The attempted terrorist attack of Northwest Flight 253 was countered by Bush's Patriot Act and Homeland Security agencies.....err, maybe not. In fact it was the actions of courageous passengers and crew feeling compelled to place the safety and the lives of others above themselves which thwarted the attempt. This was a classic case of the rejection of Randian thinking on the most basic of human instincts: self sacrifice. Had these people not taken action their lives and those of the other passengers would have been lost. There are a few ways to view this story; one of which is philisophically: the triumph of objectivism and rational self interest occured or the leftist view that team-work was necessary in order to thwart this attack. Let's look at each theory and decide which philosophy best fits.
Objectivists (or hard righties) believe all actions and decisions should be left to the individual and to the individuals self-centered desires; there should be no such thing as compulsory charity or government programs such as welfare. Objectivists believe every person is imbued with the right to choose only for themselves and should never feel compelled to act in a group unless it personally suits them to do so. This is what's meant by "voluntary action"; all motivation should all come from a stand point of "self interest"; whatever the motives may ultimately be. This belief transcends morality such as "do unto others as they'd do unto you" or belief that helping others is the reward itself rather than motivation for personal acclaim. Objectivists of course deny the fact that human success has always come from common cause and empathy rather than from rational self interest alone.
Leftism is the idea that we're all in this world equally together; we fail or succeed based upon our ability to help and communicate together as a society rather than act in personal sovereignty. Leftists promote the idea that any large task requires at least two people working to be carried out successfully and stresses team-work over individual success and rewards. Leftists realize not everyone was raised with helping others in mind and they realize also that realistically some compulsion toward self-sacrifice is necessary; taxation to feed the worse off and sustain poverty-stricken families through welfare and free (fully subsidized) medical care are some very basic means to alleviate human suffering. Objectivists seem either too self involved or indeed oblivious to the fact that cooperative programs which grant basic needs allow everyone to pursue rational self interests; they instead take such compulsion as acting against their own personal liberty and consider need-based people to be parasites. This viewpoint is extreme and seems to be at the center of the modern right's view of needy people; they cannot do for themselves so they deserve to die.
Back to the act of great courage on Friday, what drove these disparate people to act as a team? A case can surely be made that rational self interest consisting of the desire to not lose their lives was the prime motivation and there may be some evidence to merit to this conclusion abstractly, however, I think such thought misses the deeper, larger issue. Human beings naturally self-sacrifice to help others in need and personal considerations rarely figures in to the equation. In the context of human society we're actually compelled to by our own understanding of each others basic worth as people rather than buffeted by egotistical self aggrandizement. This point alone demonstrates that such self-sacrifice does in fact carry a reward well beyond personal or individual desires; it sustains us as societies and as a species. Rational self-interest by its mere wording implies cold deduction and self centered logic rather than emotional attachment to others; in fact such attachment to objectivism is both weak and immoral.
Mental conditioning in America is becoming predicated ever more toward emphasizing the good of the self alone and "looking out for number 1". It is this conditioning that I think is the real rot in American society; families and communities no longer exist; everyone is an individual commodity to be bought and sold. Fundamentalist capitalism and objectivism fit this perception like a glove and their continued primacy in "Conservative Christian" morality along with social conservatism and consumerism which places a price on what's considered the REAL worth of a human being: wealth. These ideals will continue to diminish this society over time. In fact, it's become so endemic that even the mere suggestion of a compulsion to serving others is greeted by misinterpretation and by reactionary philosophical hard-liners as collectivism.
