Liberal Media Elite

So there’s a bunch of guys in a lunatic asylum. One night (stormy, of course) there’s a power outage, and the lunatics murder their guards, steal their weapons, and (in some cases) eat their flesh. The next several days are harrowing, as they find themselves running up and down the halls trying not to get killed by each other. Finally, one of the inmates is sufficiently charismatic to call together a meeting without anybody getting shot.

“Because I’m trustworthy,” he responds, with a wounded expression. “Besides, the other folks in here are CRAZY!”

Nobody’s surprised that I’m a Second Amendment supporter, right? Whatever the risks of private gun ownership, disarming your populace is pretty much step one of establishing their dependency on you.

So Iran’s refused to back off on their uranium-enrichment program, and the UN’s imposed sanctions on them, setting up a chain of events that will almost certainly lead to another war. President Ahmadinejad (try saying that ten times fast) warns that any nations “seeking to impose sanctions against Iran will suffer a greater damage themselves.”

Let’s get the obvious statement out of the way, that nobody has the warm fuzzies about a gang of undersexed theocrats like the Iranian government getting their hands on something as delightfully phallic as a nuclear warhead. That said, as long as any one government has access to WMD’s, every other government would be crazy for not trying to develop them. It’s the only credible defense in a post-nuclear age. In fact, as the technology improves, they’re only going to continue to become easier for developing nations to obtain and conceal. Trying to fight that process — to turn the technology backwards — isn’t just crazy, it’s rapidly becoming impossible. We’re fighting the most basic biological imperative of our species, to build, to construct, to grow.

Unfortunately, it’s not like the alternative is any less crazy. The last several decades taught us the madness of nuclear proliferation. Now, it seems, we must learn the madness of nuclear disarmament. It’s a true Gordian Knot, and one that, sadly, may take a stroke as brutal as Alexander’s to sever.

“Just remember that you’re standing on a planet that’s evolving
and revolving at nine hundred miles an hour;
orbiting at nineteen miles a second, so it’s reckoned,
a sun that is the source of all our power…”

So, do we not care about space anymore?

I remember back in 2004, when Bush was talking about a manned mission to Mars, which led to all of the expected jokes — “Bush wants to go to Mars, let’s send Bush to Mars, ha ha ha” — but no detectable enthusiasm.

Okay, I think the initiative was a bad idea, too. It’s incredibly expensive with no immediate payout. And I’m confident that we’re going to make it there anyway, with my usual faith in the private sector — space tourism is already becoming a lucrative industry, with tickets selling in excess of twenty million. Functioning space hotels seem likely to go up in the next twenty years. As these venues both increase and become more affordable, intelligent investors will jack up their funding for private research. We’ll get there.

What disappoints me is the open contempt for the very idea of space travel. I mean, did nobody out there feel a chill of excitement at the prospect of travelling to Mars? My God, of a human stepping onto the surface of an alien world?

Whatever happened to the enthusiasm of the sixties? Back when science fiction was about ideas instead of explosions, when we put a man on the moon, when we transformed the night sky from a veil that covered us into a place that we could go? When our natural satellite ceased to be the subject of myth and superstition, and became a surface that bore a footprint of homo sapiens sapiens?

Two weeks ago, our species discovered that the south polar region of Mars contains enough ice to cover the entire surface of the planet in water thirty-six feet deep. If the planet once supported water, could it have supported life? Life? What would that mean for us, if it did? What might we learn about ourselves? About our world? What would such an achievement mean for the history of our civilization? Let alone our future?

So what happened? What happened to our excitement about these things? Am I the last one left who cares?

“So remember when you’re feeling very small and insecure
how amazing unlikely is your birth;
and pray that there’s intelligent life somewhere up in space,
‘cuz there’s bugger all down here on Earth…”

I am not sure what to say quite yet. My retina still hurts too much.

“He can’t be beat because he’s so white from his head to his feet”. Brough to you by the people responsible for the humanitarian desaster after Katrina.

It’s a clip recorded at the Annual Radio and Television Correspondents’ Association dinner. I remember Stephen Colbert doing a much better job at the 2006 White House Correspondents Dinner than those suckers from Who’s Line is it Anyway?.

