Explain to me why the world isn’t crazy. Please?

June 22nd, 2007 lackhead Posted in Politco Schmolitico, The Way The World Works 1 Comment »

From Slate, an article about a sexual assault case where the words rape, assault, victim, and even “sexual assault kit” have been banned from being used in front of the jury.

Also, Darth Cheney asserts that he isn’t part of the executive branch in order to exempt himself from having to provide records. His standoff with the National Archives goes back to at least April. Oh, and here’s a picture of a document shredding service truck pulling up to Cheney’s office in October. Don’t get me started on email retention policies.

What happened to reality?

-c

1 Comment »
permalink

Sound bite-me.

June 18th, 2007 lackhead Posted in Politco Schmolitico 3 Comments »

Recently, a friend of mine who is, well, no big fan of Al Gore, sent me a link to a YouTube video of him talking about Saddam Hussein, terrorism, chemical weapons, etc. The title of the video is “Gore criticizes Bush for ignoring Iraq’s ties to terrorism”, and it has apparently made the rounds of the conservative blog-o-sphere. Apparently this is supposed to be stark evidence of how Al Gore is a giant hypocrite, lambasting Reagan and then-president Bush #41 for not taking Hussein seriously. Now, I really should be doing my French homework, and I’ve been trying hard to stay out of the political arena for a bit to let my neurons regenerate, but I mistakenly just started to poke around to see what the conservatives are saying.

And I found this post.

Now, I really don’t have too much time to get into this (did I mention my French final tomorrow?), but the irony and just blatant ignorant-yet-erudite manner in which this moron proselytizes just got me pissed. He bemoans how people don’t know their own country’s history, and if they only were smarter and paid more attention to what went on the past then we’d understand that “George W Bush is the greatest president to ever live”. Puh-lease.

Ok, brainiac. Here’s a history lesson for you:

  • 1951/1953: U.S. through CIA finances/plans/supports a coup in Iran that deposes the democratically elected Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh in favor of pro-West Shah.
  • 1967: Iraq breaks official relations with U.S. during the Arab-Israeli War
  • 1979/1980: Shah of Iran is exiled, Ayatollah Khomeini establishes an Islamic-based government. In response to the U.S. giving harbor to the Shah, the American Embassy in Tehran is stormed and hostages taken. Iran/U.S. relations are broken off. Ronald Reagan elected U.S. President (the Reagan/Bush presidential campaign and their involvement with the hostage crisis is its own amazing story, FYI).
  • 1980: Iraq attacks Iran, thinking the destabilized government will be easy to overthrow (not). The Soviets, opposing the war, stop selling arms to both Iraq and Iran. This creates a huge demand for weapons, and the U.S., opposing the anti-West Iran, starts courting Saddam Hussein.
  • 1982: U.S. removes Iraq from its list of states that sponsor terrorism.
  • 1983: Iran and the Kurds report use of chemical and biological weapons on the part of Saddam Hussein. U.S. response is basically nothing, if not even intentionally ignoring/burying the issue. In December of 1983, Rumsfeld makes his famous “handshake” with Saddam Hussein. U.S. starts selling helicopters and other munitions to Iraq, including anthrax (for research purposes only, of course).
  • 1985/1986: U.S. is caught selling weapons to Iran to fund right-wing Contras in Nicaragua, the so-called “Iran-Contra” affair that should have gotten Reagan and many others impeached and/or imprisoned. This, no doubt, seriously pissed off Hussein, and the U.S. gets more hard-lined with Iran, and more friendly with Iraq, in order to maintain at least one friend in the region.
  • 1988: Iran calls for a cease fire. Iraq refuses, continuing to use chemical weapons against Iranians and Kurdish rebels within Iraq. Eventually, Hussein backs down and agrees to a cease-fire.
  • 1990: Iraq accuses Kuwait of economic warfare, of stealing oil. Iraq invades Kuwait, U.S. replies with Operation Desert Shield, as we had very close ties with Kuwait, did not want one country in the region with too much oil to control (monopoly), and viewed hegemony within the Middle East as disruptive and therefore threatening to oil flow.

Ok hot shot, in that context, I think Al Gore had a pretty good perch to sit on when criticizing the Reagan/Bush legacy of selling weapons, both biological and conventional, to someone like Saddam Hussein. And their motive? Mostly anti-soviet; don’t forget that Reagan certainly harbored plenty of “red-scare” feelings. But also it was playing all sides of the field in order to maintain a geopolitical influence and control of oil flow in the region, at the expense of dealing with extremists in Iran (both the revolutionaries and the Ayatollah, as well as Saddam Hussein). Bed down with one devil to spite another.

