Friday, October 29, 2004


McSweeney's Internet Tendency: Situation Report From Oz.:

TO: (Recipients Withheld)

FROM: General Jinjur, Provisional Proconsul of Oz

SUBJECT: War on Wickedness

IMPORTANCE: High Top Secret

It seems a long time since Operation Bucket of Water was completed, the Wicked Witch melted, and her followers shouted, "Hurrah for Dorothy! The Wicked Witch is dead!"

Retrospectively, that may have been the point where events began to diverge from our prewar plans.

Let it be said that the Wicked Witch was a highly desirable enemy, being undeniably wicked, readily identifiable by her skin pigmentation, unpopular, and, best of all, highly water-soluble.

Would that our new enemies in Oz had all these attributes. More thought should have been given to the geopolitical consequences of wiping out the Wicked Witches of both the East and the West, the so-called Axis of Wickedness. Thanks to the resulting power vacuum, Americans can no longer safely venture outside the Emerald City. Beyond the walls of this high-security enclave, the emeralds have all been looted, and sewage flows in the streets.

The Yellow Brick Road remains unusable, due to attacks by Munchkin warlords. Militias loyal to Glinda, the "Good" Witch of the North, who, just for the record, I never trusted, have launched a wide-scale insurgency. The Witch of the South has been abducted by militant Winkie clerics. Our attempts to portray the armed resistance as a last-ditch attempt by a handful of Wicked Witch of the West loyalists have lost all credibility.

U.S. forces have ceased to be viewed as liberators by many of the population, perhaps due to some unfortunate comments about Munchkins by senior Army commanders, and the PR problems stemming from our use of the Wicked Witch of the West's dungeon for interrogation purposes.

As for the current unrest stirred by Quadling suicide bombers, we're completely out of our depth, due to intelligence failures. We have no one who even speaks Gillikin.

All the state assets of Oz have been privatized, but unfortunately, there is no longer a state. This could be spun as ensuring a healthy legislative climate for multinationals, except of course for the general nonavailability of water, electricity, or the rule of law. Our last PR offensive was seriously undermined by the recent attacks on private contractors by flying-monkey suicide bombers. We keep having to revise upwardly the strength of the anti-American resistance, making it hard for us to tap the country's vast snake-oil reserves.

Shock and awe have given way to nausea and denial. The ruby slippers turned out to be made of tinsel, damaging the credibility of our characterization of them as a weapon of mass destruction, and leaving us open to charges of having duped the American people into a bloody, multibillion-dollar fiasco.

There is no long-standing tradition of Oz nationhood. When we learned that our one-time ally the Wizard of Oz lacked popular support outside the Emerald City, we exfiltrated him, along with special agent "Dorothy," and transferred sovereignty to a provisional ruling coalition of the Scarecrow, the Tin Man, and the Cowardly Lion, but they seem to lack legitimacy, among other things.

To deal with the situation in Oz, we have been forced to withdraw troops from the borders of Mordor, and are starting to seem seriously overstretched.

When I asked our former ally the former Wizard for a strategy to get our faction re-elected, he said we wouldn't need a strategy, as long as we had a slogan. "I Am the All-Powerful" was his suggestion. He also suggested we keep the special effects coming, and make sure we stay hidden behind the curtain.

Anyone have better ideas? | Editorials | Editorials

Further proof that there is a profound variegation in beliefs in middle America.

It really gets my goat (and I like my goat!) when GOP mouthpieces get on TV and talk about what will or will not fly in the "heartland." They all like to talk about how those Hollywood liberal folk only know life on the glitzy and wealthy coasts and are out of touch with people in the middle of America. But what the idiots on Fox News are saying is essentially the same- they wouldn't know a farmer from a rancher or a Mennonite from the Amish. They think that middle America votes in a conservative block, which is not only ignorant but patently false. Maybe the movie stars endorsing Kerry don't know a cheese curd from sashimi but at least most of them would probably acknowledge that liberals exist between the coasts.

That fact is something that the GOP and the more conservative media people have consistently ignored for decades, and at the least it is condescending and annoying. At most it is alienating and destructive.

When I was in Iowa, I met easily some of the most liberal people I've ever come into contact with. Iowa is the home of the Iowa writing workshop, one of the most vibrant gay communities I've ever seen, a Vedic city, some of the best Indian food I've ever had and home to several small liberal arts colleges with solid reputations. Iowa is not like Nebraska or Wyoming or Idaho or Kansas. And to assume that it Iowa is like those other states is just as ignorant as anything any "Hollywood" liberal has to say.

