Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said yesterday that terrorists are "...actively manipulating the media in this country." He also mentioned that "They can lie with impunity."
Holy rabid dogshit. The irony is so colossal it's sublime. It actually goes beyond words.
Well, except for these:
-Karl Rove leaked the identity of Valerie Plame to the press in order to hamstring her husband, Joseph Wilson, who was a vocal critic of the Administration.
-After Bush "won" in 2004, all the talk was about how he got more votes than any other candidate in history. Few sources mentioned he was voted against more than any other candidate as well.
-The Bush Administration gave the Washington Post an exclusive story during John Roberts' confirmation hearings about how many of his previous government writings wouldn't be released for scrutiny. The Post had to promise not to contact Democrats to hear their side of the story.
-The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth's smear campaign against John Kerry was a totally fabricated charade. Experts and eye-witnesses across the board punched countless holes in their ridiculous claims. The media never registered it.
-Scott Ritter, a former senior weapons inspector, proclaimed loud and clear that Saddam did not have WMD's and the cause for war was bogus. The media published every comment in regards to his insanity, his treachery, his lies and his "defense" of Saddam Hussein. They never mentioned that he was completely fucking right.
-A correspondent for Ireland's national broadcasting service, Carole Coleman had her White House press credentials revoked after she asked Bush tough, honest questions about the worsening violence in Iraq. Questions the neutered watchdogs inside the Beltway would never ask.
-The news media gave us countless stories during the Terry Schiavo controversy about how "divided" our nation was, how much of a "furious debate" was going on. No one mentioned that the overwhelming majority in America believed her husband had final say.
-John Kerry's war record was viciously attacked, even after it was proven to be accurate and honest. The media never bothered to get to the bottom of Bush's missing years in the Air National Guard, nor was there any fuss made when he didn't release his entire record to be investigated.
-As Bush visited New Orleans over the last two days, the media very gently pointed out that some folks refute his claims of competently handling the Katrina disaster. Very few came right out and said that the facts and statistics entirely belie the notion that they did anything helpful. Fewer still pointed out that the Administration seemed to actively make the situation worse, especially if you happened to be black.
-The media made very little of the fact that Bush refused to speak to the NAACP for the past six years.
-In recent months, Bush has often travelled the country without a press plane in tow. By leaving the press at home, it ensures that his comments and actions at various fundraisers and social events attended by his rich, white brethren go completely unnoticed.
-Then, of course, there's the little matter of him stealing the election in 2000. The righteous anger the press displayed during Watergate and Bill Clinton's ridiculous impeachment was nowhere to be found. Nor were tenacity, willpower or investigative journalism.
All politicians lie. All Administrations manipulate the media. But for Rumsfeld to have the temerity to tell us that the terrorists are meddling with the facts is a new acme of arrogance. And a lot of people will believe him because they read it in the paper.
I don't think these guys respect my intelligence or opinion anymore.
Wake up and resist.
Tuesday, August 29, 2006
Monday, August 28, 2006
Terror for Breakfast
Ever since America woke up on September 11, 2001, we've been force fed daily doses of terror. The government and the media have ceaselessly prattled on about possible terrorist threats, likely terrorist targets and suspected terrorist activity without pointing to any actual terrorists. We've been made to pay attention to a threat level indicator, bizarrely colored and completely divorced from any generated data. How often have we seen some meaningless shade flash across the TV - TERROR LEVEL: ORANGE - without any reference to what contributed to said level? We are told of endless terrorist plots against our country, yet the government hasn't identified or uncovered a single one in the past six years. Bush keeps telling us that the war in Iraq is somehow part of the "War on Terror," but no one has ever been privy to a scrap of evidence that shows there is any truth to this assertion. The evidence we are overwhelmed with shows that Saddam Hussein terrorized his own people, could never have been a threat to the U.S., and had no part whatsoever in 9/11. Iraq was not a breeding ground for terrorists until we installed an ineffectual government in transparent pursuit of stability in a region that will never know it. I assume at some point will we actually have to ship them WMD's.
The majority of us now realize that there was no reason to invade Iraq, especially under the banner of fighting terror. More and more people are also waking up to the fact that our government, with the help of their pet media, are the real terrorists. That sounds like a radical statement, but consider: After 9/11, if American citizens had been completely cut off from the media, how long would we have felt terrorized? Without constant alerts and misinformation, without Fox News and hysterical Homeland Security briefings, would any of us have been this afraid for this long? Who is responsible for our fears in a country that has only suffered a handful of terrorist attacks in its history, and zero after 9/11?
The government. The media. Without their constant and inaccurate representation of a very low-level threat, we would have felt much more secure over the past few years. Of course we were scared after 9/11, and we had a right to be. There is absolutely no shame in the American reaction the days and months following the attacks. The shame falls on our leaders, and our media conglomerates for exploiting our fear long after it should have been put to bed. The Bush administration saw a way to maintain a profile of strength and leadership and the newspapers and TV channels said "Yes, Massah. We sho gonna help. You just tell us what you be needin."