Oh come on, isn’t it fun to watch Rome burn?

I used to be a part of the Minnesota Anti-War Committee’s listserv. They’d send emails, most of which I just deleted. Whatever. I was against the war, they were against the war. It should have been at least a symbiotic relationship. Well no more. They just pissed me off.

I woke up the other day, rather proud of my Congressman for voting in favor of the Iraq Supplemental bill. Then some woman who has been sending me emails to make posters or some shit is on MPR attacking Ellison for the vote and talking about how they were now going to be holding vigils at his office to protest his vote for the war.

WHAT? Now let me be clear. It wasn’t the perfect bill. It was the bullshit compromise 2nd 18th draft. Admittedly. But, uhh, it did kind of draw a line in the sand. Troops out, no permanent bases. And he voted for it. I thought that’s what you people wanted.

If that’s not what you wanted, what was? Did you think that the second Ellison placed his hand on Jefferson’s Koran that all the troops would somehow teleport home? Would you have rather he put his foot down and voted against it? Ok, you wanted him to vote against it. But how is that different than our Boy King huffing and puffing and vetoing the bill down? They’re both stubborn and not accomplishing a lot to actually end the war. I mean, if you want good anti-war theatrics, congress could go back to writing non-binding resolutions.

So I’m done with them. I wrote them a polite email explaining why. They can march up and down the streets and wave signs and yell and bang on drums all they want. I’m going to stick with the guy in Congress who actually has a prayer of bringing this fucking war to an end.

For a much better written version of what I just said, read today’s Strib Editorial. ‘xactly.

It has been requested that I weigh in on the latest batch of so-called “nanny laws” — and I always aim to please. “Nanny laws” are laws so-called for their intrusive regulation of citizens’ personal lives. (Of course, for someone of my political inclinations, this encompasses, er, most of the laws passed in the last 216 years.) Particularly egregious are the bans on trans fats established recently in both Philadelphia and New York City. I have heard it claimed that this degree of state intervention in justified, because it is a matter of public health. Look –

– it’s not like we’re talking about the Joker poisoning the city’s freakin’ water supply, aight? There’s absolutely nobody who eats this stuff and thinks that they’re doing their body a favor. These are adult individuals, consciously making the choice to purchase and ingest food that they know is bad for them.

The argument, as usual, is that this will help people. Well, yeah — you can always help people by curtailing their liberties, whether they be large or trivially small. Impose a curfew and nobody gets mugged after dark, but what would be the fun in that?

It’s also a basic rule of politics that There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch — whenever you pass a law to help people, you’re also hurting somebody else, in this case various restaurants and manufacturers. It’s easy to be dismissive of the needs of organizations, but also easy to forget that organizations are ultimately nothing more than a collection of individuals who bear the brunt of the economic fallout of increased regulation. It’s impossible to measure exactly what that fallout is — probably equally impossible as measuring the exact damage that trans fats do. How the hell do you weigh something like that?

And how far does this go, anyway? Am I going to find myself lurking into a seedy downtown bar — shoulders hunched, hands shaking, palms sweating, eye glancing furtively from side to side — approaching a delightfully buxom waitress, giving her a code word and a secret handshake — her smiling warmly at me, guiding me to the back, pulling on the wine bottle three slots from the left, opening a secret underground passage — descending into a dimly lit club, where rotund men and women dine secretly upon greasy burgers and doughnuts?

Okay, I’m exaggerating. This is not that. But it does set a troubling precedent. You can’t even trust your government to deliver a letter — you want to entrust them with your own body? Everybody’s trying to save us from ourselves — God, why can’t all these people just leave us the hell alone?

BanTransFats.com founder Stephen Joseph, who grew up in England, said the heated reaction to the ban seems uniquely American.

“I was on a talk show a couple years ago and the host said, `Well, you’re trying to bring socialism to America!’” Joseph said, “I mean, what an incredible overreaction for trying to change a cooking oil.”

Bring socialism to America? Oh, sure you are, Steve — just one baby goose-step at a time.

The Bubble Boy’s latest follies…the USAs scandal, GSA politics, FBI impropriety on national security letters…coupled with ongoing hits like The War In Iraq, has one interesting by-product.