Thursday, October 28, 2004

in lieu of catblogging (which I will do next week)

Today I'm going to do a little mindless blogging:


Monty Gay. That's really lame.


Guacamole Warren. Okay, that one's pretty damn cool.


Lyons Piatti. Ooh, exotic.


Saffron Albuquerque.


C. Scho. In da house.


Piglet Skyline. Eh, I don't know how "detective-y" that is.


Leigh Colorado. Sounds very 1900's girl sharpshooter to me.

I feel much better now . . .

I guess I could have seen this one coming.

Threat rating: extremely low. You may think you can
subvert the government, but if you should try
you will be smited mightily because God likes
us best.

What threat to the Bush administration are you?
brought to you by Quizilla

MSNBC - Militants claim to have missing explosives

MSNBC - Militants claim to have missing explosives

I wasn't going to discuss this, but it's just too much.

As my Dad always said: way to go, ace.

You know, it's not that he's not bright. We've had plenty of not-bright presidents that didn't get us into this kind of trouble. It's the devilish combination of not being too bright, of surrounding yourself with highly intelligent people but ignoring them at every turn, and never, ever admitting you've taken a wrong turn. Not even if you were on I-80 on your way to Omaha and you wind up in a ditch in Compton.

And even if these guys (linked above) don't have the explosives, somebody does. And even if they were taken, as the Repubs have claimed, before American forces could have secured them (funny, since all sources I'm finding say they still had their "discard if tampered with" seal on them well into last spring) they ARE STILL GONE.

And what does the vigilant Commander In Cheif have to say about this:

Bush, in Pennsylvania, said, “I want to remind the American people that if Senator Kerry had his way ... Saddam Hussein would still be in power, he would control all those weapons and explosives” and could have shared them with America’s terrorist enemies.

“For a political candidate to jump to conclusions without knowing the facts is not a person you want as your commander in chief,” Bush said.

Uh, ok . . . those weapons were there for approximately 10 years and Saddam didn't "share them" with our terrorist enemies because as we have learned, and as everyone should know by now, Saddam didn't share nuthin with our terrorist enemies because he was a selfish despot.

And um, while we're talking about political candidates jumping to conclusions without knowing the facts . . . ah, nevermind. we've all heard that one before.

As Jeff commented before, and I am inclined to agree, the CIA can only take so many fingers erroneously pointed at them before they unveil damaging information. I do believe they have more in store that will probably come out after Bush is out of office.

Strange things are happening. The Sox swept the series. A lunar eclipse. Good signs, my friends.

Wednesday, October 27, 2004

A little something for the ladies

I mean, come ON, girls. This guy is H-O-T!

Tuesday, October 26, 2004

You know what?

I'm not even going to try to show the missing explosives thing as another example of the administration's complete and frightening lack of foresight. Because it has become utterly ineffective to try and pin any disaster on this administration. Many have tried. Many have failed. Examples:

Abu Ghraib? Despite evidence showing that the behavior at this prison came from the highest levels of the administration, nobody is feeling the heat from it. This was torture, people- recruits were following orders to completely denegrate and humiliate these prisoners and nobody is talking about it.

Enron? Well, let's just say the president and co. have their fingers in a lot of pies. But nobody is calling them on this, or Halliburton, or any number of other corporate disgraces.

9/11 intelligence? Bush screwed up. He did not take action despite intelligence indicating an impending attack on US soil. He knew something was happening and didn't act on it (and I just don't buy that every day a memo comes to the president saying that we are going to be attacked. I just don't.) and 3,000 people were killed. There had to have been ways to step up airport security, to increase national defense, to take action. Bush can keep saying this was an intelligence failure, that it was a failure on the part of the FBI. But ultimately, it was his failure.

Clinton was brought down by a blue dress. The stain on that dress should have been much, much less consequential than the bloodstains the Bush and Co have smeared about the White House. But nobody is being accountable for any of this. Where is the outrage, as they used to say? Where are Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman to take this man down?

Snarky . . . I can live with that.

You Are a Snarky Blogger!

You've got a razor sharp wit that bloggers are secretly scared of.
And that's why they read your posts as often as they can!