Naturally, there are plenty of terrorists out there. Folks who truly have it in for us and would destroy our country if given the chance. While they have not been given the chance, they have been given further reason to hate us. The invasion of Iraq, unconditional support for Israel, refusals to even speak to Hamas or Hezbollah about their legitimate complaints; all these have served to strengthen foreign terrorists' resolve rather than shake it.
However, they remain a very unlikely potential threat right now. Not to say the situation isn't worsening every day, it certainly is. The overseas terrorist threat is going to have to be addressed after the miserable debacle in Iraq is abandoned and we can step back and survey the total damage. But right now the terrorists are already here. They hold public office and edit major newspapers. Obviously, we're not going to stop paying attention to the news. But we don't have to rely on the administration's crooked bullshit as trumpeted by our sensationalist, gleeful, fear-mongering media. It's easy to find news on the internet, whether it's international, untouched by our media (the BBC online), or reported by people concerned with facts and not spin (e.g. Media Matters, Media Channel, BuzzFlash, the Huffington Post, Consortium News).
Your government needs your help in the fight against terror. It needs you to ignore the New York Times and the Washington Post when they report baseless, amorphous threats. It needs you to become an informed and educated citizen, willing to work a little harder to get news untainted by its meddlings. It needs you to vote against its criminals and thugs draining our national finances, killing the poor and reinforcing the rich. It needs you to rail against its empty promises; expose its clumsy lies; destroy its strangling influence before Big Business and Big Brother eliminate you entirely.
Our government has terrorized us long enough. Our way of life, a way they claim to represent and defend, is something they will never be a part of. We're not all wealthy, white, privileged kids whose power and influence are cemented by a long line of wealthy, white, priveleged ancestors. We're Americans, struggling for health care and jobs that haven't been outsourced yet. We're Americans, striving to show our children that there are leaders that can be looked up to. We're Americans, smothered by low wages and resigned to poverty. We're Americans still shattered one year after Katrina, unhelped and forgotten. We're Americans told that the next nightmare 9/11 is right around the corner.
And yet...I'm around that corner. I'm looking at the street and it occurs to me that I'm pretty safe here. I'm pretty safe and I can be happy. You know why? Because I'm a fucking American. The government will bow to MY will, not the other way around.
You're an American, too. Don't let the bastards tell you it means something it doesn't. You were born from rebels, people who fought the government and drove it out. They installed a better system that gives you power and safeguards your freedoms. Two hundred thirty years later it looks like it's time to do some more overthrowing.
On September 11, 2001, we were the victims of a hideous terrorist attack. We will never forget it, but we won't let our government make us victims every day.
Wake up and resist.
The majority of us now realize that there was no reason to invade Iraq, especially under the banner of fighting terror. More and more people are also waking up to the fact that our government, with the help of their pet media, are the real terrorists. That sounds like a radical statement, but consider: After 9/11, if American citizens had been completely cut off from the media, how long would we have felt terrorized? Without constant alerts and misinformation, without Fox News and hysterical Homeland Security briefings, would any of us have been this afraid for this long? Who is responsible for our fears in a country that has only suffered a handful of terrorist attacks in its history, and zero after 9/11?
The government. The media. Without their constant and inaccurate representation of a very low-level threat, we would have felt much more secure over the past few years. Of course we were scared after 9/11, and we had a right to be. There is absolutely no shame in the American reaction the days and months following the attacks. The shame falls on our leaders, and our media conglomerates for exploiting our fear long after it should have been put to bed. The Bush administration saw a way to maintain a profile of strength and leadership and the newspapers and TV channels said "Yes, Massah. We sho gonna help. You just tell us what you be needin."
Naturally, there are plenty of terrorists out there. Folks who truly have it in for us and would destroy our country if given the chance. While they have not been given the chance, they have been given further reason to hate us. The invasion of Iraq, unconditional support for Israel, refusals to even speak to Hamas or Hezbollah about their legitimate complaints; all these have served to strengthen foreign terrorists' resolve rather than shake it.
However, they remain a very unlikely potential threat right now. Not to say the situation isn't worsening every day, it certainly is. The overseas terrorist threat is going to have to be addressed after the miserable debacle in Iraq is abandoned and we can step back and survey the total damage. But right now the terrorists are already here. They hold public office and edit major newspapers. Obviously, we're not going to stop paying attention to the news. But we don't have to rely on the administration's crooked bullshit as trumpeted by our sensationalist, gleeful, fear-mongering media. It's easy to find news on the internet, whether it's international, untouched by our media (the BBC online), or reported by people concerned with facts and not spin (e.g. Media Matters, Media Channel, BuzzFlash, the Huffington Post, Consortium News).
