<$BlogRSDUrl$>

picture me giving a damn...

1.30.2004

 
hey, what's grosser than gross? this!

 
doves caught in an oil slick...

 
hey, someone remind me: is it 2004? or 1904?
buzzword: freaks!

1.29.2004

 
blair kicks the bbc's ass. those needledicks should've known better than to fuck with him...

 
sully has some fucking amazing quotes of the day on his site and i'm posting them here:
QUOTE OF THE DAY I: "My friend said, 'I'm for the UN and international law, and I think you've become a traitor to the left. A neocon!'
I said, 'I'm for overthrowing tyrants, and since when did overthrowing fascism become treason to the left?'
'But isn't George Bush himself a fascist, more or less? I mean-admit it!'
My own eyes widened. 'You haven't the foggiest idea what fascism is,' I said. 'I always figured that a keen awareness of extreme oppression was the deepest trait of a left-wing heart. Mass graves, three hundred thousand missing Iraqis, a population crushed by thirty-five years of Baathist boots stomping on their faces-that is what fascism means! And you think that a few corrupt insider contracts with Bush's cronies at Halliburton and a bit of retrograde Bible-thumping and Bush's ridiculous tax cuts and his bonanzas for the super-rich are indistinguishable from that?-indistinguishable from fascism? From a politics of slaughter? Leftism is supposed to be a reality principle. Leftism is supposed to embody an ability to take in the big picture. The traitor to the left is you, my friend...'" - Paul Berman, fighting for sanity, in Dissent.

QUOTE OF THE DAY II: "In a world where we know others are seeking WMD, the likelihood at some point in the future of a seller and a buyer meeting up would have made [Iraq] a far more dangerous country than even we anticipated with what may turn out not to be a fully accurate estimate," - David Kay, honest hawk.

QUOTE FOR THE DAY III: "Criticising the conduct of US and British policy towards Iraq is legitimate, as is disquiet about the effectiveness of the two countries' intelligence operations. But impugning the honourable motives of those who sought to defend their countries, by dealing with a threat they believed they could not ignore, is not." - The Financial Times, yesterday.

 
this morning while getting ready for work (in my usual pre-work waking haze, putting my shirt on backwards, kicking over a glass of oj on the floor) i saw a little segment on cnn regarding the Innocence Project, an organization founded by barry scheck and peter neufeld that uses dna testing to try to free the wrongfully convicted. i think it's a noble cause and because of them 140 people have been exonerated of committing serious, usually horrible, crimes. i've always found it maddening that many on the right (well, maybe it's not a political thing, but it seems like most of them are right wing leaning), so called "victim advocates", seem personally affronted by groups like this (as they are with anti-death penalty arguments). they seem to think that freeing innocent people is somehow antithetical to victims' rights when that is obviously not the case. truly rational, compassionate individuals understand the most fundamental tenet of crime and punishment: that it is infinitely worse to convict and punish someone wrongfully than it is to have a guilty person go free of a crime they committed. way too many people, over the years, have been wrongfully convicted- either because of racism, other types of prejudicial attitude, incompetence, sheer malice, or just bad luck. one of the beautiful developments in the dazzling growth of science has been the advent of dna testing in making convictions more certain, and overturning egregious ones, in our far-from-perfect criminal justice system.

anyway, i've put a permalink to the innocence project over there to the right. check 'em out.

1.27.2004

 
fowl mouth: churchill's parrot

1.26.2004

 
miller time

 
dudes. holy fucking shit. is this cnn or is it the onion?!?!! a wily co-worker of mine pointed this out to me and i about choked on my coffee...

which reminds me of something. a couple of weeks ago a friend and i tried to rent breakin 2: electric boogaloo (the classic breakdancing movie of all freakin time) with no luck. one blockbuster employee actually sniffed and said, and i quote, "we don't carry movies like that". fucking blockbuster dillhole. if u haven't seen this definitive 80s movie yet, u don't know what u're missing. u really really don't. my goofy friend greg actually saw it in the movie theater with his mom and his aunt when it first came out. that's gotta be a memory worth cherishing forever...

 
and i believe tony...

 
david rees has a new strip, adventures of confessions of saint augustine bear , which looks promising, me thinks. it takes a very rare and giddily anarchic sense of humor to appreciate rees in all his clipart trashculture glory; if u happen to have that sense of humor and are female, and hot, let us get married. now.

1.23.2004

 
uh oh, this topic is rearing its ugly head again. yech...

 
so, legal memorandom has just threatened to "sue the pants off me and leave me wretched and penniless in the gutter" for misrepresenting him. the last joke wasn't his- it's a pc-fied version of a joke i got from europundits. same difference.
legal memorandom drives a volvo and eats mayonnaise with his french fries.

