and the White House is trying to tell us it never happened. Who do we believe? This administration has a detailed and public record of lying and dissembling in the face of known facts. Who do we believe?While I hold no hope that you will reply to this, I thank you for hopefully reading it.
I Got Rhythm, Ataxic Rhythm
One thing that very few people know about me is that I am Abraham Lincoln's first cousin, four times removed. That means that my great-great-great grandmother (give or take) was his aunt (or uncle...hard to tell sometimes in those old tin-types). This, in and of itself, means nothing. Everyone is related to someone famous somewhere back in time. Everyone will be related to someone famous somewhere forward in time.
However, that's not the point. This is the point. It seems that a mutated gene which causes a form of ataxia has been found and traced down through the descendents of Honest Abe's family (or a branch thereof). All the way through to the present.
What's ataxia, you ask? Good question. Gold star for you.
When one considers ataxia, one should first picture in the mind a drunken pirate. A drunken pirate on land. A drunken pirate on land for the first time in a very long time. With a large parrot on one shoulder that adds weight more to one side of the pirate's body than the other. This is an extreme picture. But most drunken pirates who own parrots tend to be extreme.
So, there is a list to this pirate's gait.
Now, picture this gait on someone who has never sailed. Picture it on a landlubber. A sober landlubber. A teatotaling, Bible thumping, dry docked landlubber. Again, an extreme picture. But again, these people tend to be very extreme. Even without the parrot. Or because of. Not sure.
Ataxia is this (from the MD Virtual University):
"Ataxia describes a lack of coordination while performing voluntary movements. It may appear as clumsiness, inaccuracy, or instability. Movements are not smooth and may appear disjointed or jerky.
Ataxia may affect any part of the body. When it affects the arms and hands, it may cause tremor due to over-correction of inaccurate movements, past-pointing when an attempted reach overshoots the target, and poor performance of regular, repeated movements, such as hand clapping. When ataxia affects mechanisms of walking, there will be instability with a tendency to fall. As a result, the child usually adopts a wide-based gait, with the feet spread further apart than the hips. This is done in an attempt to compensate for the instability. The gait may appear "drunken." Balance may also be affected; the child may fall spontaneously or be unable to compensate for variations in the ground or a mild push from the side. When ataxia affects speech, it leads to "scanning" speech. In this form of speech, the voice is relatively monotone, often with a breathy sound accompanied by unusual accelerations or pauses between syllables. When ataxia affects the eyes, rapid shifts of gaze to look at a particular object often miss. On careful examination, the eyes may be observed to overshoot or undershoot their mark, with "catch-up" movements."
Now to my point. If any of the class is still awake, that is. Personally, I dozed a bit right around "Ataxia describes..."
My point is that for all of these years when I've appeared intoxicated, lubricated, under the weather, out of my gourd pissing mad, ripped to the gills, three sheets to the wind, stupefied, mesmerized, hypmotized, and just generally shitass drunk...I really wasn't. It was the ataxia talking.
Now, I know a few of you, or some or you, or maybe most or all of you are saying to yourselves right now, right this minute in fact, "SSM has got his head up his anus". But think. When you and I were out on the town (well, at Livingstone's) and you saw me drinking what appeared to be a brown beer, how did you know it was beer? That and tea look exactly the same. When you thought you heard me asking for a taxi, could I actually having been announcing "I feel ataxic"?
So, there you have it. All these years I've been pulling the wool over your eyes. I was always ashamed of my ataxia, so I pretended to be the town drunk. I'm a good actor, after all.
Just felt I should tell the truth and be done with it.
And I think that deserves a round.
Of applause, dammit!
However, that's not the point. This is the point. It seems that a mutated gene which causes a form of ataxia has been found and traced down through the descendents of Honest Abe's family (or a branch thereof). All the way through to the present.
What's ataxia, you ask? Good question. Gold star for you.
When one considers ataxia, one should first picture in the mind a drunken pirate. A drunken pirate on land. A drunken pirate on land for the first time in a very long time. With a large parrot on one shoulder that adds weight more to one side of the pirate's body than the other. This is an extreme picture. But most drunken pirates who own parrots tend to be extreme.
So, there is a list to this pirate's gait.
Now, picture this gait on someone who has never sailed. Picture it on a landlubber. A sober landlubber. A teatotaling, Bible thumping, dry docked landlubber. Again, an extreme picture. But again, these people tend to be very extreme. Even without the parrot. Or because of. Not sure.