Your government needs your help in the fight against terror. It needs you to ignore the New York Times and the Washington Post when they report baseless, amorphous threats. It needs you to become an informed and educated citizen, willing to work a little harder to get news untainted by its meddlings. It needs you to vote against its criminals and thugs draining our national finances, killing the poor and reinforcing the rich. It needs you to rail against its empty promises; expose its clumsy lies; destroy its strangling influence before Big Business and Big Brother eliminate you entirely.
Our government has terrorized us long enough. Our way of life, a way they claim to represent and defend, is something they will never be a part of. We're not all wealthy, white, privileged kids whose power and influence are cemented by a long line of wealthy, white, priveleged ancestors. We're Americans, struggling for health care and jobs that haven't been outsourced yet. We're Americans, striving to show our children that there are leaders that can be looked up to. We're Americans, smothered by low wages and resigned to poverty. We're Americans still shattered one year after Katrina, unhelped and forgotten. We're Americans told that the next nightmare 9/11 is right around the corner.
And yet...I'm around that corner. I'm looking at the street and it occurs to me that I'm pretty safe here. I'm pretty safe and I can be happy. You know why? Because I'm a fucking American. The government will bow to MY will, not the other way around.
You're an American, too. Don't let the bastards tell you it means something it doesn't. You were born from rebels, people who fought the government and drove it out. They installed a better system that gives you power and safeguards your freedoms. Two hundred thirty years later it looks like it's time to do some more overthrowing.
On September 11, 2001, we were the victims of a hideous terrorist attack. We will never forget it, but we won't let our government make us victims every day.
Wake up and resist.
Monday, August 14, 2006
Glad Tidings
Good numbers today, folks. According to an AP poll, Bush's approval ratings have sunk to 33%, tying his all-time low. This is especially good news since, in the past, anything that cropped up relating to terrorism usually resulted in a boost for this jackass. Unaccountably, Bush's handling of terrorism has always been his strongest suit, producing his best numbers in polls.
The foiled terror plot in the UK has done absolutely nothing for him, however. (Assuming, of course, there actually was a plot. It all remains frustratingly vague, doesn't it?) His numbers haven't jumped up; quite the contrary, they have slipped to the aforementioned 33%. Americans are just sick of this guy. They know for a fact that he's a criminal, and those who can still deceive themselves that he's not are at least willing to admit that his policies are insalubrious, at best. The situation in Iraq is untenable, with constantly escalating violence and an explosive civil war, the seriousness of which has yet to be really addressed. Gas prices are crippling the nation while oil companies continue to rake in record profits. Afghanistan is sinking deeper into new conflict while Bush continues encouraging Israel's bellicose handling of its affairs.
It's got to stop, and the public is beginning to wake up to that. Last month, 20% of Americans said their congressional vote this fall would be, at least partially, to express their opposition to Bush. That number is now up to 29%. That means that nearly a third of the populace is willing to cast a vote for a Democrat simply to help oust the GOP's control of Congress. That's extremely welcome news, especially after Ned Lamont's victory over Joe Lieberman in Connecticut. It shows that wasn't an isolated event, and this trend could very well continue through midterms.
I myself still remain shocked at the public's recalcitrance to completely and overwhelmingly oppose Bush. The numbers are getting better (for those of us who like freedom and such) but they're still dismally low in a nation who has its nose rubbed in Executive arrogance and incompetence every day.
I don't have time to link you to all the sites or recommend all the books that prove my next assertions, but, believe me, the information is not hard to find. The Administration does nothing to cover its tracks, knowing it has nothing to fear from the media or the public. Help me prove them wrong.
Our children are dying because Bush has sent them to war under false pretenses. He is an abominable liar. While it's true that all politicians are liars, Bush is a gleeful, vicious prevaricator. He is surrounded by rich, white, elitist bastards who couldn't care less for your welfare. He is a right-wing, Christian fundamentalist and he's dedicated to turning our democracy into a theocracy. He's also a Rapture Christian, meaning he believes sometime very soon Jesus will come and lift the righteous to Heaven and leave the rest of us to languish on an evil, painful, no doubt smelly Earth. Despite this not being in the Bible, it's the reason Rapture Christians like him have no regard for the environment. Why bother trying to save it if the Rapture is on the way? The good people won't be here to enjoy it. Bush will never represent you or this country. His political moves will reflect his own desires and beliefs which pertain only to his money, his power, and the false notion that he has an immortal soul.
Wake up and resist.
The foiled terror plot in the UK has done absolutely nothing for him, however. (Assuming, of course, there actually was a plot. It all remains frustratingly vague, doesn't it?) His numbers haven't jumped up; quite the contrary, they have slipped to the aforementioned 33%. Americans are just sick of this guy. They know for a fact that he's a criminal, and those who can still deceive themselves that he's not are at least willing to admit that his policies are insalubrious, at best. The situation in Iraq is untenable, with constantly escalating violence and an explosive civil war, the seriousness of which has yet to be really addressed. Gas prices are crippling the nation while oil companies continue to rake in record profits. Afghanistan is sinking deeper into new conflict while Bush continues encouraging Israel's bellicose handling of its affairs.