Bush is the unmatched champion of cellulosic ethanol. As his approval ratings have dropped and as new scandals rise to the surface the Prezzz steps up his efforts to tout the government’s support of ethanol in general and R&D into cellulosic ethanol in particular. Broadly, we’ll describe ethanol as derived from corn and cellulosic ethanol as being derived from wood chips and switchgrass.

This from a President who mocked hybrid vehicles when he first campaigned for his current gig.

You know things are bad for Oil Man George when he starts shilling for wood chips and switchgrass.

Y’all Republicans need to give some thought to your lockstep support for the Prezzz. He’s screwed up so bad everywhere else that he’s turned into a…(gasp)…environmentalist.

On the heels of Elizabeth Edwards…

Tony Snow has malignant cancer in his liver. He had his colon removed in 2005 and went through six months of chemo. Went in to the doc for something minor this week and they found that it was back and had spread to his liver.

I don’t care for Mr. Snow’s politics. Never have.

But this really sucks.

I sincerely hope for the best for him and that the aggressive treatment he and his doctors have outlined works.

And, y’all…just ’cause we don’t like his politics doesn’t mean that it’s cool to wish this horrible illness on him. So no snarky comments, okay?

Monica Goodling, the Department of Justice White House Liason (now on indefinite leave), is now refusing to testify before Congress because mean people suck.

Monica M. Goodling, who has taken an indefinite leave of absence, said in a sworn affidavit to the Senate Judiciary Committee that she will “decline to answer any and all questions” about the firings because she faces “a perilous environment in which to testify.”

…

One of Goodling’s lawyers, John Dowd, said in a statement yesterday that “the potential for legal jeopardy for Ms. Goodling from even her most truthful and accurate testimony under these circumstances is very real.”

What’s even more baffling is the Democrats are apparently letting her get away with it.

By getting away with it I mean the following: the 5th amendment allows you to not testify against yourself. It does not protect you from testifying in front of people who are going to be mean. Nor can you plead the 5th to protect yourself against perjury charges. Because…um…you could just, as her attorney says, provide “most truthful and accurate testimony”. The only way she can plead the 5th is to keep from testifying about a crime she previously committed. Her attorney, though, says she didn’t commit a crime. In which case the 5th does not apply. So either her attorney is lying and she committed a crime therefore allowing her to plead the 5th or her attorney is telling the truth…she didn’t commit a crime and therefore must testify under the subpoena.

The point is that the 5th amendment doesn’t provide a “get out of testifying for free” card. Think about it, the rationale her attorney lays out is that she committed no crime but she won’t testify because the questioners are hostile and have already formed an opinion on her behavior. Which is precisely what happens in every single criminal case that makes it to a court.

If Congress allows her to do this you best believe every other Bush crony is going to plead the same thing. Watch this one. The Senate will have no choice but to go to the District Court and have a judge determine if the 5th is being properly applied. And that decision will determine if we ever find out what really happened.

(As with everything having to do with the firing of the USAs a hat tip goes out to talkingpointsmemo.com)

So a lot of people have been asking me for my “take” on the 2008 elections, to which I usually respond that I’m amused to note that the Democrats have selected as their frontrunners a black guy and a woman. They then look at me with a kind of confused, hurt, bovine expression, and ask if I think that that’s really still an issue.

Look, maybe I’m just a cynic, but I can’t help thinking that the white guys’ fifty-five term winning streak is gonna be a hard one to break. My county just elected the first Muslim representative to Congress. He wanted to be sworn in on the Qu’ran, and the country went apeshit. And we’re, like, one of the most liberal states in the union! I’d love to be proven wrong on this, but c’mon. We’re not ready. We are all kinds of not ready for this.

Not that I’m one to talk, anyway — I’ve never supported a candidate that actually had a prayer of making it into office. This is why, every time the Democrats get bitch-slapped in an election year, I find myself clapping my hands and cackling “A-ha! You see? Now you see what I feel like every goddamn election!” Then I get recklessly drunk, curl up under my bed and start weeping, because it’s an emotionally fragile time and sometimes it’s okay to have a crutch.