Ataxia is this (from the MD Virtual University):
"Ataxia describes a lack of coordination while performing voluntary movements. It may appear as clumsiness, inaccuracy, or instability. Movements are not smooth and may appear disjointed or jerky.
Ataxia may affect any part of the body. When it affects the arms and hands, it may cause tremor due to over-correction of inaccurate movements, past-pointing when an attempted reach overshoots the target, and poor performance of regular, repeated movements, such as hand clapping. When ataxia affects mechanisms of walking, there will be instability with a tendency to fall. As a result, the child usually adopts a wide-based gait, with the feet spread further apart than the hips. This is done in an attempt to compensate for the instability. The gait may appear "drunken." Balance may also be affected; the child may fall spontaneously or be unable to compensate for variations in the ground or a mild push from the side. When ataxia affects speech, it leads to "scanning" speech. In this form of speech, the voice is relatively monotone, often with a breathy sound accompanied by unusual accelerations or pauses between syllables. When ataxia affects the eyes, rapid shifts of gaze to look at a particular object often miss. On careful examination, the eyes may be observed to overshoot or undershoot their mark, with "catch-up" movements."
Now to my point. If any of the class is still awake, that is. Personally, I dozed a bit right around "Ataxia describes..."
My point is that for all of these years when I've appeared intoxicated, lubricated, under the weather, out of my gourd pissing mad, ripped to the gills, three sheets to the wind, stupefied, mesmerized, hypmotized, and just generally shitass drunk...I really wasn't. It was the ataxia talking.
Now, I know a few of you, or some or you, or maybe most or all of you are saying to yourselves right now, right this minute in fact, "SSM has got his head up his anus". But think. When you and I were out on the town (well, at Livingstone's) and you saw me drinking what appeared to be a brown beer, how did you know it was beer? That and tea look exactly the same. When you thought you heard me asking for a taxi, could I actually having been announcing "I feel ataxic"?
So, there you have it. All these years I've been pulling the wool over your eyes. I was always ashamed of my ataxia, so I pretended to be the town drunk. I'm a good actor, after all.
Just felt I should tell the truth and be done with it.
And I think that deserves a round.
Of applause, dammit!
Friday, January 20, 2006
Hot Off The Press
"Cheney said the tape showed that al-Qaida has been hobbled, because "they didn't have the ability to do anything on video" and because it had been so long since bin Laden had been heard from."
Hey. Good news. We have al-quaeda on the run. They can't even afford a video camera. In comments not approved for dissemination, Cheney added that he expects the next message to be delivered on an Etch-A-Sketch. After that, stone tablet and chisel. But by the November election, he hopes to announce a huge terrorist attack imminent and of biblical (King James revised) proportions. Cheney's spokesman stressed that the attack announcement would be theoretical and "most likely only used in the event of looming Democratic gains in the Senate or House of Representatives during the run-up to the next election cycle".
At today's White House press briefing, Scott McClellan reiterated that the coincidence of the tape of bin Laden appearing around the same time as that of the increasing Republican scandal surrounding Jack Abramoff's conviction and subsequent "squealing" to prosecuters about who he paid off for favors, while highly unlikely, was merely an unfortunate "'cervix of combostuble events'. His words exactly. The President would in no way want to appear as having had a hand in distracting the hard-working media and the common citizenry from non-events not happening within the White House or with its Brown...yes, David? What would you like to insinuate today?".
The Democrats were quick to respond. Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nevada) proposed a committee to investigate steroid abuse by the Mafia, while Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-New York) called for an investigation into a possible candidacy for the 2008 presidential nomination citing bin Laden's offer to cease hostilities as a sign that "most terrorists are likely to vote Democratic in the next election cycle" thereby ensuring an uptick of at least .00182% in voter registration. Howard Dean could not be reached for comment. The Republican National Committee, however, downplayed Clinton's comments stating that in the 2004 election almost all known domestic and foreign terrorists voted Republican and that the RNC didn't see that changing so long as President Bush remained commited to the "war on terror". Said one RNC analyst, asking for anonymity, "Until we as a nation soften in our stance against terror the Republican Party can expect continued support from all of those miscreants who would bring down our noble effort". Clarification could not be obtained at press time as to what "noble effort" meant.
What does this mean to the average person on the street? We didn't know, so we asked one. Juble Jenkinsoninfromtonshire, age "41" and living in the Northwest, wasn't sure what all of the fuss was about.