The New York Times > Opinion > Editorial: Making Things Worse

The New York Times > Opinion > Editorial: Making Things Worse

Hm. See, you'd think the Republicans would have it figured out by now that you can't wage war against nouns without it backfiring. War against Drugs. War against Terror. What's next? War against Hummus? War against Shag Carpeting?

Although, in a case like this it is very easy to put on your tinfoil hat and go into full Fox Mulder mode, saying that it was never about actually eliminating terror, but perpetuating it and the measures citizens are willing to tolerate in fighting it. It's times like these when one who has written at length on the topic of dystopias has trouble seeing the light at the end of the tunnel.

In other news . . . did Jesse Ventura join the Simbionese Liberation Army?

Wednesday, October 20, 2004

Political Strategy - Politics, Strategies, Tactics, News and Opinion

Political Strategy - Politics, Strategies, Tactics, News and Opinion

Heartening news indeed . . .

It's a sad situation . . .

When Pat Robertson is more in touch with reality than the president. - Robertson: I?warned Bush on Iraq casualties - Oct 19, 2004
"NEW YORK (CNN) -- The founder of the U.S. Christian Coalition said Tuesday he told President George W. Bush before the invasion of Iraq that he should prepare Americans for the likelihood of casualties, but the president told him, 'We're not going to have any casualties."

Don't mess with Jon Stewart - Transcripts

You'll want to do a Ctrl+F for "Stewart" on this, because their first roundtable with Carville is as predictable as a Liza Minelli divorce. But man, when Jon Stewart stops being funny and starts indicting the press, watch out. The man makes some valid points and in the end, it is the comedian that turns the room into one man with journalistic integrity and two clownish hacks with little to say in return to his scathing (and yes, vulgar) attacks on their sensational opportunism.

And I liked it when he called Carlson a dick. He had it coming.

I do have to wonder about the polls. Sheezus. Can it really be that close? I just wonder if the aforementioned political hacks saw the ratings hike last time they declared a close race and are selectively ignoring poll data to keep us all on the edge of our seats.

It's a quaint word, "infotainment." But scratch the surface and it has some seriously sinister, Orwellian if you will, undertones.

Tuesday, October 19, 2004

Headlines comes to Longmont

This picture, from Times-Call photog Coke Whitworth, was on Leno last night as part of headlines. I knew I'd seen it somewhere . . .

Kerry Didn't Gay-Bait - He used Mary Cheney to shame Bush for gay-baiting. By Timothy Noah

Kerry Didn't Gay-Bait - He used Mary Cheney to shame Bush for gay-baiting. By Timothy Noah:

"As it happens, the genetic nature of homosexuality was the very subject Kerry was discussing when he brought up Mary Cheney. Both candidates had been asked, 'Do you believe homosexuality is a choice?' Bush had said he didn't know, and then, after some vague words about tolerance and dignity, affirmed his support for a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. Then Kerry spoke:

We're all God's children, Bob. And I think if you were to talk to Dick Cheney's daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell you that she's being who she was, she's being who she was born as.
I think if you talk to anybody, it's not choice. I've met people who struggled with this for years, people who were in a marriage because they were living a sort of convention, and they struggled with it.
And I've met wives who are supportive of their husbands or vice versa when they finally sort of broke out and allowed themselves to live who they were, who they felt God had made them.
I think we have to respect that.

I won't dispute that Kerry was using Mary Cheney to score a political point. But the political point was an entirely legitimate one, aimed, I believe, not at fundamentalists but at swing voters with libertarian leanings. Listen, Kerry was saying. This guy knows gay people, just like you and I do. So he must know that homosexuality isn't a 'lifestyle choice.' He must know that, and yet he pretends not to know it to score points with the religious right. How cynical can you get? And then he lends his support to a cockamamie Constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage that even his right-wing-nut of a vice president can't stomach because his own daughter is gay. But even Cheney won't really speak out against this administration's exploitation of the gay-marriage issue to score cheap political points. Some father he is."

Okay? Can we move on now? Good.

Next issue.

Friday, October 15, 2004

Just a quick one
check it out.

Thursday, October 14, 2004

The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Contributor: What Derrida Really Meant

The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Contributor: What Derrida Really Meant: "Fortunately, he also taught us that the alternative to blind belief is not simply unbelief but a different kind of belief - one that embraces uncertainty and enables us to respect others whom we do not understand. In a complex world, wisdom is knowing what we don't know so that we can keep the future open. "

Jacques Derrida died last week at the age of 74. I think it probably was Derrida that taught me that no matter how much you read something and understand the words, you may not understand the concept. And now that I do, in fact, understand Derrida's approach to certainty and understanding, I think this is exactly what he meant to teach the world. You can't KNOW anything. Because certainty means the exclusion of certain truths that you do not yet know. See . . . the words make sense but the knowledge, the understanding of the concept does not come easily.