Of course, if as a people we did abandon such service entirely the question would be: who'll want to serve in the military, the police, nursing or teaching or any other thankless career in which service and taking care of others outweighs pay and personal acclaim? With a constant and ever-dangling carrot of personal rewards (which would render such services TOO expensive and would require tax increases; objectivists wholly oppose such measures) these important service would go cease and our society would crumble; thus the belief of individualists that service should only be voluntary and based upon selfish considerations does in this way expose the major flaw in their philosophy: self-sacrifice and selfless behavior. This also view also harms capitalism itself; capitalism to really function must be tempered by human empathy and the idea that we're all equals who belong to a community. The objectivist notion of each of us embodying a "country of one" can only lead to harm if it is replicated on a mass scale. The collapse of French Feudalism provides a final and lasting testament to the logic that moral principles such as cooperation and community ethically succeed outweigh notions that selfishness and greed can succeed as a pervading ethos
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Security Tightens on World Airports and Dick Cheney is STILL a Douchebag
After a Nigerian man failed to detonate a suspected incendiary device upon an Airbus plane flying over Detroit on Friday, the world decided to ramp up security. This was by no means an irrational decision or wrong, but calling such a terrorist attack so soon before the facts arrive? Some may not know it, or even understand it, but the United States is still politically in trouble with much of the world. Bush's "War on Terror" sapped nearly all of the good will the world felt toward the United States in the wake of September 11th primarily based upon two issues: the highly suspect invasion of Iraq and torture of detainees at Guantanamo Bay. As a disclaimer I'm not saying this tragically young man didn't have terroristic motives toward this plane, but what I am saying is reactionary action to "look tough" without considering the implications of said action is doomed to failure and loss of face.
Dick (has there ever been a more aprapous name for him?) Cheney a while back accused President Obama of "dithering" with the amount of time he was taking to decide which course to take in Afghanistan and frankly I thought the charge was typical of this slimy "five deferments" barnacle. I guess by his own definition Dick Cheney "dithered" and then "cut and ran" from Vietnam. I think the amount of time taken was appropriate to such a big decision not to be rendered lightly and "from the hip" as occurred with many of Bush's worst decisions. I do disagree strongly with what was decided: after eight years of ignoring Afghanistan suddenly we're going to "fix" the situation. There is no precedent for this kind of action actually working and with our track record in Iraq the rhetoric of us being able to do anything we please even when that choice is outside of practical sense has largely dissipated.
For the sake of full disclosure, I was glad to see a welcome change in Bush in 2006 when he apparently "dithered" (only it wasn't called dithering back then; it was "strong and decisive"; Republicans are too hilarious) with his decision over what the course forward with Iraq should be (even if his decision essentially sucked). The mere fact that he just took time to consider his choice after so many reactionary and bad decisions was a breath of fresh air from a stale administration. Cheney's way of thinking ended for Bush in 2006 with the defeat of the GOP majorities in the House and Senate; why anyone aside from mustachioed John Bolton (who seems to want sexy time with the Dick) would still believe that this guy's opinion carries any weight is beyond me. In fact I’d submit the right decision is the one Dick Cheney opposes; his sycophants won’t admit it but he is at least 70% of the reason why the Bush Administration is so reviled and Republicans were destroyed in 2006 and 2008.
That being said, the US is still in hot water with much of the world and going from deliberation and smart action to reactionary emotionalism has never served us well. Major Hassan wasn't for instance a terrorist by definition; his crime was mass murder and should be treated as such. The tried and true right wing method of labeling every crime anyone with a name like "Mohammed" commits as terrorism only makes the charge lose it's potency. In fact people become intellectually and emotionally detached from real terrorism and thus don't react in a timely manner. The effect is similar to the news media always focusing on violent crime and horrible acts which causes over time the loss of impact those acts have on the "normal populace" to take action.
Again, I'm not saying the labeling of this man as a terrorist is wrong or misguided; I'm only saying the evidence since 2001 suggests a slightly cautious mindset of "look before you leap". Remember, Bush once convinced many Americans to support war with Iraq by exploiting fears of terrorism, death and annihilation after 9/11. This rhetoric was especially galling since the Bush Administration apparently knew beforehand that Iraq had little to nothing to do with what occurred that horrible day. The last eight years are perfectly allegorical of why the US needs to "dither" more and react in anger and fear a lot less.
