Our resident online plagiarist has graduated to complete theft of material. Does anyone still think me wrong for suggesting that this is a Democratic plant of a website, or do you believe that a Republicant shill could truly be so very stupid? I trend to think the latter.
Over the last day or two, Oliver has been on a gaddamned roll!
Steve Clemons of the Washington Note is very knowledgeable about global
policy and all its ebbs and flows, but he makes the same mistake in this piece for Salon
that so many in the foreign policy "establishment" do. Clemons assumes
that Bush would not attack Iran because it wouldn't make any sense. The
problem is, these are not people governed by sanity. In 2002, as Bush
and the Republicans campaigned against Democrats as to how tough they
where to whip their genitals out to oust Hussein, I assumed that all
the talk about invading Iraq was bravado. I seriously thought to
myself: they couldn't be that stupid.
I was wrong. Really wrong. Before this administration there
have presidents of both parties who have done things that people can
clearly disagree about on policy, but we had a long tradition of not
being completely insane in the White House. Things have changed.
I was trying to think about why I've been bothered by the constant focus, especially among some conservatives, on the Duke rape case and its aftermath. There's no
doubt that Mike Nifong is an idiot of the highest order who screwed up
those student's lives considerably and he should be strongly punished.
But isn't the whole reason why Duke is notable the fact that it's an
outlier? We don't have a very long tradition of middle to upper class
white males being victimized by the justice system. When it does come
to light it does so largely because of its rarity.
But the mostly symbolic, silly and time-wasting vote on MoveOn
did have an effect. Sen. Clinton and Dodd voted against stupidity (Let
me know when the senate votes to condemn pro-administration outlets
like Rush Limbaugh - who regularly slurs women, minorities and anyone
not on the left while calling for torture and the like. He makes
anything intemperate MoveOn has ever said or endorsed look like a
southern belle at the spring formal. I wonder when we'll have a single
Democratic senator with the balls to push a resolution condemning
Limbaugh & Co.) while Sen. Obama simply didn't show up.
ODub talks the talk and walks the walk. And, Atrios hasn't been slacking either:
All of this was utterly predictable last Spring, and blindingly obvious
by August. If people want to pretend that fake media controversies
which didn't move public opinion in the slightest are the reason that
they're failing to do the jobs they were elected to do they're welcome
to do that, but they just reveal themselves to be petty childish
mediocrities with fragile egos who don't want to take responsibility
for their own failures.
Reid bad, won't compromise. Of course what really has happened is that
the Democrats, including Reid, wanted to find some sort of compromise
bill to get "moderate Republicans" on board, but then they realized
that moderate Republicans won't actually get on board with anything
that could actually achieve anything in Iraq, and even if they did they
don't exist in sufficient numbers (60 total or 67 depending on how you
want to look at it) for an actual compromise to pass.
Could somebody rational (not so fast Ms. Malkin) please explain to me what is so farooking awful about Ahmahinejad's will to visit 'ground zero'? It's a publicity stunt, and the whining mass of wingnut stupid is giving him more than he could have hoped for. He wants to lay a wreath, for pity's sake. So what? What do you really think is gonna happen, wingnuts? Do you think he's gonna pee on the hollowed dirt (hollowed only because it's the site of one of our greatest ass-kickings)? After 9/11, Iran promised help, and offered sympathy and support. A few short months later, some important retard lumped them into a mythological "axis of evil". That doesn't mean that we have to buy into their anger, or the bullshit from the important retard. Iran had jack-shit to do with the terror attacks of 9/11. So I really want someone to rationally explain: what's the problem here?
Folks, I can't get all worked up about this. MoveOn put things poorly. The wingnuts went apeshit. Tester is correct: let's not waste a buttload of time concerning something idiotic. Move On.
On the other hand, the Democrats really did play right into the gambit of Republicants who are banking on the voters being dumb enough to care more about fantasy than they are that the Republicants have chosen:
A) Our troops will serve without just rest until they die!
B) Habeas Corpus is some foreign term that don't mean shit to Amurkins.