Derrida was probably best known for his "deconstruction" theories, which have been pirated by mainstream media and pop culture and perverted into something simple. And Derrida was not a man of simple theories. Deconstruction is not about dismantling or picking apart a notion, it's about showing that each human certainty is weak, fallible. The concepts of "Good" and "Evil" may seem simple and concrete but they can't exist without one another and there is no pure form of either. By extension, witnessing evil acts sometimes compells good people to be better, and so good can come from evil. Which is why evil can't be pure.

Which is good.

When I was a freshman in college studying Derrida's work, my world had been full of certainties. Abortion should be legal, no matter what. Writers write what they mean. Politicians may lie but they have limited power and resources, so the power remains with the people. Religious individuals lack logical, rational thought processes. These were the things that I would later grapple with in my life- notions that had once seemed untouchable, solid, became full of exceptions and outright contradictions. Some people come out of their college experiences with more certainty, some with less. I think you are only a success as a scholar and a philosopher if you continue in your life becoming less and less certain about ideas and opinions . . . and more comfortable with uncertainty.

Derrida forced me to realize that there were certain things that I would never fully understand. All through high school I had never really been mentally challenged, and the ease with which I dealt with simple material became confused with aptitude. At some point that bubble had to be burst. It should be burst for everyone- everyone should, at some point, be told that they can't truly be certain about the world or about ideas and that there are certain things that are simply beyond the grasp of the human mind. I am very grateful, in retrospect, that Derrida's work confused me. Because later I would come to understand that, to a certain degree, the world and all that's in it should confuse us all. When we become certain, when we think we know it all, we stop learning.

In the great tradition of French thinkers, Derrida dared to give thought a presence- to make thought not only intrinsic to the human condition, but also a guiding principal and a worthwhile activity. While Descartes said "I think, Therefore I am," Derrida's philosophy was, "I think, therefore, I must always think."

Thank you, Jacques.

Wednesday, October 13, 2004

To tie it all up

I think this was another one where there was really no clear winner. This debate was very similar to the others, Bush stammering along, Kerry remaining on his talking points. I doubt, as many of the pundits on TV also doubt, that many minds will be changed in the election by this debate.

But the basics remain the same. No matter how well he defends it, the President has a record of failure. He will maintain appeal with the evangelical Christians and die-hard Republicans who just will not vote any other way. But for all his folksy faithful vernacular, Bush will probably not win over any undecided voter who has:

-lost a job to outsourcing
-lost a family member in Iraq
-children in afer-school programs
-children in under-funded schools
-lived or traveled abroad in an immersive fashion
-family or friends living abroad
-ever had a family member killed by an assault weapon
-a gay long-term companion or any gay friends or relatives
-any concern for environmental issues
-ever tried to gain entry into a college and has wondered about affirmative action
-attended school with illegal immigrant children
-ever had an unwanted pregnancy (this one is iffy)
-lost health insurance
-aetheistic beliefs

The thing is, a ton of people are registering RIGHT NOW, and I have doubts that the reason for this is that more people want to reassure the incumbent's reelection. These are people that want a change. Although I can't point to any one moment in the debates that show me that one man will win in a landslide, I believe that Kerry had a real chance to show his colors, show his real character. I think that more undecided voters will probably see that Kerry is more of the consummate politician, and anyone who knows his background in protest should see that he has always fought the good fight. I hope.

But why o why does Bush keep saying "Liberal" like it's a bad thing??

I thought the audience was supposed to be silent?

Ah well. It's good that John can take a hit or two about how his wife's all about tha benjamins.

The pony's one trick is "no child left behind"

The president has never met with NAACP

But he has gone to this.

The Global Test

Bush simply does not understand why the other nations of the world didn't approve of Iraq. He's actually not lying. He really believes what he's saying.

Bush looks like he's watching a stripper

when Kerry's talking. He looks like he's watching something sparkly and undulating.

How did he change the minimum wage question into education?

I mean, jeez, the president went to Yale and look what good it did him. Why is he talking about no child left behind when we're asking about minimum wage?

Face it, Bushie- people with Masters' degrees are getting outsourced. Giving them coupons for free classes on machining isn't helping the problem.