Dick (has there ever been a more aprapous name for him?) Cheney a while back accused President Obama of "dithering" with the amount of time he was taking to decide which course to take in Afghanistan and frankly I thought the charge was typical of this slimy "five deferments" barnacle. I guess by his own definition Dick Cheney "dithered" and then "cut and ran" from Vietnam. I think the amount of time taken was appropriate to such a big decision not to be rendered lightly and "from the hip" as occurred with many of Bush's worst decisions. I do disagree strongly with what was decided: after eight years of ignoring Afghanistan suddenly we're going to "fix" the situation. There is no precedent for this kind of action actually working and with our track record in Iraq the rhetoric of us being able to do anything we please even when that choice is outside of practical sense has largely dissipated.
For the sake of full disclosure, I was glad to see a welcome change in Bush in 2006 when he apparently "dithered" (only it wasn't called dithering back then; it was "strong and decisive"; Republicans are too hilarious) with his decision over what the course forward with Iraq should be (even if his decision essentially sucked). The mere fact that he just took time to consider his choice after so many reactionary and bad decisions was a breath of fresh air from a stale administration. Cheney's way of thinking ended for Bush in 2006 with the defeat of the GOP majorities in the House and Senate; why anyone aside from mustachioed John Bolton (who seems to want sexy time with the Dick) would still believe that this guy's opinion carries any weight is beyond me. In fact I’d submit the right decision is the one Dick Cheney opposes; his sycophants won’t admit it but he is at least 70% of the reason why the Bush Administration is so reviled and Republicans were destroyed in 2006 and 2008.
That being said, the US is still in hot water with much of the world and going from deliberation and smart action to reactionary emotionalism has never served us well. Major Hassan wasn't for instance a terrorist by definition; his crime was mass murder and should be treated as such. The tried and true right wing method of labeling every crime anyone with a name like "Mohammed" commits as terrorism only makes the charge lose it's potency. In fact people become intellectually and emotionally detached from real terrorism and thus don't react in a timely manner. The effect is similar to the news media always focusing on violent crime and horrible acts which causes over time the loss of impact those acts have on the "normal populace" to take action.
Again, I'm not saying the labeling of this man as a terrorist is wrong or misguided; I'm only saying the evidence since 2001 suggests a slightly cautious mindset of "look before you leap". Remember, Bush once convinced many Americans to support war with Iraq by exploiting fears of terrorism, death and annihilation after 9/11. This rhetoric was especially galling since the Bush Administration apparently knew beforehand that Iraq had little to nothing to do with what occurred that horrible day. The last eight years are perfectly allegorical of why the US needs to "dither" more and react in anger and fear a lot less.
Monday, December 21, 2009
Edward Abbey
To kick off my new section in which I select various authors, books, films, philosophies and music to discuss I'd like to select a personal favorite and hero of mine: Edward Abbey. Ed Abbey was known throughout his life as an extremist; for this he was dually grateful. But what Ed Abbey contributed to literature and environmentalist went well beyond his legendary truculence and cynicism. Ed Abbey in addition was a very talented and original author. From his non-fiction works such as the seminal "Desert Solitaire" to "The Journey Home" Ed Abbey mixed ruminations on politics, religion and of course the environment.
Ed Abbey wasn't the kind of environmentalist seen today: tough, austere, in-your-face and sometimes grating; in fact he was a throwback. Considered by some to be the modern equivalent of Henry David Thoreau, Abbey was a doctorate in psychology and mixed in many humorous quotes on the subject. Ed Abbey also wrote some interesting works of fiction with his most famous work "The Monkey Wrench Gang" landing him into the hearts of many Westerners as well as in the files of the FBI. He was uncompromising in style and principle, Ed even beat the shit out of his own pickup truck to remove the comforts and trappings of the automobile. He really walked the walk; in fact when he died he asked to be placed into his sleeping bag, carted in the back of a truck, burned and sprinkled over the nature he so loved.
So while being labeled a fan of his work and parts of his mission at one point would get one labeled, Abbey resisted being grouped into any "ism"; he disliked them all. So as this, the 20th year anniversary of his death comes to a close I'd like anyone who reads this to remember the man and possibly, read a bit of what he wrote.