It's got to stop, and the public is beginning to wake up to that. Last month, 20% of Americans said their congressional vote this fall would be, at least partially, to express their opposition to Bush. That number is now up to 29%. That means that nearly a third of the populace is willing to cast a vote for a Democrat simply to help oust the GOP's control of Congress. That's extremely welcome news, especially after Ned Lamont's victory over Joe Lieberman in Connecticut. It shows that wasn't an isolated event, and this trend could very well continue through midterms.
I myself still remain shocked at the public's recalcitrance to completely and overwhelmingly oppose Bush. The numbers are getting better (for those of us who like freedom and such) but they're still dismally low in a nation who has its nose rubbed in Executive arrogance and incompetence every day.
I don't have time to link you to all the sites or recommend all the books that prove my next assertions, but, believe me, the information is not hard to find. The Administration does nothing to cover its tracks, knowing it has nothing to fear from the media or the public. Help me prove them wrong.
Our children are dying because Bush has sent them to war under false pretenses. He is an abominable liar. While it's true that all politicians are liars, Bush is a gleeful, vicious prevaricator. He is surrounded by rich, white, elitist bastards who couldn't care less for your welfare. He is a right-wing, Christian fundamentalist and he's dedicated to turning our democracy into a theocracy. He's also a Rapture Christian, meaning he believes sometime very soon Jesus will come and lift the righteous to Heaven and leave the rest of us to languish on an evil, painful, no doubt smelly Earth. Despite this not being in the Bible, it's the reason Rapture Christians like him have no regard for the environment. Why bother trying to save it if the Rapture is on the way? The good people won't be here to enjoy it. Bush will never represent you or this country. His political moves will reflect his own desires and beliefs which pertain only to his money, his power, and the false notion that he has an immortal soul.
Wake up and resist.
Tuesday, August 08, 2006
Check It Out
Granted, the Washington Post is a bastion of Beltway conservatism. And, granted, as part of Bush's kept media, they are perfectly comfortable printing outrignt lies. But come on.
This is just ridiculous.
This article is a pathetic attempt to paint Joe Lieberman as an honest man surrounded by a sea of fickle, bemused, capricious Democrats. If anyone out there is still buying this worthless shit, please send me your address so I can have you disenfranchised.
Wake up and resist.
This is just ridiculous.
This article is a pathetic attempt to paint Joe Lieberman as an honest man surrounded by a sea of fickle, bemused, capricious Democrats. If anyone out there is still buying this worthless shit, please send me your address so I can have you disenfranchised.
Wake up and resist.
Thursday, August 03, 2006
I Dare You To Care
I doubt you need me to point this out, but all national news media are forsaking most actual breaking news in order to bring you constant, uninterrupted, methodically stupid coverage of what Mel Gibson has done, is doing, and will be doing.
I know it may seem counterintuitive, but, if you are concerned with actual NEWS, I urge you to get your information from a source that doesn't place Mel Gibson as a priority.
I'd also like to point out that, as news pours in from around the world, as the international media is swamped with information about Israel and Hezbollah, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the failing health of Fidel Castro, and crazy fuckers in Korea with the bomb, as well as much more, we are listening to around the clock coverage pertaining to a gentlemen who matters very little in the big scheme. Someone whose comments matter even less, considering the overwhelming anti-Semitism, sexism, and general jackassery that we observe on a worldwide scale every day. In case you've been captivated by Fox News or MSNBC or CNN or any "news" channel that insists on reporting the whereabouts, mental status, or forgiveness level of one Mel Gibson, I will gladly tell you why that's not important:
1) Mel Gibson lives in America.
I know that doesn't mean much to a lot of folks these days, but it means a FUCK of a lot to me. We don't live in a police state, nor do we live in a true theocracy, at least not yet.
2) Mel Gibson lives in America.
A lot of shit happens here. I can't imagine caring less what Mel Gibson does. Unless, of course, the NSA has discovered that he might be a terrorist, in which case we should raise the Terror Alert Level to Smokin Burnt Umber.
3) Mel Gibson lives in America.
Here, we are free to hate, despise, or criticize whomever we please. Defamation and libel suits aside, we may publicly deride on the Internet, on the airwaves, in books and magazines, or with really big fucking signs, the race, religion or gender of anyone. I'm not sticking up for ignorance here; I'm sticking up for freedom. Any kind of prejudice, whether inbred or learned is despicable. But no one can remove these rights.
4) Mel Gibson lives in America.
He can say whatever the hell he pleases. I don't care if he said that all Buddhists will end up as crack-whores serving Richard Gere in his mansion built from baby harp seal bricks held together with the sperm of 5000 homosexual AIDS victims. We can't pick and chose who gets to say what. It's up to you, the news consumer, to educate yourself so that the massive amounts of fluff and drivel the media throw at you can be filtered through your own, personal, empirical experience. We must learn, through research and intellect, to separate the fiction from the facts; the important from the useless.