How did he change the minimum wage question into education?

I mean, jeez, the president went to Yale and look what good it did him. Why is he talking about no child left behind when we're asking about minimum wage?

Face it, Bushie- people with Masters' degrees are getting outsourced. Giving them coupons for free classes on machining isn't helping the problem.

Yay! Let's raise women's pay!

It's long overdue.

Hm . . . awarding citizenship to aliens who . . .

work hard, pay their bills, stay out of trouble. By those standards, the president wouldn't be a legal citizen if he hadn't been born here.

He just said "I see it as" a lot of times.

Basically his immigration policy makes it OK to hire illegal aliens for criminally low wages to do whatever the hell they want if they have a card. Visa: It's everywhere you want to be.

But at the same time he doesn't want people to become legal via amnesty.

Yeah, whatever happened to that surplus?

Does anyone buy it when Bush starts talking about the great things he's done for the economy?

Is anyone saying that the current system is OK?

That Social Security is fine?

I don't know that I've ever heard anyone say that.

Yuck. The president just said "Youngsters.

GAH again!

Group of folks. I thought the group of folks were the terror cells, not independent healthcare research firms.

And his halfway finished idea about quoting news organizations went absolutely nowhere.

God, he's smirking again.

Has anyone else noticed that every single moderator has had to dress down the President when he gets ornery?

WTF are "buggy and horse days?"

And what does it have to do with healthcare?

I think the president's wire just snapped. He's acting weird again.

Faith without works is dead.

Well done. But it goes completely agains the "born again" credo. They want to convert everyone and everyon who doesn't think the same way is evil.

How can a guy who has executed retarded people try and talk about a "Culture of Life?"


Activist judges again. God, if I was in that audience I'd have thrown something at him. This is why I am not allowed in places like this.b

So Bush's answer to outsourcing

is to change the subject to education. Yeah, I'm sorry you're out of a job, but that must mean because you're dumb. Here! go to VoTech and learn basketweaving. He's literally foaming at the mouth. Gross.
WTF? John Kerry literally lays bare the hugely inept economic policy of this president and he's talking about how the government shouldn't tell people how to live their lives. Unless they're gay. Or pregnant. Or Arab.

Oh no you did not just say "Bait and Switch"

Hello, Kettle? This is Pot. You're black.

How embarrassing.

They're wearing the same tie.

It's official . . .

Bush is making this whole flu shot thing up.

That's it!

We'll infect Osama with the flu! That's what we can do with all those infected kids who can't get health insurance.

Oh, and so it's okay to work with Canada on the flu, but all their drugs are extremely dangerous for every other application.

I got a question.

How come Bush always talks about he WILL chase Al-Qaeda? It's like he's really saying "I know that I got us all distracted, what with annexing Iraq, but I'll get around to that Al-Qaeda thing one of these days. Maybe after I'm done clearing brush."

I wonder . . .

Just how safe was the world in which Sheiffer grew up? Or Kerry? I just don't know . . . especially if they grew up during the cold war. I know what he means but I'm not sure if it's as well worded as it could be.

Can we please get a new line other than the cargo/container terrorism threat? I'd like to hear more on that . . .


To sum up- I ask the questions around here, bozo.


The last shootout. Think Sergio Leone- doodoodoodoodoooooo . . . wa wa waaaaaa.
Bob Shaffer is cool.

I almost forgot . . .

Here are my new wheels:

The New York Times > Washington > Campaign 2004 > Hometown Politics: Sure, Country Is Divided, but Bush Country, Too?

The New York Times > Washington > Campaign 2004 > Hometown Politics: Sure, Country Is Divided, but Bush Country, Too?: " "

You know you are in trouble when you lose "hometown hero" status . . . and you're the President of the United States.

He's doubly in trouble because it sounds to me that the editor for the Iconoclast (which is a mighty cool name for a paper) is a hardened GOP man and like many such men, he is disillusioned by the ineptitude and ideology and secrecy of this administration.

But there comes a time where your hometown is no longer famous for your association with it . . . and starts becoming infamous. This was an incredibly brave thing for these newspaper editors to do, and it will no doubt (in fact, it has already) cost them sales and readers. But I have to cheer for those journalists that do the right thing, even when it is unpopular and even when it's not what the people reading your paper want to hear. It is those guys that will eventually counterbalance the Fox Newses out there that pander to what people want to believe, not the truth.