Ed Abbey wasn't the kind of environmentalist seen today: tough, austere, in-your-face and sometimes grating; in fact he was a throwback. Considered by some to be the modern equivalent of Henry David Thoreau, Abbey was a doctorate in psychology and mixed in many humorous quotes on the subject. Ed Abbey also wrote some interesting works of fiction with his most famous work "The Monkey Wrench Gang" landing him into the hearts of many Westerners as well as in the files of the FBI. He was uncompromising in style and principle, Ed even beat the shit out of his own pickup truck to remove the comforts and trappings of the automobile. He really walked the walk; in fact when he died he asked to be placed into his sleeping bag, carted in the back of a truck, burned and sprinkled over the nature he so loved.
So while being labeled a fan of his work and parts of his mission at one point would get one labeled, Abbey resisted being grouped into any "ism"; he disliked them all. So as this, the 20th year anniversary of his death comes to a close I'd like anyone who reads this to remember the man and possibly, read a bit of what he wrote.
New Section....
Hello,
As I've been trying to decide ways in which I could differentiate myself from other political blogs I hit upon an idea...."why not be educational as well as opinionated?" So I decided that, rather than just compose vulgar rants about the various and sundry corrupt assholes in leadership I could also talk about authors, books, films and philosophy that I think are important literal and cultural consumption for any thinking person. Many of these pieces will be those I've already read or seen but I am also open minded to new experiences. So while I'll employ plenty of articles stressing the lies and misinformation from the vulgarians and the preposterous venture we call society, I'll also try to add some distinct flavor. Anyone who reads this and in the future who has suggestions for books and films which are enriching, I'd love to read them.
As I've been trying to decide ways in which I could differentiate myself from other political blogs I hit upon an idea...."why not be educational as well as opinionated?" So I decided that, rather than just compose vulgar rants about the various and sundry corrupt assholes in leadership I could also talk about authors, books, films and philosophy that I think are important literal and cultural consumption for any thinking person. Many of these pieces will be those I've already read or seen but I am also open minded to new experiences. So while I'll employ plenty of articles stressing the lies and misinformation from the vulgarians and the preposterous venture we call society, I'll also try to add some distinct flavor. Anyone who reads this and in the future who has suggestions for books and films which are enriching, I'd love to read them.
The Torturer, the Prize and the Apocalypse
Human Events has gained a hard earned reputation as being one of the more loopy publications on the Right. With any such reputation the organization in question must always seek to outdo themselves by upping the ante to maintain their credibility with the teh crazy. The editors of Human Events must have been thinking to themselves "Our rag hasn't gotten any attention or attacks by the thinking populace for quite a long while, what are we to do?" After fellating John Bolton, mustachioed legend of batshit insanity they came upon a plan: "Let's name someone SO objectionable even our side by and large doesn't like him". Who could this masked asshole be? this pungent promulgation of excrement culled from diseased and mutated pond scum? Then everyone knew just who...and the fellatio concluded.
Yes, torturing bag of hog vomit Dick Cheney is the Conservative Of the Year!
Now why in God's name would anyone aside from the American Nazi Party (neocons) and Halliburton give Cheney an award? Was he named for shooting his attorney lickspittle in the face and then going inside and eating rather than follow his "friend" to the hospital? "Well, maybe" the staff thought."..nahh, too evil". Was he named for torturing countless detainees in secret prisons, many of whom were never charged with any crimes? "Yes and that does give me a hard-on" the staff says. Was he named for being the man on point of the WMD lies about Iraq? "Yes!, but that was 2003". Then was he named for outing the name of CIA Agent Valerie Plame in retribution for her husband calling his nuclear claims full of shit by presenting the facts? "Definitely but that's his legacy" the staff fretted. Finally, was he named for his secret "energy task force" meetings with greedy oil execs and others during which time carving up the oil reserves in the Middle East was NEVER discussed? "Oh god, oh god!"