Whatever Mel Gibson said, or did, is totally irrelevant to your day-to-day life, even if you are a Jew, a woman named Sugar Tits, or someone who thought Braveheart blew. He is just as entitled to his prejudices, bigotry and hatred as you are. Ann Coulter makes her living by cleverly marketing uninformed opinions one thousand times worse than anything Mel will ever say. Her ostensible rage and righteousness are so overwrought as to be actually cartoonish. And you're telling me the nation is held spellbound by a story of a guy who acts the way we've all seen a friend act after a night of heavy drinking?
Mel Gibson can hate Jews. He can make inflammatory statements about Jews. You know why? Cause he lives in America. You are no better or worse than he is.
Wake up and resist.
I know it may seem counterintuitive, but, if you are concerned with actual NEWS, I urge you to get your information from a source that doesn't place Mel Gibson as a priority.
I'd also like to point out that, as news pours in from around the world, as the international media is swamped with information about Israel and Hezbollah, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the failing health of Fidel Castro, and crazy fuckers in Korea with the bomb, as well as much more, we are listening to around the clock coverage pertaining to a gentlemen who matters very little in the big scheme. Someone whose comments matter even less, considering the overwhelming anti-Semitism, sexism, and general jackassery that we observe on a worldwide scale every day. In case you've been captivated by Fox News or MSNBC or CNN or any "news" channel that insists on reporting the whereabouts, mental status, or forgiveness level of one Mel Gibson, I will gladly tell you why that's not important:
1) Mel Gibson lives in America.
I know that doesn't mean much to a lot of folks these days, but it means a FUCK of a lot to me. We don't live in a police state, nor do we live in a true theocracy, at least not yet.
2) Mel Gibson lives in America.
A lot of shit happens here. I can't imagine caring less what Mel Gibson does. Unless, of course, the NSA has discovered that he might be a terrorist, in which case we should raise the Terror Alert Level to Smokin Burnt Umber.
3) Mel Gibson lives in America.
Here, we are free to hate, despise, or criticize whomever we please. Defamation and libel suits aside, we may publicly deride on the Internet, on the airwaves, in books and magazines, or with really big fucking signs, the race, religion or gender of anyone. I'm not sticking up for ignorance here; I'm sticking up for freedom. Any kind of prejudice, whether inbred or learned is despicable. But no one can remove these rights.
4) Mel Gibson lives in America.
He can say whatever the hell he pleases. I don't care if he said that all Buddhists will end up as crack-whores serving Richard Gere in his mansion built from baby harp seal bricks held together with the sperm of 5000 homosexual AIDS victims. We can't pick and chose who gets to say what. It's up to you, the news consumer, to educate yourself so that the massive amounts of fluff and drivel the media throw at you can be filtered through your own, personal, empirical experience. We must learn, through research and intellect, to separate the fiction from the facts; the important from the useless.
Whatever Mel Gibson said, or did, is totally irrelevant to your day-to-day life, even if you are a Jew, a woman named Sugar Tits, or someone who thought Braveheart blew. He is just as entitled to his prejudices, bigotry and hatred as you are. Ann Coulter makes her living by cleverly marketing uninformed opinions one thousand times worse than anything Mel will ever say. Her ostensible rage and righteousness are so overwrought as to be actually cartoonish. And you're telling me the nation is held spellbound by a story of a guy who acts the way we've all seen a friend act after a night of heavy drinking?
Mel Gibson can hate Jews. He can make inflammatory statements about Jews. You know why? Cause he lives in America. You are no better or worse than he is.
Wake up and resist.
Wednesday, August 02, 2006
Protecting What's Not Under Attack
The Washington Supreme Court voted recently to keep firmly in place the state's gay marriage ban. Despite the fact that the vote was close (5-4), as well as all the talk about Washington being a "liberal leaning" state, the reason the Court gave for upholding the ban is one of the most ludicrous things you'll hear this year.
Justice Barbara Madsen writes in the controlling opinion that all this "is constitutional becasue the Legislature was entitled to believe that limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples furthers procreation, essential to survival."
Procreation. Essential to survival. The deductive leaps made by the Washington Supreme Court are truly staggering in their perspicacity. Unfortunately, their ridiculous legal double-talk is pathetically transparent. The last time I ran through the phone book the population on Earth was rapidly approaching seven billion. I can't imagine anything, short of a Texas-sized asteroid colliding with us, threatening the survival of the species. If one HALF of the bloody planet turned queer overnight, we wouldn't have a problem filling this place to capacity. The procreating humans are here to stay.
How can refusing to let gay people marry further procreation anyway? If they can't get married, do they stop being gay? Do they enter the breeding pool? Do more straight people get married and have kids just to rub it in gay faces?