So my ballsy journalist award for the week goes to W. Leon Smith, who had the guts to tell Crawford Texas what he really thought about the prodigal son. It's people like him who keep us from becoming an Orwellian Onestate.

Tuesday, October 12, 2004

The last man to die for a mistake

Okay, so I just saw "Going Upriver" and now I have even more respect for John Kerry than before. Mostly because he seems to me to be the consummate public servant. But also because he is the kind of person you want in politics- someone who has always wanted to fight the good fight. He just cuts such an amazing figure as a soft-spoken but gutsy kid in army fatigues who went up against the scariest Republicans and simply said that something had to change, and that the government had no business trying to save face at the cost of lives.

What's intriguing is that the same people that tried to destroy him then are the same people who are trying to destroy him now. Bush is just a very cartoonish version of Nixon, secretive and sneaky and ultimately drunk with power. Cheney has a distinctive Nixonian air, and nothing more or less should be expected from someone who worked as closely as he did with the original Tricky Dick. I think the Republicans are right to fear John Kerry- because he's dealt with them all before. And he ultimately was vindicated. No matter how many fake swift boat vets Karl Rove can pull out of the air, no matter how many attacks Bush can make on Kerry's supposed "flip flopping," Kerry's seen it before, and from much scarier folks than the Smunkey in Chief (smug+monkey=smunkey).

It was an inspiring movie, and made me see that Kerry is not only our only alternative to Bush, he's a great politician and a good man as well. We can only hope that his vast intellectual, political and personal superiority is enought to carry the day in November.

I would think that someone like Kerry, who is obviously now and always has been a little leery of governments overstepping their bounds, would appeal to the last great Libertarian Republicans. Let's hope so.

Tuesday, October 05, 2004

Thank you , and goodnight

Okay, this wasn't the clear victory that I saw with the Presidential debate. Cheney was quick to jump all over Edwards' voting record, which is not what most of us would like it to be. But I think that when even an intelligent man like Cheney is involved with a failure of an administration like Bush's, full of pork barrel excesses and sheer disregard for the American people, he can't have much to say when he's trying to defend it. If that makes sense. Cheney is not stupid, but he is not having an easy time of trying to make it sound like the past 4 years have done anything to improve the lot of life for America. He is much clearer and much more elegant with his words than the President. But he's still saying the same things. He's still using personal attacks and still trying to connect the dots from 9/11 to Iraq. Those dots can't be connected, and anyone would sound stupid trying.

I think it was very important that the Halliburton thing came back again. There is nothing more sinister about the Bush administration than that big fat elephant known as the no-bid contract.

And, what kind of heat does Cheney have to be feeling in order to express to the nation that he thinks there is a looming possibility of a terrorist taking a nuclear weapon and detonating it in a major American city? I've said it before. If the nation's leaders really thought this was a possibility, they wouldn't be going around saying so . . . they'd have cancelled the debate and Cheney would be in a war room working on getting that freako disarmed. The American people need to understand that when he says these things, he's just trying to scare you. He's like your creepy uncle who says that the basement is haunted and then tells you to get some ground beef from the downstairs deep freeze.

All in all, I'd have to say I think this is pretty much a draw. It's unfortunate- you have two intelligent men debating one another, one whose boss is a complete asshat but whose record he have to defend in order to keep his job, and another who represents change and youth and has an answer to everything. Cheney did a good job of defending his boss, although the defense is of something inherently flawed. Edwards did a good job of shutting him down, but came off as a little to slick.

I agree with the major media outlets- this is no obviously hardcore spanking (ooh, I'm gonna show up on some funky web searches now- watch my hit count go up!) like the presidential debate. But then, this was not meant to be a breakout event. The vice presidential race is secondary in all accounts and this established Edwards as a solid choice for vice president. And that's all we can really hope for.


Charly Gibson is going to be the moderator next time!

9/11 9/11 9/119/11 9/11 9/11

I was really hoping Cheney wouldn't do the fear thing. I'm really pretty sick of it. There comes a time when people are not going to be afraid anymore. I'm hoping that time is soon.

wait . . .

where on TV can you learn math? I want that!

Clearly there is a downside

to running for the highest office when you are a senator and your voting record is public . . .

The Bush administration has a weird relationship with the Courts

Beginning with his DUI and including the court-ordained election, his anger and outright antipathy for "activist courts" on the subject of gay marriage, to his newfound desire to limit Americans' lawsuit rights. The only judges Bushie likes are the ones in his many pockets.