Those were just a few of the things Dick Cheney did that any principled human would revile....yet Human Events thinks he's the shit, the sin qua non of America. Rather than face sensory overload of describing his career in and out of government (yes, he did horrible things as the completely unqualified CEO of Halliburton too) they chose instead to let the milk moustache worship him for his dishonest and brass testicles lies about Obama's foreign policy. Don't get me wrong, I'm deeply disappointed with what the President has done on foreign policy up to this point, but Dick Cheney lies and distorts like no tomorrow. Rather than take apart his verbose arguments point-by-point I'll just remind everyone that Dick Cheney has never done or said anything that was right, ever.
So as this award probably will set off the apocalypse as even god roils in disgust I'll go ahead and get my survival bunker dug, also.
Ugliness in Health Care Debate
Now this has gotten interesting hasn't it?
The Senate is debating one of the most publicized and griped about bills in a long while and keeping with the spirit of the season both the Democratic Party and the Republicans are attacking one another. Now anyone who isn't following this bill, it's garbage; complete garbage. If you liked how it felt being pounded by the health insurance companies before, hold onto your hats (and butts). Essentially the worst part of the bill and something I can now agree with some of those on the right (though for different reasons) is the personal mandate. This item would make sense were it not for Senator Aetna Joe Lieberman and Senator Cigna Ben Nelson demolishing anything resembling a government plan.
But this mandate minus a government plan is toxic, very toxic. I know the argument is one is mandated to carry insurance for their car, but you can choose not to own a car and ride GOVERNMENT transportation like a city bus or walk; you cannot choose not to have a body in need of care. Therefore, the comparison both intellectually and morally falls flat. As for the current debate, the Republicans are behaving like douche bags. I seem to remember they actually lost tremendously in 2008. To act like the American people embrace their brand of leadership is as delusional as a fat Italian guy in Speedos on Venice Beach thinking "I'm gonna get me a babe on this beach".
The Senate is debating one of the most publicized and griped about bills in a long while and keeping with the spirit of the season both the Democratic Party and the Republicans are attacking one another. Now anyone who isn't following this bill, it's garbage; complete garbage. If you liked how it felt being pounded by the health insurance companies before, hold onto your hats (and butts). Essentially the worst part of the bill and something I can now agree with some of those on the right (though for different reasons) is the personal mandate. This item would make sense were it not for Senator Aetna Joe Lieberman and Senator Cigna Ben Nelson demolishing anything resembling a government plan.
But this mandate minus a government plan is toxic, very toxic. I know the argument is one is mandated to carry insurance for their car, but you can choose not to own a car and ride GOVERNMENT transportation like a city bus or walk; you cannot choose not to have a body in need of care. Therefore, the comparison both intellectually and morally falls flat. As for the current debate, the Republicans are behaving like douche bags. I seem to remember they actually lost tremendously in 2008. To act like the American people embrace their brand of leadership is as delusional as a fat Italian guy in Speedos on Venice Beach thinking "I'm gonna get me a babe on this beach".
"Some suggested the special Nebraska considerations in the bill amounted to bribery and corruption"
Ya don't say? To try and pretend this sort of practice isn't common in modern politics and that any such "consideration" is bribery is similar to making the observation that there are flies on horseshit. This is standard operating procedure: Senator whines about bill, all of a sudden there are provisions in the bill benefiting that Senator's specific state. AMAZING! anyway, enough cynicism; if this situation ever devolved into a discussion about what constitutes bribery in Washington and what it does to legislation every single industry lobbyist and about 90% of the politicians would be indicted. This sort of pathetic display represents the "talk radio" mindset leaking into politics with myopia and amnesia to boot. Acrimony and anger, Senators can no longer be friends. Methinks this more has to do with who's paying the election and re-election bills than it concerns the hollow suits sitting on the benches.
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Tis the Season
I know as usual the defacto "War on Christmas" continues with heavy losses on both sides (like Bill O'Reilly's favorite loofah, pray for him). But I'd just like to say whatever silly greeting you like to use, Christmas is no longer religious. What's my evidence? well I'll begin by noting the pagan symbols present.