I guess what I’d really like to see would be Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton, because twenty years under the same two-family aristocracy just plain wasn’t enough for me.

Dear CNN & MSNBC:

Try one day…just one day ’cause I don’t want you to panic over too long of a time horizon…with no coverage of Anna Nicole Smith. Just one day. Really. Try it. I promise you your ratings won’t sink even a little. No one…NO ONE…gives a shit. I tried a little experiment yesterday. I approached about 20 people I don’t know in a variety of different settings and asked them their thoughts on Ms. Smith. None of the 20 had anything more than a vague idea what it was that happened. Given your daily wall-to-wall coverage dedicated to this “news” for the last month or however long it’s been, this should tell you something about how deeply engaged your public is.

Really. We don’t care. We have no idea why y’all do.

Hugs,

Rik

It just keeps gettin’ better.

“Either Elston did not scroll down on his BlackBerry to read the last section [of the e-mail] or it made no impression on him, because he knew that it did not reflect the department’s plan for replacing the U.S. attorneys who would be asked to resign,” says spokesman Brian Roehrkasse.

Love it. Love it. Love it. At artful combination of the old school “I do not recall” with the new school “I forgot to scroll”.

Coming soon to a spin cycle near you…”my dog ate my printouts”.

And for today’s compelling topic…Chinese property law!

So on March 16th, the National People’s Congress finally passed a law clearly defining three existing property types, state, collective, and private. The very concept of legally protected private property is a revolutionary one, and it’s a big step in the right direction. But in a lot of respects, it’s nothing more than symbolic.

Y’see, regardless of the fancy legal language that it’s dressed up in, Chinese property is still defined in terms of usufruct — meaning, the government owns all property. What you actually “own” is a land-use right, not, y’know, property itself.

Sounds pretty kooky, right? I direct your attention to Exhibit A:

“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

That’s the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and it’s pretty good stuff, no? In fact, it contains the one line in the Bill of Rights that I don’t agree with:

“…nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

Er, what exactly qualifies as “just compensation” for the forceful deprivation of property? This is a concept known as eminent domain, and the practical upshot of it is that the government can come and take away the house that you worked and sweat for if they decide it would be a nice place for a parking ramp. This isn’t one of those antiquated laws just sitting around on the books that nobody pays attention to anymore, either: it happens all the goddamn time.

It’s kinda like if you’re a teenager, and you have to borrow your dad’s car all the time, and you realize that all the girls think that you’re kind of lame, so you decide to work and save up and buy your own car, but your dad still has the right to take it away from you whenever he wants, so in a sense you never have to grow up but remain a teenager for the rest of your life, and the next thing you know you’re in your forties and you’re still fucking teenage girls, because they’re the only ones naive enough to believe that a guy who actually has his own room and gets to stay up late is still pretty cool. It’s kinda like that.

There’s a reason that we regard property rights as sacred — because your property is the product of your life and liberty, and robbing you of the former robs the latter of its meaning. And concepts such as usufruct — and eminent domain — turn the very concept of private property into a joke.

Someone is ranting about Mark Ritchie again. It’s getting old. Read about it here.

I was going to respond. Write an impassioned defense of someone I helped put into office. But with MDE, what’s the point? I think it will be more effective to mock Mr. Brodkorb and his ilk with this Natalie Dee cartoon.

nataliedee.com

So I turned on the TV yesterday to see the House of Representatives kneeling before their lord and master George II, who promptly pulled down his pants, whipped out his cock, and began merrily fapping away, crying “You like that? Huh? You like that, bitches? See this? I’m gonna ram it so far down your throat your throat’s gonna bulge out, and then I’m gonna start choking you to make it tighter, so it’ll be like I’m jacking myself off on the inside of your throat! Whadda you say to that? Huh? Huh?”

…at least, that’s the basic gist of what I saw. Judging from his tone, the President may as well have been whapping Nancy Pelosi on the nose with a rolled-up newspaper and scolding her like a naughty puppy.

So, once again, we have the President furious at the legislative branch because of their attempts to, y’know, legislate — and we have a Congress furious at the executive branch because of its refusal to, y’know, execute their laws. Most agitating of all, perhaps, is George’s exhortation to the House that “this is not what the American people want.”