Is it truly fair

to say that the Iraquis are now responsible for the clusterf*&k in Iraq when we were the ones who occupied in the first place?

I'm so glad someone

is finally bringing up the empty promises and flip-flopping nature of the Bush administration. Kerry needs to do this. Often.

If I never hear the words "flip flop again . . . "

I'm going to start calling my sandals "slippers" like they do in Hawaii.

better link:

I think that Edwards should be proud

that he doesn't have Cheney's resume.

Uh oh, there's that job interview question . . .

"Why should we hire you." That one's a killer.


Cheney says it's ok to push for AIDS education in other nations but we're all for abstinence only here.


Mr. Cheney lives in the biggest glass house on the block and shouldn't throw the "tax evasion" stone.

Well, the reason

why this administration has not stepped up to insurance companies and drug companies, is because they are all very, very well funded by said companies.

. . . speaking of red herrings

what is it with the Republican obsession with malpractice lawsuits?

Whoa . . .

Cheney just conceded, thanked Edwards and swallowed about a thousand possible GOP responses to that . . .

"nothing but a political tool"

Aw yeah. I like that Edwards just pretty much threw the gay marriage red herring into the Bush Administration's face.

Dick Cheney's daughter

is like a pair of Sorels. He only takes her out to make an arguement when he's up to his ankles in something.

Control from the government

Uh, Dick Cheney shouldn't even go there. Not about what control the goverment has over its people. No one, in fact, from an administration that is against abortion and for the Patriot act should go there.

Honey, I shrunk the GDP!

I remember Amanda said that the Bush tax cuts give the top 1 per cent of all earners over 50K per year back. That is more than I make in two years.

Trust me, I'm a lawyer

Oooh, that little "What was your question about" thing was dead on. Yeah, let's tap dance happily away from job loss and talk about elementary school students and their "significant progress!"

Edwards just made a big-time slam dunk there . . .

Cheney is still 1,000 times more eloquent than Bush but it doesn't take away from the fact that he's pure evil.

Ending poverty

Uh, Dick? Your connection from ending poverty to cutting taxes is a little six-degrees-of-Kevin-Bacon.

Whoa, wait, we're back on Halliburton?

And Edwards' attendance record? Lets face it, Dick, you're not going to win an election just because you bothered to show up.

And really, let's not blame Sadaam for the fact that suicide bombers blow themselves up in Israel.

I'm trying to figure out . . .

What is Edwards' little brooch?

Oh, ouchie

The Halliburton swings just keep coming! And Gwen just shut Dick down!

Bloody hell

How come all this "major progress" that the vice president thinks is going on isn't being covered in any major media outlets? Or for that matter, minor media outlets?

Damn those French!

How dare they negotiate with Iran now when I had contracts there not all that long ago!

Just what is the nature of the relationship between Zarkawi and Hussein?

Did they go to Olive Garden for Bottomless Bowl of Pasta?

This is a throwdown

It's getting really ugly. Thing is, Cheney is smarter than Bush and not afraid to fight dirty. There's a little more room for nastiness when you're playing second fiddle. But it's an important fiddle and I think Edwards plays it best . . .

Edwards is a trial lawyer and he's much smoother than The Penguin.

Um . . .

Sorry to say but I don't think Cheney should be talking about how to make friends.
Does Cheney want us to beleive that he actually cares about how many Iraquis have died during his war? Come on!

I know what he's up to . . .

I think Edwards is trying to piss Cheney off until he drops the F-Bomb.

Edwards is hot.

I like the notion of taking the Iraquis out of Iraq to train them, get them away from the insurgent groups. Now if we do that, do WE get to get out, too?

Haaaaliburton! Halliburton! (apologies to Handel)

Oh, yeah, Edwards just played the Halliburton card. Sweet.

Monday, October 04, 2004

thatGeorge W. Bush, Will You Please Go Now?!

George W. Bush, Will You Please Go Now?!

"Got his ass handed to him" has got to be the most apt description of what happened at the debates that I've heard yet.

My Republican grandfather is rolling in his grave. "Of course we’re after Saddam Hussein -- I mean, Osama bin Laden." Republican leaders before Bush had been called many things, but typically "borderline mentally disabled" was not usually among them. But now . . . can anyone, no matter how stalwart, have watched what went on at the debate and thought "now
that's what I call leadership!"?