The Christmas Tree: a pagan symbol from the Celts, trees such as these didn't even grow in Jerusalem. Lights on the tree were also part of the pagan tradition, which ended with burning the tree at festival's end.
The Gift-Giving: Oh this has pagan written all over it. Seriously, what does giving children some cheap plastic crap in a gaudy box have to do with Jesus' birth? even the date is speculative as we don't know when HE was born.
If we were to indeed celebrate Christmas we'd celebrate it not as an orgy of consumerism (this is the REAL TRADITION the culture warriors desperately seek to maintain) but as an absentee birthday. All of your relatives would get together, bake a cake, annoy each other, present gifts to the holy spirit, eat, fight and then go home. The tradition of Christmas would indeed be themed by togetherness and commonality of caring for one another, not by Little Johnny getting a Wii. So I submit as proof, who can remember Christmas after it passes? The memory lasts for a time and fades away just like any other insignificant day. Make this holiday memorable not for what you buy or what you receive but for how you and yours treat one another. Because life is a series of moments and the brain only keeps vivid the ones that affect it the most. And if "Peace on Earth" really meant anything, we'd do something about ending senseless and stupid wars (yes President Obama, that one's for you). Food for thought.
The Christmas Tree: a pagan symbol from the Celts, trees such as these didn't even grow in Jerusalem. Lights on the tree were also part of the pagan tradition, which ended with burning the tree at festival's end.
The Gift-Giving: Oh this has pagan written all over it. Seriously, what does giving children some cheap plastic crap in a gaudy box have to do with Jesus' birth? even the date is speculative as we don't know when HE was born.
If we were to indeed celebrate Christmas we'd celebrate it not as an orgy of consumerism (this is the REAL TRADITION the culture warriors desperately seek to maintain) but as an absentee birthday. All of your relatives would get together, bake a cake, annoy each other, present gifts to the holy spirit, eat, fight and then go home. The tradition of Christmas would indeed be themed by togetherness and commonality of caring for one another, not by Little Johnny getting a Wii. So I submit as proof, who can remember Christmas after it passes? The memory lasts for a time and fades away just like any other insignificant day. Make this holiday memorable not for what you buy or what you receive but for how you and yours treat one another. Because life is a series of moments and the brain only keeps vivid the ones that affect it the most. And if "Peace on Earth" really meant anything, we'd do something about ending senseless and stupid wars (yes President Obama, that one's for you). Food for thought.
They're Back!!!!
So, does anyone want to argue that the evidence doesn't suggest the Republican Party is completely off the rails? I mean, the guys who brought us Reaganism, Bushism and the even more objectionable ugh, Palinism could easily be argued to lack scruples, but this is just ridiculous. The John Birch Society is once again in bed with the GOP....stop and let that sink in...the John Birch Society...
A short history says the JBS was formed in the 1950's as a completely batshit-insane anti-communist group founded by Robert Welch. Ya know, the guy who called Eisenhower a commie...After the GOP ostracized them in the 1960's with a bitch slap of epic proportions they slipped mostly into obscurity with the exception of Ron Paul. As for today the equivalent of a political chemical unbalance has allowed them to return. If the recent development of the Republican Party embracing a group of gun-toting, white, mostly Southern teabaggers (Dick's Armey) was any indication of things to come this development is prescient. Oh sure the JBS has attempted to SOMEWHAT back away from their past as a bunch of racist, anti-Semitic WASPy twats; the lessons of their history remain. I guess Obama really has turned the Right into a crazed frenzy, or maybe they've just gone off their meds for too long.
Anyway, this shouldn't come as a huge surprise. Sarah Palin and Ron Paul both are known supporters of the JBS and god knows how many of those other groups on the fringe of the fringe will be next.
A short history says the JBS was formed in the 1950's as a completely batshit-insane anti-communist group founded by Robert Welch. Ya know, the guy who called Eisenhower a commie...After the GOP ostracized them in the 1960's with a bitch slap of epic proportions they slipped mostly into obscurity with the exception of Ron Paul. As for today the equivalent of a political chemical unbalance has allowed them to return. If the recent development of the Republican Party embracing a group of gun-toting, white, mostly Southern teabaggers (Dick's Armey) was any indication of things to come this development is prescient. Oh sure the JBS has attempted to SOMEWHAT back away from their past as a bunch of racist, anti-Semitic WASPy twats; the lessons of their history remain. I guess Obama really has turned the Right into a crazed frenzy, or maybe they've just gone off their meds for too long.