Did Gore advocate invading Iraq and overthrowing Hussein? No; he just criticized funding the bastard and lambasted ignoring his terrorist activities and human-rights abuses. Does he advocate disrupting the balance of power within the region, and bringing about civil war, increased terrorism and one giant cluster!*#@? Not at all. So please, please, explain to me what part of history do I not get. Hmmm? Or am I just one of those “Americans [that] are not educated enough or do not have the ability to understand these things”? Honestly, if you think your little rant about history proves that President W. Fucknut is really just a super guy and that Gore, et. al. are a bunch of hypocritical whiners, well then you’re sorely mistaken.

But I will give you this- the current crop of Democrats are a bunch of nutjobs too. You say that Clinton/Gore didn’t do anything in their 8 years in the Whitehouse about Iraq. Well, that’s partly true. They did continue on with the sanctions that devastated the people of Iraq, which also kept Hussein from getting WMDs and sponsoring terrorism as fully as it had in the past. Talk about a turd blossom- there’s one fore you. The Hussein of 2003 was no where near as powerful as the Hussein of 1990; still a tyrannical insane dictator, but nowhere near the international threat that he as made out to be. I don’t credit Clinton/Gore for that, but hey, that’s not really the point here.

Yes, the Democrats capitulated to Bush when he got a-warrin’. Yes, they are as responsible for the nightmare in Iraq as Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, and the rest of those war criminals. Hillary scares the bejesus out of me for all of her flip-flopping and pandering and promises to have as low of a set of scruples and morales and the rest of them. But that doesn’t make George Bush a hero, not in any way, shape or form. He’s the one that manufactured intelligence to lead us to war. He’s the one that upped U.S. hegemony in the most unstable region on the planet to 11. He’s the one that bullied his way into a war that anybody with half a brain, anybody who knew even a little bit of history, knew was going to be a disaster.

And you’re the one lamenting that people aren’t “educated enough” or “have the ability to understand these things”. Sheesh.

-c

3 Comments »
permalink

This is War

June 2nd, 2007 lackhead Posted in Musicalifragilisitc, Politco Schmolitico, Wonderfulness 1 Comment »

A blog that I have recently tuned into is John Cole’s Ballon Juice. In particular, he had a rather terse post concerning the fact that a number of right-wing bloggers were expressing outrage that the “liberal blogosphere” was drudging up a storm about the use of torture by the United States, but wasn’t as rigorous in complaing about the use of torture by Al-Qaida. John’s repsonse was:

It isn’t news because they are terrorists, you fucking simpletons. Yesterday, my cat scratched himself then shit in a box. The media didn’t report that, either.

Anyway, what I found totally and utterly fascinating was this post, and in particular, the YouTube links found within. I mean, the first link, Apache is totally in itself absolutely blogworthy, but the Hasselhoff-er-ific follow up as almost as mind blowing. And some people take drugs to alter their state of consciousness. Man, they could save a lot of time by just looking for stuff on YouTube.

So, for those of you with a curious and masochistic streak, I’ll save you some time and link to the videos strait up and stuff. First, everybody do the Apache:

Now, everybody sit back and try not to lose their lunch over this cover of “Hooked On A Feeling”:

Man, and you thought Pour Casses Avec Toi left an indelible mark on your brain. You may now go back to worrying about the fate of the United States economy, and try to pretend like the last 8 minutes of your life didn’t happen.

-c

1 Comment »
permalink

Fact checking the Republican debate

May 6th, 2007 lackhead Posted in Politco Schmolitico 1 Comment »

The good folks over at Countdown with Keith Olbermann did a nice neat wrap-up of the mostly uninspiring Republican debate this last week. I was glad to see that abortion was a topic to be brought up; in the heavy atmosphere of the news world these days, even very important issues like the changing legal landscape for abortion (note: I’m glad that we haven’t devolved into a legal landscape like Ireland, where they can legally imprison a rape victim to keep her from fleeing the country to abort her developmentally abnormal 3-month fetus).

But I digress. Countdown’s fact-checking of the republican debate is great and too short; I’m digging now to see if they did a similar one on the Democratic debate. Does anybody know if there is a blog out there that fact-checks Bush’s speeches and/or remarks? Sounds like a full time job, but that would be *really* interesting. If you know of one, please post a comment!

-c

1 Comment »
permalink

Quote of the day: Betrand Russell on the Liberal outlook

May 2nd, 2007 lackhead Posted in Politco Schmolitico No Comments »

“The essence of the Liberal outlook lies not in what opinions are held, but in how they are held: instead of being held dogmatically, they are held tentatively, and with a consciousness that new evidence may at any moment lead to their abandonment.”

-Bertrand Russell

No Comments »
permalink