More to the point, where does the Constitution that these folks are defending guarantee safety, much less the continued survival of the species? The Constitution makes provisions to DEFEND the population, but it certainly doesn't shoulder the burden of ensuring humanity's survival. The right to have children is constantly being defended; the right NOT to have children is usually overlooked. If people want to remain childless, whether straight or gay, it's no one's business but their own. Not the God-lovers who demand more mouths to feed and praise Jesus; not the weeping hearts who believe marriage is only about the progeny; and not the patriots that want to guarantee a good bumper crop of young 'uns to send into the teeth of the next war. My wife and I never want children. Should we be denied the benefits of marriage? Of course not. Legally, we can't be denied those benefits. So why is it OK when the couple in question is gay?
This species will survive. There is no question about that. The fact that a state Supreme Court thinks it's a good enough reason to deny equal rights to one group of people speaks volumes about the mentality of this nation. As does the notion that marriage is somehow being attacked. All the organizations dedicated to theocracy preach the same tired old bullshit about how they must "defend" the institution of marriage. From what? What could possibly threaten marriage? No, what they're worried about is what's threatening their RELIGION. If gay folks, whom God obviously hates, are allowed to wed, then what's to stop the rest of the self-aware, free-thinkers from chipping away at their ridiculous faith? If faggots and dykes can get married, if that affront to God is allowed, then the gates to religious fascism will begin to swing closed instead of open.
And the religious right in American can't have that. They've worked to long, too hard, and too selfishly to stand by while the freedoms they've taken away are slowly restored. This is not about marriage-it never was. This is about defending the stranglehold Chrisianity has on this country. If it's allowed to slip, even an inch, then science, logic, and peace may have a chance to come flooding back in.
Back off, Christians. Why don't you try defending heterosexual marriage from it's 60 percent divorce rate before you start telling the rest of us how to handle it?
Wake up and resist.
Justice Barbara Madsen writes in the controlling opinion that all this "is constitutional becasue the Legislature was entitled to believe that limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples furthers procreation, essential to survival."
Procreation. Essential to survival. The deductive leaps made by the Washington Supreme Court are truly staggering in their perspicacity. Unfortunately, their ridiculous legal double-talk is pathetically transparent. The last time I ran through the phone book the population on Earth was rapidly approaching seven billion. I can't imagine anything, short of a Texas-sized asteroid colliding with us, threatening the survival of the species. If one HALF of the bloody planet turned queer overnight, we wouldn't have a problem filling this place to capacity. The procreating humans are here to stay.
How can refusing to let gay people marry further procreation anyway? If they can't get married, do they stop being gay? Do they enter the breeding pool? Do more straight people get married and have kids just to rub it in gay faces?
More to the point, where does the Constitution that these folks are defending guarantee safety, much less the continued survival of the species? The Constitution makes provisions to DEFEND the population, but it certainly doesn't shoulder the burden of ensuring humanity's survival. The right to have children is constantly being defended; the right NOT to have children is usually overlooked. If people want to remain childless, whether straight or gay, it's no one's business but their own. Not the God-lovers who demand more mouths to feed and praise Jesus; not the weeping hearts who believe marriage is only about the progeny; and not the patriots that want to guarantee a good bumper crop of young 'uns to send into the teeth of the next war. My wife and I never want children. Should we be denied the benefits of marriage? Of course not. Legally, we can't be denied those benefits. So why is it OK when the couple in question is gay?
This species will survive. There is no question about that. The fact that a state Supreme Court thinks it's a good enough reason to deny equal rights to one group of people speaks volumes about the mentality of this nation. As does the notion that marriage is somehow being attacked. All the organizations dedicated to theocracy preach the same tired old bullshit about how they must "defend" the institution of marriage. From what? What could possibly threaten marriage? No, what they're worried about is what's threatening their RELIGION. If gay folks, whom God obviously hates, are allowed to wed, then what's to stop the rest of the self-aware, free-thinkers from chipping away at their ridiculous faith? If faggots and dykes can get married, if that affront to God is allowed, then the gates to religious fascism will begin to swing closed instead of open.
And the religious right in American can't have that. They've worked to long, too hard, and too selfishly to stand by while the freedoms they've taken away are slowly restored. This is not about marriage-it never was. This is about defending the stranglehold Chrisianity has on this country. If it's allowed to slip, even an inch, then science, logic, and peace may have a chance to come flooding back in.
Back off, Christians. Why don't you try defending heterosexual marriage from it's 60 percent divorce rate before you start telling the rest of us how to handle it?
Wake up and resist.
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
It's Like They Don't Even Respect Us
As if more evidence was needed in the campaign to unseat the GOP criminals in power, we get this:
http://www.workingforchange.com/blog/index.cfm?
Just read today's post and then tell me the Republicans are even a bit concerned about what we think or whether they get caught. They know that, no matter our opinion, our shock, our outrage, even getting nabbed stuffing money into their pockets or stuffing dead hookers into holes, they cannot be touched.