 
Legal memorandom's horribly misogynist joke of the day:
What do u say to a woman with two black eyes?
Nothing! You've already told her twice!

 
commonsense & wonder's quote of the day:
"One thing I learned from this election is that you don't have to be as smart as I thought you did to be a doctor or a general."
classic dennis miller, whose new show will begin monday nite on cnbc. i'll definitely be watching...

1.20.2004

 
overheard (and perhaps oversaid) today at work: "man, someone smells like baloney..."

1.19.2004

 
this is funny. maybe not ha ha funny, nor hee hee hee funny, but more like shake your head, purse your lips, roll your eyes, and mutter "sweet jesus" under your breath funny.

Slavery

While the UN organizes commissions to excoriate the US and Britain for their involvement with slavery more than a century and a half ago, there is shockingly little said or done about its current practice. Joseph Farah examines the situation.

Millions of women, children and men are enslaved around the world today, yet the United Nations is declaring 2004 the year to remember the abuses of the past.

Girls as young as five are trafficked into domestic work in West Africa. Families are forced to work as bonded slaves in South Asia. Women are used as chattel in Europe's sex industry.

Slavery is shockingly common in the world today: in homes, factories, farms and brothels. The most common form is bonded servitude, or holding people to work off debts with stratospheric interest rates. One widely held estimate puts the number of people in slavery at 27 million. The U.S. CIA estimates that up to 900,000 people are sold across international borders each year. The trade is illegal, and officially condemned, throughout the world. Yet it flourishes, earning perhaps $7 billion a year for its perpetrators.

The U.S. Department of State lists 72 nations -- including Brazil, China and the Czech Republic -- that aid slavery or are home to it. The five countries below are singled out as "countries whose governments do not fully comply with the minimum standards [to eliminate trafficking in humans] and are not making significant efforts to do so":

• Burma: Internal factory work and prostitution; export to the Asian sex trade.

• Cuba: Forced labor; sexual exploitation connected with the government-run tourism industry.

• Liberia: Forcible conscription in the military as laborers, soldiers and sex slaves.

• North Korea: Forced labor; export of brides to China.

• Sudan: Sex slaves, domestic workers, laborers and soldiers.

Most slaves in the world today are justified – even encouraged – by radical Islam.

Little is studied or said about the trade, the opposite being true of slave trade directed toward the Americas. The last general assembly of the African Catholic bishops conferences took place in Dakar in October 2003, where a session was dedicated to the issue, being introduced by statements such as the following:

“Analyses of this issue have been prohibited at length. One cause of the paralysis of this historical conscience has been the attitude of many intellectuals and Muslim rulers regarding the trans-Saharan trade. For reasons of religious sensitivity they don’t want to properly admit to Arab and Islamic responsibility in this drama, whose evil effects still continue. Today in the Arab world the word ‘black’ simply means ‘slave.’ The tracks of the trans-Saharan trade have formed geographic roads leading to Maghreb and the Middle East.”

u know, the fact that we had legalized slavery in this country a mere 140 years ago still gets to me; only a halfcentury before my beloved grandpappy (who is still alive) was born human beings bought and sold other human beings, committed vicious and unspeakable crimes against these human beings, and got away with it because it was legal to do so in this very country. but the u.s. finally rid itself of such a vile institution and we've moved ever-so-slowly on. obviously, we can't forget these past sins. but do we need to focus on them, do we need the u.n. to declare 2004 the year to remember past atrocities, when we have so many fresh and ongoing atrocities for the u.n., for the world, to remember, to focus on and to do something about?

from commonsense & wonder

 
i'm pilfering this straight from andrew sullivan cuz i think it's a refreshing and provocative antidote to all the gooey sentimentality and banality going on with this holiday (which holds true for pretty much all holidays).
THOUGHT FOR MLK DAY: "To be called an Uncle Tom is an honor. Like our foundational black thinkers, Uncle Tom is often invoked but rarely read. He is not who the Politburo says he is. He was a moral, religious man of dignity and duty who accepted his lot as a slave because he had no choice yet by his behavior transcended it. He was an ancestor of whom to be proud; how has it been overlooked that he chose torture and death rather than inform on two sexually abused female runaways? To follow the Politburo's anti-intellectual, perverse construction to its logical conclusion, blacks should have cultivated no manners, created no art, pursued no knowledge, expended only the minimum energy at their tasks, and avoided any kindness or heroism that could not have been confined to the black community. They should have actually been subhuman." - Debra Dickerson, from her new, stimulating book, "The End of Blackness."

1.16.2004

 
john kerry, u did it again! u are SO awesome! from chicago boyz:
Foot In Mouth Disease Season

Senator John Kerry, D-MA, on Meet The Press this morning :
"They failed in Afghanistan, to capture Saddam Hussein in Tora-Bora."