Anyway, this shouldn't come as a huge surprise. Sarah Palin and Ron Paul both are known supporters of the JBS and god knows how many of those other groups on the fringe of the fringe will be next.
http://www.cpac.org/sponsors.html
Anyone interested:
Inaugural Post
Hello,
This blog shall be a magnum opus...
First off, I'd like to thank anyone who reads this now or in the future and chooses to share their thoughts with me and others on the issues. This is my first blog post on my first blog so if you can hear an audible noise that's my cherry popping. I intend to write this blog with a sort of unconventional convention....let me explain what I mean. I am a principled left winger and therefore am free of partisan hackery; in short I'll blast the Democratic Party quite often but don't confuse me with a Republican, my knuckles aren't scabby. Full disclosure I did vote for and support Obama against the stereotypical get-off-my-lawn insane old guy McNasty. Oh and Palin...let's just say she can see Russia from her house and that's when she's lucid. The Democratic Party has gone from the salad days of tough, principled leaders like FDR and RFK (though he never reigned) to "wolves in sheep's clothing" like President William Jefferson Clinton. The rightward tilt of some in the party (Lieberman I-Aetna, Nelson D-are you serious?) and others have taken what I think is a majority of well intentioned progressives and liberals, dipped them in corporate excrement and left them hung out to dry. Oh great, we just get finished running off Mussolini's illegitimate offspring in Cheney and now we get more of the same? say it ain't so, liberals. Okay, I apologize for the tangent (but not the poisoned bag of dicks heading Lieberman's way heh, heh). I'll link to other blogs as soon as possible though a busy schedule sometimes precludes me from always coming current. In spite of my sour grapes towards a few select politicians I would like to make as a mission statement an intelligent and semi-coherent analysis of the issues of the day and maybe a blast or two at another blog as I read them. Anyone who comments directly to me will get a post back either expressing my thanks for bringing to my attention any new detail or development or a fuck you if deserved. That's pretty much it, enjoy the blog!
This blog shall be a magnum opus...
First off, I'd like to thank anyone who reads this now or in the future and chooses to share their thoughts with me and others on the issues. This is my first blog post on my first blog so if you can hear an audible noise that's my cherry popping. I intend to write this blog with a sort of unconventional convention....let me explain what I mean. I am a principled left winger and therefore am free of partisan hackery; in short I'll blast the Democratic Party quite often but don't confuse me with a Republican, my knuckles aren't scabby. Full disclosure I did vote for and support Obama against the stereotypical get-off-my-lawn insane old guy McNasty. Oh and Palin...let's just say she can see Russia from her house and that's when she's lucid. The Democratic Party has gone from the salad days of tough, principled leaders like FDR and RFK (though he never reigned) to "wolves in sheep's clothing" like President William Jefferson Clinton. The rightward tilt of some in the party (Lieberman I-Aetna, Nelson D-are you serious?) and others have taken what I think is a majority of well intentioned progressives and liberals, dipped them in corporate excrement and left them hung out to dry. Oh great, we just get finished running off Mussolini's illegitimate offspring in Cheney and now we get more of the same? say it ain't so, liberals. Okay, I apologize for the tangent (but not the poisoned bag of dicks heading Lieberman's way heh, heh). I'll link to other blogs as soon as possible though a busy schedule sometimes precludes me from always coming current. In spite of my sour grapes towards a few select politicians I would like to make as a mission statement an intelligent and semi-coherent analysis of the issues of the day and maybe a blast or two at another blog as I read them. Anyone who comments directly to me will get a post back either expressing my thanks for bringing to my attention any new detail or development or a fuck you if deserved. That's pretty much it, enjoy the blog!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)