Ziggy over at www.highlyagitated.blogspot.com brought this article to my attention today. I'm sure he, like the rest of us, is newly overwhelmed by the sense of frustrated impotence this brings. I've learned never to believe I've seen it all; never to think I can't be freshly agape at these antics or offended by the moral superiority.
A moral superiority, by the way, that has Joe Lieberman attacking Ned Lamont's wife and the Bush Administration classifying Wal-Mart as a small business so they can sneak them an extra check or two and call it helping out the underdog.
My disgust knows no bounds. I would rather see the Dems take back Congress in November and wander aimlessly around for a few months than see this deceitful, arrogant, fascist bullshit continue for one more hour.
Wake up and resist.
http://www.workingforchange.com/blog/index.cfm?
Just read today's post and then tell me the Republicans are even a bit concerned about what we think or whether they get caught. They know that, no matter our opinion, our shock, our outrage, even getting nabbed stuffing money into their pockets or stuffing dead hookers into holes, they cannot be touched.
Ziggy over at www.highlyagitated.blogspot.com brought this article to my attention today. I'm sure he, like the rest of us, is newly overwhelmed by the sense of frustrated impotence this brings. I've learned never to believe I've seen it all; never to think I can't be freshly agape at these antics or offended by the moral superiority.
A moral superiority, by the way, that has Joe Lieberman attacking Ned Lamont's wife and the Bush Administration classifying Wal-Mart as a small business so they can sneak them an extra check or two and call it helping out the underdog.
My disgust knows no bounds. I would rather see the Dems take back Congress in November and wander aimlessly around for a few months than see this deceitful, arrogant, fascist bullshit continue for one more hour.
Wake up and resist.
No Prescription Necessary
So you're walking down the street. Maybe you're on the way to work, maybe you're shopping, maybe you're just enjoying the feeling of walking around. Whatever the case, you're walking, the sun is shining on your face, your blood is pumping easily, peacefully; all feels right and comfortable and perhaps even wonderful.
Which makes it all the more startling when you twist your ankle stepping off a curb and stumble into an intersection where you're struck by a car. The car swerves and you're not hit full-on, more of a glancing blow. Of course, it's more than enough to explosively fracture your tibia in your lower leg.
When you're released from the hospital a couple days later, what do you imagine you're given to facilitate mobility? A wheelchair, naturally, to get to the front doors, but then what? What primitive, yet effective device are you handed so you can drag your busted ass around? A crutch.
And what do you do with your crutch? You sock it under your arm and learn how to hobble around on it. You occasionally bump your leg on something and the pain is quite bad, but you learn to use the crutch to navigate around the worst of the pain.
You spend a few months like this while your leg heals. You have to use your crutch because your leg won't support your weight. You get around OK. You're not out playing soccer or hiking the AT but you can mostly keep up. Your friends help you out when they can, but this is something you get used to on your own.
As your leg gets better you don't rely as heavily on the crutch. Perhaps you can go most of the day limping about on your own, but, as the hours draw out, you have to lean on it a bit. Pretty soon, you're only using it a few times a week, and, eventually, when everything is knitted back together, you stop needing it altogether. You're back to your old, pre-crippled self, frolicking and gamboling like a wee kitten.
Now, let's imagine circumstances are just slightly different. Instead of being mashed by a car, let's say you were mashed by love. Everything was ducky, you and your beloved were enjoying your days together with the promise of many more to come. You were deep in it, your heart was totally committed and there wasn't a thing you could do about it. With no warning whatsoever, your beloved leaves you, shatters your hopes, and drives fang-marks through the meat of your heart. You feel broken. You feel incapable of facing the next day; of living through work, bills, bad TV, and glitzy, unreal Hollywood romance wherever you turn.
So what do you do? What's the one thing you can do that no one would look down on you for when your leg is broken, but everyone will when it's your heart that's broken? That's right. Use a crutch.
For many, many years I've heard people refer to alcohol as a "crutch," and I've never understood why it carries such a pejorative connotation. Why is it OK to use a wooden crutch to alleviate pain and facilitate living, but it's pathetic to use an alcoholic crutch to do the same fucking thing?
When your heart's been fractured, day-to-day living is a constant marathon of hurt. There is nothing that isn't affected. It's much harder to walk with a broken heart than a broken leg. At least when you sit down most of the pain is off your leg. Nothing ameliorates the feeling of love-sickness. Nothing, that is, except alcohol.
And it works the same as any other crutch. You use it constantly at the beginning, when the pain is awful. You self-medicate as you see fit and you make it through your days. Not with the same grace and aplomb you would normally, but, hey, you're making it. Your friends help, often just by being there, but, quite often, you're alone. And that's the problem, isn't it? Just a few days ago, you weren't alone. You had that SOMEBODY. Now you don't. Now it's just you and your crutch.