Said Jenkinsoninfromtonshire, "Being average, I can only hypothesize. Perhaps this confluence of irregular confabulations will set off tintinabulations within the auracles of the hoi-polloi. Now get off my cardboard bed and away from my heating grate. This is MY turf until the DOW tops 12,000."
Efforts to reach Jenkinsoninfromtonshire for a follow-up interview were fruitless as, according to his PR firm, he was out of cell phone reach on an aluminum recycling pilgrimage.
Hey. Good news. We have al-quaeda on the run. They can't even afford a video camera. In comments not approved for dissemination, Cheney added that he expects the next message to be delivered on an Etch-A-Sketch. After that, stone tablet and chisel. But by the November election, he hopes to announce a huge terrorist attack imminent and of biblical (King James revised) proportions. Cheney's spokesman stressed that the attack announcement would be theoretical and "most likely only used in the event of looming Democratic gains in the Senate or House of Representatives during the run-up to the next election cycle".
At today's White House press briefing, Scott McClellan reiterated that the coincidence of the tape of bin Laden appearing around the same time as that of the increasing Republican scandal surrounding Jack Abramoff's conviction and subsequent "squealing" to prosecuters about who he paid off for favors, while highly unlikely, was merely an unfortunate "'cervix of combostuble events'. His words exactly. The President would in no way want to appear as having had a hand in distracting the hard-working media and the common citizenry from non-events not happening within the White House or with its Brown...yes, David? What would you like to insinuate today?".
The Democrats were quick to respond. Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nevada) proposed a committee to investigate steroid abuse by the Mafia, while Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-New York) called for an investigation into a possible candidacy for the 2008 presidential nomination citing bin Laden's offer to cease hostilities as a sign that "most terrorists are likely to vote Democratic in the next election cycle" thereby ensuring an uptick of at least .00182% in voter registration. Howard Dean could not be reached for comment. The Republican National Committee, however, downplayed Clinton's comments stating that in the 2004 election almost all known domestic and foreign terrorists voted Republican and that the RNC didn't see that changing so long as President Bush remained commited to the "war on terror". Said one RNC analyst, asking for anonymity, "Until we as a nation soften in our stance against terror the Republican Party can expect continued support from all of those miscreants who would bring down our noble effort". Clarification could not be obtained at press time as to what "noble effort" meant.
What does this mean to the average person on the street? We didn't know, so we asked one. Juble Jenkinsoninfromtonshire, age "41" and living in the Northwest, wasn't sure what all of the fuss was about.
Said Jenkinsoninfromtonshire, "Being average, I can only hypothesize. Perhaps this confluence of irregular confabulations will set off tintinabulations within the auracles of the hoi-polloi. Now get off my cardboard bed and away from my heating grate. This is MY turf until the DOW tops 12,000."
Efforts to reach Jenkinsoninfromtonshire for a follow-up interview were fruitless as, according to his PR firm, he was out of cell phone reach on an aluminum recycling pilgrimage.
Wednesday, January 18, 2006
Sanctity of Life. By Gum!
"At no point are we not going to value the sanctity of life," said prison spokesman Vernell Crittendon. "We would resuscitate him," then execute him.
No offense to those of you who support the death penalty for whatever reason (even though I think y'all are morons), but what the hell??? Clarence Ray Allen- a vicious, unrepetent asshole who was resuscitated once back in September for a supposedly fatal heart attack- asked his captors to let him just die if he had another one before his execution. The above response says it all about our so-called criminal justice system and the (lack of) morality therein.
"Sanctity of life"??? We will bring you back as many times as necessary, because we believe in the Sanctity of Life, so that we can kill you deaddeaddead in order to prove a point. I'm guessing the point is about the Sanctity of Life somehow. He didn't believe in it while he was ordering hits from prison, but somehow by kickstarting his heart as many times as it takes we ("we" being the morons) are showing him and the world that we value human life so much we will do whatever it takes to keep someone alive long enough to kill him legally. Um, put quotation marks around legally. So that it looks like this: "legally". Not to be confused with "morally". Or "financially feasible". Or "reducing the violent crime rate". Or "making the victims' families really feel any better in the long run".
Did you know it costs more to put a prisoner to death "legally" than it does to just lock them up forever and throw away the key? If a murderer continues to be a naughty boy in prison, then take away phone and visitation rights. Don't allow him access to the real world. Spy on his lawyers. My goodness, we're doing it to "terrorists" right now and we have so much less evidence against them.