It's OK, John. It turned out he was in that other country called Iraq and we got him now. No worries, mate. Relax. Breathe. It will all be over soon.

(Via Instapundit)
kerry fucking rules, dudes. first, his precious comment on the triple amputee posted earlier this week, and now this. i can't believe he doesn't have a commanding lead over those other fuckstains running for the democratic nomination...

1.15.2004

 
great great great little ditty from europundits:
When those boring antiwar guys ask you again about the missing WMDs, here’s the answer for them :

How are we supposed to find hidden and buried WMDs in Iraq if, wherever one digs there, we just keep finding mass graves?

that's it in a fucking nutshell. to semi-quote lou reed and the velvet underground, what about "all the dead bodies piled up in mounds?" well?

 
funny funny get your war on...Mars. altho many times i don't agree with david rees politically and altho he sometimes coasts and puts out mediocre stuff, every now and then, when u least expect it, he kicks out the hilarious genius shit and totally redeems himself. props...

and, despite loving this latest comic strip, i'm all for mars exploration! only severe isolationists, the non-imaginitive, and the hopelessly dour have a problem with space travel and exploration (yes, it's expensive! duh!). and we're all familiar with these people. they're the ones that thought and acted like iraq was on a different planet, indeed a different solar system, and wanted nothing to do with it. thank god they don't lead; let them subsist in the perpetual peanut gallery of resentment and ineffectualness...

1.14.2004

 
slate is running a currently ongoing weeklong discussion, Liberal Hawks Reconsider the Iraq War, between thomas friedman, christopher hitchens, paul berman, fareed zakaria and other erudite, highprofile "liberal hawks", with interesting results. i think this is the perfect time to revisit the question of the u.s. invasion of iraq and honestly evaluate (and re-evaluate) the justifications, the promoted "reasons", prior expectations and hopes, and the results so far. far from getting unified, cut-and-dried and rote answers here, we get a fleshed-out, provocative and complex dialogue. i think. damn, if i only had time to read it fully and be able to comment on it with my patented supersexy flair! soon! things shall settle down in kaisercrackland and all will be well, brothers and sisters.

anyway, start with monday's discussion and continue onwards. not only is it good, it's good for u...

 
i want to thank eye on the left for listing me on their wonderful blog. i've been culling from them often as of late and was thrilled to see myself noticed by them. check their great site out...

1.12.2004

 
from my bazooka joe wrapper:
bazooka joe: what are you fishing for, pesty?
pesty: whales!
bazooka joe: whales? there are no whales in that pond!
pesty: there are no fish either. so i might as well fish for whales!
bazooka joe looks appropriately befuddled


hee-frickin'-larious!!!

 
hmmmmm (pt. ii)...

 
i bet y'all didn't know this, but legal memorandom aka cap sensibl aka master blogger/coder/exaggerator happens to have an exceedingly mindless job. i'm somehow reminded of the fact every single day...

 
go avs! alex tanguay will kick your ass; quietly...

 
omigod. andrew sullivan's UNFORTUNATE QUOTE OF THE DAY:
"And, Tim, you can hear the advertisements now; so can I. We saw what they did to challenge the patriotism of Max Cleland, a triple amputee, a man who left three of his limbs on the ground in Vietnam. They challenged his patriotism. His regret is he didn’t stand up and fight back." - John Kerry, Meet The Press.
ouch. when i read this, i winced so hard i think i sprained an eyelid. seriously.

1.09.2004

 
hmmmmm...

 
my charming misogynist joke of the day:

Q: Why is it called PMS?
A: Because Mad Cow Disease was already taken.

 
this is a cool story, especially for those who adore emily dickinson, as i do...

via the incomparable arts & literature daily

1.08.2004

 
the new republic endorses joe lieberman, with some pretty damn good reasons:
... The years since January 2001 have been among the worst in the contemporary history of the Democratic Party. To be sure, the party has suffered from events beyond its control. Since September 11, 2001, George W. Bush has ruthlessly turned the country's fear and rage into a wedge issue, sacrificing national unity but recreating the visceral flag-politics of the 1980s. But the Democratic Party has also buried itself. In late 2002, with the Bush administration threatening preemptive war in Iraq, Democratic strategists developed a remarkable plan for the midterm elections: Ignore national security. One year after the bloodiest foreign attack on U.S. soil, and on the eve of one of the most audacious foreign policy gambles in U.S. history, Democratic candidates campaigned on the sluggish economy and prescription drugs. And Bush and Karl Rove ripped them to shreds.