So you drink. You drink and the pain goes further away and you wake up a bit hungover. You drink a bit less the next day, but the pain still fucks off elsewhere. You wake up with your hangover a little more moderate. As time passes, you're drinking less and re-integrating more. You're more engaged with life, with moving on and being happy. There's still pain, of course, and drinking takes the edge off, but you don't need it as much as before. One way or another you get to the place where healing has happened. At this point, you can start drinking for fun again.
So I don't want to hear anymore of this shit about "Oh, he's drinking to forget about her." Fuck yes, he is, and there's nothing wrong with it. Or "She just drinks because he hurt her so much." Damn right, it hurts, and vodka makes it feel better. Or what about "Maybe you shouldn't drink so much. You should deal with this." Drinking IS dealing with it. It dulls pain, it temporarily erases wretched memories, and it inspires brief moments of happiness. All this on the road to wellness.
Drinking while hurt is not burying your head in the sand. It's not avoiding problems and copping out unless you NEVER STOP DRINKING. If you use it like a tool, and put it down when things get better, it's no worse than using a literal crutch.
Which makes it all the more startling when you twist your ankle stepping off a curb and stumble into an intersection where you're struck by a car. The car swerves and you're not hit full-on, more of a glancing blow. Of course, it's more than enough to explosively fracture your tibia in your lower leg.
When you're released from the hospital a couple days later, what do you imagine you're given to facilitate mobility? A wheelchair, naturally, to get to the front doors, but then what? What primitive, yet effective device are you handed so you can drag your busted ass around? A crutch.
And what do you do with your crutch? You sock it under your arm and learn how to hobble around on it. You occasionally bump your leg on something and the pain is quite bad, but you learn to use the crutch to navigate around the worst of the pain.
You spend a few months like this while your leg heals. You have to use your crutch because your leg won't support your weight. You get around OK. You're not out playing soccer or hiking the AT but you can mostly keep up. Your friends help you out when they can, but this is something you get used to on your own.
As your leg gets better you don't rely as heavily on the crutch. Perhaps you can go most of the day limping about on your own, but, as the hours draw out, you have to lean on it a bit. Pretty soon, you're only using it a few times a week, and, eventually, when everything is knitted back together, you stop needing it altogether. You're back to your old, pre-crippled self, frolicking and gamboling like a wee kitten.
Now, let's imagine circumstances are just slightly different. Instead of being mashed by a car, let's say you were mashed by love. Everything was ducky, you and your beloved were enjoying your days together with the promise of many more to come. You were deep in it, your heart was totally committed and there wasn't a thing you could do about it. With no warning whatsoever, your beloved leaves you, shatters your hopes, and drives fang-marks through the meat of your heart. You feel broken. You feel incapable of facing the next day; of living through work, bills, bad TV, and glitzy, unreal Hollywood romance wherever you turn.
So what do you do? What's the one thing you can do that no one would look down on you for when your leg is broken, but everyone will when it's your heart that's broken? That's right. Use a crutch.
For many, many years I've heard people refer to alcohol as a "crutch," and I've never understood why it carries such a pejorative connotation. Why is it OK to use a wooden crutch to alleviate pain and facilitate living, but it's pathetic to use an alcoholic crutch to do the same fucking thing?
When your heart's been fractured, day-to-day living is a constant marathon of hurt. There is nothing that isn't affected. It's much harder to walk with a broken heart than a broken leg. At least when you sit down most of the pain is off your leg. Nothing ameliorates the feeling of love-sickness. Nothing, that is, except alcohol.
And it works the same as any other crutch. You use it constantly at the beginning, when the pain is awful. You self-medicate as you see fit and you make it through your days. Not with the same grace and aplomb you would normally, but, hey, you're making it. Your friends help, often just by being there, but, quite often, you're alone. And that's the problem, isn't it? Just a few days ago, you weren't alone. You had that SOMEBODY. Now you don't. Now it's just you and your crutch.
So you drink. You drink and the pain goes further away and you wake up a bit hungover. You drink a bit less the next day, but the pain still fucks off elsewhere. You wake up with your hangover a little more moderate. As time passes, you're drinking less and re-integrating more. You're more engaged with life, with moving on and being happy. There's still pain, of course, and drinking takes the edge off, but you don't need it as much as before. One way or another you get to the place where healing has happened. At this point, you can start drinking for fun again.
So I don't want to hear anymore of this shit about "Oh, he's drinking to forget about her." Fuck yes, he is, and there's nothing wrong with it. Or "She just drinks because he hurt her so much." Damn right, it hurts, and vodka makes it feel better. Or what about "Maybe you shouldn't drink so much. You should deal with this." Drinking IS dealing with it. It dulls pain, it temporarily erases wretched memories, and it inspires brief moments of happiness. All this on the road to wellness.
Drinking while hurt is not burying your head in the sand. It's not avoiding problems and copping out unless you NEVER STOP DRINKING. If you use it like a tool, and put it down when things get better, it's no worse than using a literal crutch.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