Uh, you mean the American people that elected them? For specifically this purpose? Hey, y’know all those kooky anti-war protestors that have been giving you such a headache lately? We’re the American people, too. Who the hell are you talking to?

1.) One book that changed your life.
Ishmael, by Daniel Quinn. I’ve pretty much outgrown this one — I don’t really agree with, well, most of the conclusions that he comes to, and the protagonist is something of a slack-jawed straw man — but I read this at just the right age for it to blow my mind, and I still adhere to the main revelation that I took from it: that human societies function best when organized at a smaller level.

2.) One book you’ve read more than once.
The Lord of the Rings, by J.R.R. Tolkien. Picked by virtue of the fact that I think I’ve read it more than any other book (with the possible exception of Le Morte D’Arthur) — I read it when I was six years old, it’s the first book I remember reading on my own, and I’ve come back to it at least once a year since. Its depiction of the corrupting influence of power, of evil as both an internal and external force, and its faith in the potency of ordinary people to resist it, have all had a powerful influence on my own thinking.

3.) One book you’d want on a desert island.
Parzival, by Wolfram von Eschenbach. This sprawling, sixteen-book German epic about a bumbling simpleton being initiated into the mysteries of man and God is nothing less than the single greatest achievement of Western literature, and nobody’s even heard of it.

4.) One book that made you laugh.
Y’know, I don’t laugh that often when I’m reading — I might be amused, or think “Huh. That’s clever,” but actual, out-loud laughter? I’d have to go with The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, by Douglas Adams. Every line in the damn thing is perfectly constructed, and it’s also the most bleak and bitter satire of the way bureaucracy destroys lives on a (literally!) cosmic scale that I’ve ever encountered

5.) One book that made you cry.
The Power That Preserves, by Stephen Donaldson. Another fantasy novel (can you tell I’m kind of a geek?) in which the epic final battle takes the form of an epic conversation, an almost Buddhist argument over the nature of reality and the function of morality within it. The conclusion that the protagonist comes to — that concepts such as hope and despair are irrelevant in a moral struggle, that evil must be resisted for its own sake, without anticipation of success — is a deeply moving one to me, not least because of what it costs him to achieve it, and probably explains why I’ve ended up allying myself with third parties.

6.) One book you wish had been written.
Chretien de Troyes’ continuation of Perceval, le Conte du Graal, not least because it would spare us all any number of nonsensical conspiracy theories about the Roman Catholic Church. For Chrissakes, they’ve done enough monstrous bullshit in their history without us having to invent more.

7.) One book you wish had never been written.
I guess I could come up with some kind of snarky response, like The Communist Manifesto or Atlas Shrugged, but the fact is that I really don’t jive with the whole “suppression of information” thing. Bring on all the ideas, good, bad, and ugly. And thus I, Clinton-like, will neatly tap-dance my way past this whole debate.

8.) One book you’re currently reading.
Time Enough for Love, by Robert Heinlein. It’s a bit of a slog, but much more enjoyable if you approach it as a loosely connected collection of short stories, rather than a coherent novel.

9.) One book you’ve been meaning to read.
I’m embarrassed to admit that I still haven’t made it through The 9-11 Commission Report, but I think I’m going to have to steal Rik’s response and say The Qu’ran. Islam is a rising geopolitical power, and I honestly have no genuine understanding of where they’re coming from.

10.) Tag six people.
Since four of them are the LME crew, I guess I’ll tag two: Ben and Dan.

Howdy, folks. My name’s phillip low, and Matt Foster was kind enough to invite me on board as a guest blogger. The bulk of my political writing can be found over at Libertarian Rage, a site loosely spun off of a play by the same title. In the meantime, prepare to be edified by all kinds of dazzlingly topical observations.

My presence here is worth raising an eyebrow over, since I don’t self-identify as a liberal, except in the classical sense. As the title of my other site implies, I am in fact a registered Libertarian — a cranky, tax-hating, anti-state porcupine. Y’know those crazy bearded guys, who live in cabins out in Montana, with the wife-beaters and shotguns, screaming “Get off my Goddamn property!”? Yeah, that’s the party I signed up with.