But no. Put the American to death. Gas him. Electrocute him. Shoot his heart full of holes. Stick a needle in his veins. Then talk about how humane it all is. And how it will bring peace to the families of his victims. And how we are a nation of laws and crime cannot go unpunished and how the punishment must fit the crime. I'm all for a person forfeiting their right to life as we see it. And I'm all for the punishment fitting the crime. But how does killing the convict truly punish him? We've ended his suffering. We've ended his sentence. We are still stuck with his legacy. And it takes us long, long years and millions in taxpayers' money to do so. And 99.9999999% of us couldn't give a shit about that one scumbag. And does it statistically lower the violent crime rate? A big, fat, resounding no.
Unfortunately, it's the morons who make the loudest noise in this arena. Why? Dunno. Maybe they're still pissed off about Viet Nam, the Civil Rights Movement, the New Deal, the Civil War and King George the 3rd turning out to be a big pussy. Really, I don't know. Hell, it could all be constipation from the Roadkill Stew. Enlightenment, people. That's all I ask. And not on the "moral" issue. Fuck that. We should all know by now that revenge solves nothing. I'm more concerned about the moolah and the lawyers sucking it up like the bottom feeders they are. And the politicians using it as an elective stance when really they don't give a shit either. And the preachers who never opened a Bible, but know the right words to get their flocks to tithe. And the Rotarians for whatever reason. I don't think they're related to this rant, but they really bother me. So, they're in.
Any time I think of these people, I hear in my head the line from The Big Lebowski:
"Eight-year-olds, dude."
No offense to those of you who support the death penalty for whatever reason (even though I think y'all are morons), but what the hell??? Clarence Ray Allen- a vicious, unrepetent asshole who was resuscitated once back in September for a supposedly fatal heart attack- asked his captors to let him just die if he had another one before his execution. The above response says it all about our so-called criminal justice system and the (lack of) morality therein.
"Sanctity of life"??? We will bring you back as many times as necessary, because we believe in the Sanctity of Life, so that we can kill you deaddeaddead in order to prove a point. I'm guessing the point is about the Sanctity of Life somehow. He didn't believe in it while he was ordering hits from prison, but somehow by kickstarting his heart as many times as it takes we ("we" being the morons) are showing him and the world that we value human life so much we will do whatever it takes to keep someone alive long enough to kill him legally. Um, put quotation marks around legally. So that it looks like this: "legally". Not to be confused with "morally". Or "financially feasible". Or "reducing the violent crime rate". Or "making the victims' families really feel any better in the long run".
Did you know it costs more to put a prisoner to death "legally" than it does to just lock them up forever and throw away the key? If a murderer continues to be a naughty boy in prison, then take away phone and visitation rights. Don't allow him access to the real world. Spy on his lawyers. My goodness, we're doing it to "terrorists" right now and we have so much less evidence against them.
But no. Put the American to death. Gas him. Electrocute him. Shoot his heart full of holes. Stick a needle in his veins. Then talk about how humane it all is. And how it will bring peace to the families of his victims. And how we are a nation of laws and crime cannot go unpunished and how the punishment must fit the crime. I'm all for a person forfeiting their right to life as we see it. And I'm all for the punishment fitting the crime. But how does killing the convict truly punish him? We've ended his suffering. We've ended his sentence. We are still stuck with his legacy. And it takes us long, long years and millions in taxpayers' money to do so. And 99.9999999% of us couldn't give a shit about that one scumbag. And does it statistically lower the violent crime rate? A big, fat, resounding no.
Unfortunately, it's the morons who make the loudest noise in this arena. Why? Dunno. Maybe they're still pissed off about Viet Nam, the Civil Rights Movement, the New Deal, the Civil War and King George the 3rd turning out to be a big pussy. Really, I don't know. Hell, it could all be constipation from the Roadkill Stew. Enlightenment, people. That's all I ask. And not on the "moral" issue. Fuck that. We should all know by now that revenge solves nothing. I'm more concerned about the moolah and the lawyers sucking it up like the bottom feeders they are. And the politicians using it as an elective stance when really they don't give a shit either. And the preachers who never opened a Bible, but know the right words to get their flocks to tithe. And the Rotarians for whatever reason. I don't think they're related to this rant, but they really bother me. So, they're in.
Any time I think of these people, I hear in my head the line from The Big Lebowski:
"Eight-year-olds, dude."