Saturday, October 02, 2004

By the by . . .

If you look up Einstein's insanity dictum and the name George W. Bush, you get 8,020 results.

The weekend shift . . .

Yeah, so I have to be at work today til 5:30 and tomorrow from 2 to 5. As Megan would say, BIKESHORTS!

It's a bummer, esp. considering the weather is perfect for a drive to the mountains to look at the changing colors. Bleh. But my time here at work gives me moments to ponder all the stupid crap I usually ponder on the weekends, but at work I can write it down for all of you to enjoy.

Like, how weird is that rhyme that describes what boys and girls are made of? Girls are supposed to be made of sugar and spice and everything nice, right? Well, not only does that make girls really high-carb and full of empty calories, but it fails to explain how something containing "everything nice" can be as evil as so many of the girls I knew in elementary and middle school. And boys: made of snakes, snails and puppy dog tails. Ignoring the bizarre phallic imagery here, why must it be implied that a puppy is mutilated in order to produce a boy?! So while girls are constructed using traditional baking ingredients and a rather ambiguous collection of things generally agreed upon as "nice," (does this include nice things like new nail polish, brownies, birthday cards? Or is it abstract, like when someone opens a door for you or says "bless you" when you sneeze?) boys are made with live animals and the products of pet cruelty.

This is why I don't sleep at night. I can't turn my brain off. It's like trying to sleep when you have the Spanish news playing in your head.

Speaking of, the guy who detailed my car today said it was "bueno." That was cool.

I'm beginning to deeply dislike the term "steadfast resolve." I keep hearing it in reference to the administration. Which is stupid. Insane, even. Who was it who said that "Insanity is doing the same thing, over and over again, and expecting different results?" Oh yeah, Einstein. And note to the Prez: he's the guy who developed the theory of relativity. Not the guy who started the bagel shop.

Friday, October 01, 2004

New car = smarter than me.

Okay. So. Got the Check Engine light off, no problem. Disconnect the battery, wait an hour, reconnect. No light. But no radio. It flashes "Code In" on the display.

Off to the online bulletin boards. Security feature, they say. If the radio is stolen, it won't work without the code. Ok . . .

Run to the mechanic. She says she'll be there till noon. She's not there at 11:30. Damn!

Ask the handsome mechanic next door at the Racing mod workshop. Five minutes later, I've got a code and I'm heading home listening to Pink Floyd on my overly secured factory radio.

I'm so not used to the world of O2 sensors, security codes, onboard computers . . .

In other words, I think our president looked like a flustered little monkey on TV last night. I think Kerry pretty much ran over him, backed up (beep beep) and ran over him again. But I fear that this is a victory that will be too subtle for many Americans to see.

How, do you ask, can someone be subtly steamrolled? Well, it's an unfortunate truth that our President can't engage in any kind of higher level communication beyond parroting certain notions and talking points that he has been fed. And it is another unfortunate truth that his obstinate repetition of said talking points is mistaken by many as resolution, as standing one's ground. And it is further an unfortunate truth that many Americans are threatened by and suspicious of intellectualism and subtlety as a whole. So while I see a victory, while I see how Kerry basically bated the bear and fought him back with every intellectual weapon he had at his disposal, many will see a suspicious elitist with a lot of big words to say, up against a good old boy who sticks to his guns.

Have I mentioned that this is unfortunate?

I don't honestly know that America can withstand another Bush term in office. And I shudder to imagine just who would come after him- Cheney? Rumsfeld? The thought of a President Ashcroft is too horrible to bear, but what's to stop the GOP if the Bush administration heads into a second term. I foresee the dissolution of the line between church and state, the ruin of Roe V. Wade as we know it, the downfall of the cause of the ACLU, the shattering of any environmental progress we made during the Clinton years, a failed Iraq and a destructive domino effect in the greater Mid-East. I see further allies turning away- China, Japan, others . . .

I don't see how Republican voters can be OK with all of this. You don't just get the tender, juicy parts of an administration (tax cuts, for some, the reversal of Roe V. Wade being a positive step . . . these are the juicy parts). You have to live with the whole thing. The war. The constant surveillance. The destruction of our environment. You have to weigh all of the parts of an administration in your decision, and I just don't see how Republicans can balance a clusterf*&k of a war and the silliest of tax cuts and somehow see it come out even.

Tons of letters in the Opinion email today, claiming a Kerry victory. Perhaps Longmont's not as backward as it sometimes seems.