So what the hell am I doing here? That probably has something to do with the fact that I find myself being allied more and more with the left, and that almost certainly has a lot to do with this current administration, particularly ever since the so-called party of small government became the party of absolutely raving foaming batshit insane. Democrats and Libertarians may not see eye-to-eye on the solutions, but the same problems are looming up in front of all of us. So…maybe we have something of merit to offer each other in this unpleasant hour, hmm?

Yesterday the House passed the single most intrusive war time bill in the history of our nation…a point that is being repeatedly made by the right and half-assed denied by the left. The left’s denials do not ring true because the statement is accurate. In a typically bumbling response to having done the right thing, it appears that Democrats are missing the point. It is the most intrusive war time bill because it addresses the prosecution of one of the most botched wars.

President Bush has done one thing right, just one thing, in this war. The invasion. Not coincidentally, this is the area that was given the great majority of resources when the war was in the planning stages. Very little effort, we now know, was given to planning the victory…to aftermath.

Republicans now condemn this bill as an admission of defeat. The hell it is. Defeat and failure are not the same thing. Defeat implies somebody beat us. Hasn’t happened. Failure implies that we have fallen egregiously short of our goals due to our own bumbling. That is precisely what has happened. This failure is partially due to poor performance and planning on the part of military command and overwhelmingly due to the poor performance…the utter lack of performance and planning…on the part of the President and his top civilians (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, et al). It is not a defeat for the troops on the ground. Iraq is a management failure not a failure of the line workers. Saying that this vote is an admission of defeat is precisely analogous to saying that Enron’s spectacular failure was due to the shortcomings of line workers and not the corrupt and incompetent management of its executives and board members.

What, outside of the invasion, has this President done right in prosecuting the war? Nothing. When, then, is it appropriate to hold him accountable for it? When, if not now, will Republicans be willing to accept taking the reins away from him? The President told us back in 2003 that troops would be out of combat in six months to a year. We are now closing in on four years later (this declaration was made in May 2003). His strategic estimate has now proven wrong by somewhere between 300%-600%. How much more wrong must he be before there is a conclusion that he is incapable of managing this war?

To underscore this point let’s look at some news developments associated with Iraq and the military from yesterday, the same day this historic vote took place:

That is just a smattering of what went wrong in the war yesterday.

Yes, the House passed a bill that would curtail the actions of the President…the manager of this war. The big problem isn’t that it’s an intrusive bill. The big problem is that it’s taken this long.

I can’t resist any longer. It must be easier to fight the avian flu than the urge to look at this. And this. And since Knut is likely going to be the mascot of the United Nations’ Convention on Biological Diversity conference in Bonn/Germany in May 2008, joining the fight against global warming in a somewhat official capacity, I feel fully justified to post this.

See Spiegel Online for full Knut coverage:

From a 1998 Op-Ed piece written by current White House Mouthpiece Tony Snow entitled Executive Privilge is a Dodge…

“Evidently, Mr. Clinton wants to shield virtually any communications that take place within the White House compound on the theory that all such talk contributes in some way, shape or form to the continuing success and harmony of an administration. Taken to its logical extreme, that position would make it impossible for citizens to hold a chief executive accountable for anything. He would have a constitutional right to cover up.

“Chances are that the courts will hurl such a claim out, but it will take time.

“One gets the impression that Team Clinton values its survival more than most people want justice and thus will delay without qualm. But as the clock ticks, the public’s faith in Mr. Clinton will ebb away for a simple reason: Most of us want no part of a president who is cynical enough to use the majesty of his office to evade the one thing he is sworn to uphold — the rule of law.”

Any new thoughts on the issue, Tony?

It appears that the Bubble Boy’s main reason for not allowing members of his inner sanctum testify under oath regarding the USAs is that such a thing (which was allowed by Clinton, Bush I, and Reagan, among others) would mean that the President could no longer receive candid advice from his advisers.

At what point during his time in office has this most insulated and surrounded by yes men President sought out candid advice?

These guys aren’t even trying to make the spin believable.