Monday, January 16, 2006
A Hard Rain Is Gonna Fall
it's raining again. we had one glorious day of no rain yesterday and the cat got kicked the hell out of the house. up to yesterday, there had been 27 straight days of rain. the record is 33. here in bremerton we did get enough to count it as the 28th day, so the streak continues. and my monthly rain total sat at 8.5 inches...before the current downpour started up. the monthly average for january is 8.3 inches. so, it's a wet one. but i love it.
and speaking of things i love, here is Al Gore's speech today commemorating Martin Luther King Day.
and speaking of things i love, here is Al Gore's speech today commemorating Martin Luther King Day.
Sunday, January 15, 2006
bald eagle
amazing the life one can find in the back yard. was just hanging out, ignoring the angry crows that divebombed it. 
Friday, January 13, 2006
In Denial? Laugh It Off!
Torture got you down? Lack of body armor? No viable exit strategy? Had your enlistment extended by 2 or 3 years? Seen your buddy blown away by an Improvised Explosive Device? Got a letter from your spouse about this? Haven't seen your husband, wife or children in too long? About to go back to Iraq or Afghanistan and put yourself in the line of fire? Lost a limb? Lost a lover? Suffering from Post or PreTraumatic Stress Syndrome? Depressed by a burning urinary tract or organ failure due to exposure to Depleted Uranium? Husband's semen has a burning effect in your uterus due to his exposure to Depleted Uranium? Children are acting like a really bad episode of Spouse Swap without the swap? Feeling suicidal because of any or all of these things? Well, if you're in the military or are married to one of its members or are the offspring thereof, then you're in luck.
It used to be that you went to the VA and waited in line and received subpar medical treatment (if at all). Sometimes you would be told it was all in your head and you'd be referred to a shrink who told you it was all in your head and to take these little pills and try to live the brave life. But now...
Now, you can beat the blues with laughter, officially recognized and sanctioned by the Pentagon. Gone will be the blues from the wind of your guffaws. Gone the nasty, empty feeling that would normally accompany reintegration into civilian life. Gone the pre- and postpartum symptoms of losing a loved one to de- or redeployment for all concerned. Huzzah!
Necessary no more will be the psychiatrists, support groups and medical staffs who would belittle you, baffle you and bullshit you.
It's new, it's brilliant, it's shiny! And it can only be found at Pentagonco!
From the same people who brought you Abu Ghraib Jenga (stack 'em up and pull 'em out one by one). And the Original Iraqi Christmas Tree (complete with wires, tree topper in the shape of a hood and 12 volt battery). And Bunker Busters (for the complete 4th of July fireworks party). And Operation: Secret Rendition (don't land too close to the air control tower or it will buzz!). And The Laugher (for those lonely nights when only laughter can turn those lights back on).
But seriously...forced laughter IS good medicine for the sick soul. Much better than honest tears or rightious anger. So, turn that frown upside down and be a happy camper. And know that your president is doing everything he can to bring our troops home safely and in one piece. Oh, oh gosh, I'm making myself laugh now. Ha ha. Wow, I feel way better. Thanks, Pentagonco!
It used to be that you went to the VA and waited in line and received subpar medical treatment (if at all). Sometimes you would be told it was all in your head and you'd be referred to a shrink who told you it was all in your head and to take these little pills and try to live the brave life. But now...
Now, you can beat the blues with laughter, officially recognized and sanctioned by the Pentagon. Gone will be the blues from the wind of your guffaws. Gone the nasty, empty feeling that would normally accompany reintegration into civilian life. Gone the pre- and postpartum symptoms of losing a loved one to de- or redeployment for all concerned. Huzzah!
Necessary no more will be the psychiatrists, support groups and medical staffs who would belittle you, baffle you and bullshit you.
It's new, it's brilliant, it's shiny! And it can only be found at Pentagonco!
From the same people who brought you Abu Ghraib Jenga (stack 'em up and pull 'em out one by one). And the Original Iraqi Christmas Tree (complete with wires, tree topper in the shape of a hood and 12 volt battery). And Bunker Busters (for the complete 4th of July fireworks party). And Operation: Secret Rendition (don't land too close to the air control tower or it will buzz!). And The Laugher (for those lonely nights when only laughter can turn those lights back on).
But seriously...forced laughter IS good medicine for the sick soul. Much better than honest tears or rightious anger. So, turn that frown upside down and be a happy camper. And know that your president is doing everything he can to bring our troops home safely and in one piece. Oh, oh gosh, I'm making myself laugh now. Ha ha. Wow, I feel way better. Thanks, Pentagonco!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