From that humiliation, the Howard Dean revolt was born. In early 2003, the former Vermont governor began captivating the Democratic base with his thunderous attacks on Washington Democrats. But, in their righteousness, Dean and his supporters have embraced an analysis potentially even more damaging than that of the party leaders they seek to depose. We are not speaking primarily about Dean's general-election prospects (though they are grim, and their potential consequences for the House and Senate even grimmer). The problem with Dean's vision of the Democratic Party is more than electoral; it is intellectual and moral. And the candidate who offers the clearest, bravest alternative is Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman.

Fundamentally, the Dean campaign equates Democratic support for the Iraq war with appeasement of President Bush. But the fight against Saddam Hussein falls within a hawkish liberal tradition that stretches through the Balkan wars, the Gulf war, and, indeed, the cold war itself. Lieberman is not the only candidate who stands in that tradition--Wesley Clark promoted it courageously in Kosovo, as did Richard Gephardt when he defied the polls to vote for $87 billion to rebuild Iraq. But Lieberman is its most steadfast advocate, not only in the current field but in the entire Democratic Party. In 1991, he broke with every other Northern Democrat in the Senate to support the Gulf war, then broke with George H.W. Bush when the former president allowed Saddam to slaughter tens of thousands of Iraqi Shia in the war's aftermath. In 1998, Lieberman joined with McCain to co-sponsor the Iraq Liberation Act, which committed the United States to regime change in Baghdad. And, in the 2000 campaign, when the younger Bush was still peddling neo-isolationism, it was Gore and Lieberman who insisted that the United States be prepared to use force to stop genocide and promote democracy.


yes, this is true. there is something very admirable about joe and his against-the-grain-of-his-party hawkishness in the foreign policy arena but there's also the super troubling fact that joe is pro-death penalty, way too pious for my tastes and lacks any sort of charisma whatsoever. if u could somehow meld his courage and integrity with the charm and progressiveness of john edwards then u might have an ideal candidate. but that's not gonna happen, obviously. not this time around. the democrats are fucked.

1.06.2004

 
check out this masturbating monkey. in trying to explain bush's popularity, he comes up with this brilliant analysis:
The answer, I'm afraid, is the factor that dare not speak its name. It's the factor that no one talks about. The pollsters don't ask it, the media don't report it, the voters don't discuss it.

I, however, will blare out its name so that at last people can address the issue and perhaps adopt strategies to overcome it.

It's the "Stupid factor," the S factor: Some people -- sometimes through no fault of their own -- are just not very bright.

It's not merely that some people are insufficiently intelligent to grasp the nuances of foreign policy, of constitutional law, of macroeconomics or of the variegated interplay of humans and the environment. These aren't the people I'm referring to. The people I'm referring to cannot understand the phenomenon of cause and effect. They're perplexed by issues comprising more than two sides. They don't have the wherewithal to expand the sources of their information. And above all -- far above all -- they don't think.
see, it's this sort of elitist, self-satisfied drivel that has alienated most of the decent, truly egalitarian and intellectual liberals from the american democratic party. the democratic party is hemorrhaging integrity and intellectual vitality primarily because of the attitudes of fucktards like this who, rather than own up to his astonishing deficits and the flaws of the political group he belongs to, would rather spew sour grapes. the democrats have steadily been getting their asses kicked for 40 years now and have taken a major whooping lately, to boot, and are in no position to criticize the intelligence of bush supporters. but i am in a position to point out the gaping inanities of a group of people who, less than a year ago, either wanted to appease saddam or just ignore what he was doing, after fretting over us going after the taliban in afghanistan; a pathetic group that includes the pompous blusterings of michael moore and jeanine garafolo, noam chomsky and his legion of lobotomized followers. it's the same mindset that fawned over stalin and mao tse tung and their murderous, monumentally blundering regimes and, i have no doubt, which will continue to celebrate vile philosophies as long as they have sufficient support in the debased and vacuous halls of american academia and the selfloathing, guilt-ridden neurotics who viscerally hate the freedom, and the power, that america stands for. sorry, mr. starkman, the retard contingent is safely enmeshed in your camp. it says that u were writing a guest column for the seattle post-intelligencer. u need to go back to sucking your mother's dick. u're a fucking joke.

molto grazie to eye on the left for the link.

 
2004...holy fucking shit

things are good. we were right all along, weren't we fellow pragmatists and true liberals? afghanistan, iraq, the economy and oh-so-much more. the bush doctrine trumps all others several times over. the neurotic chattering of the pseudolibs, poseurs and frauds, the cowards and the deniers, the nihilists and self-flagellators, the school of resentment and the school of do-nothings have seemed to recede to mere whimperings; with the occasional hoarse cackle reaching the ear. it's like 4 degrees outside but i'm feeling rather toasty right now. things are fucking great...

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours? Listed on Blogwise Weblog Commenting and Trackback by HaloScan.com