Out of deference to one of my frequent readers, I haven't wigged out about the sadistic bastard engineer who feels that Bozeman's northside should be unaccessible from anywhere else in town. So, imagine my joy at reading this letter to the editor in the Bozeman Comical that succinctly sums up my frustrations:
Is there any street, avenue, highway, boulevard, bridge, alley, place, drive, court, circle, square, sidewalk, path, trail or driveway in Bozeman not under repair or construction? If there isn't, who's paying for it?
The foot-stamping defenders of appropriate speech are at it again, demanding that the leftlibdemocomfascists do what the children want, when they want it done. It's always fun to point out that what they are demanding is the same as always, that the lldcfs (read 'Democrats') aren't sacrificing one of our own to appease the god of rightful thinking (which would be the whiny little children's view of themselves.) Here's a tip, kids: if you want Murtha sacrificed to sate your outrage and hate ... do it yourselves, if you have the balls.
To put some context to this, I have an introduction to make. Steve, meet Clif. Clif, this is Steve.
Now Steve was all bemoanin' that us Democrats aren't hating Murtha to Steve's required level of desire, thinking that we're letting him hide behind his military service . But then, we know that Steve ain't the sharpest of the knives in drawer. That's why he focuses on something Murtha said that appears to be the actual fact of the case, and has his temper tantrum about that. He missed completely the story that CREW (you know, that left wing organization that so viciously slandered Conrad Burns) has placed Murtha on their Most Corrupt Congress-person's list. I guess CREW didn't get the memo from MoveOn.org, did they Steve?
Of course Steve didn't notice it. That would have meant he would be honor bound to acknowledge the 18 Republican congressmen on that list of 22. Or perhaps, Steve would have had to acknowledge that the overwhelming majority of people who grant mythological power to military service are Republicants, such as himself. Murtha isn't immune to attack from the left because of his military service. He's only immune to cheap shots from lying chicken-hawks because of his military service. And Steve, that's a problem for your side ... not mine. Whine all you want for the cookie. The only kids who will whine with you are those who want one to. It shouldn't be at all surprising that we adults just don't want to give you one anymore.
President Bush's TV address
tonight was the worst speech he's ever given on the war in Iraq, and
that's saying a lot. Every premise, every proposal, nearly every
substantive point was sheer fiction. The only question is whether he
was being deceptive or delusional.
The biggest fiction was that
because of the "success" of the surge, we can reduce U.S. troop levels
in Iraq from 20 combat brigades to 15 by next July. Gen. David Petraeus
has recommended this step, and President George W. Bush will order it
Let's be clear one more time about this claim: The surge of
five extra combat brigades (bringing the total from 15 to 20) started
in January. Their 15-month tours of duty will begin to expire next
April. The Army and Marines have no combat units ready to replace them.
The service chiefs refuse to extend the tours any further. The
president refuses to mobilize the reserves any further. And so, the
surge will be over by next July. This has been understood from the
outset. It is the result of simple arithmetic, not of anyone's
decision, much less some putative success.
The emphasis is mine. It's simple math. 130,000 + 30,000 - 30,000 = 130,000. There will be no troop withdrawal, save in the pettiest technical sense. It's nothing more than a bone to call off the dogs (which, by the way, is how your elected Chief Executive appears to think of you.) Here's a hint to Congress, however; if you really want the folks back home to pay attention, draw down the one thing that Bush didn't mention at all, but matters to every one of us. We're spending $2,000,000,000 a week in Iraq. That has surged somewhat, but it won't go down in July of next year. It's just gonna keep bleeding away. Return on Success? Bullshit. You are Congress, and have been given the fiscal reigns of the nation. Demand a Return on Investment, or get the hell out. Even "libertarians" might understand that reasoning (though experience with the locals has taught me not to expect it.)
The Willful kind, to be exact. We've all heard the old saw about a guy so dumb, he couldn't pour piss out his boot if the instructions were written on the heel? When something is laid out all nice, neat and simple, it takes a real special kind of stupid to go flailing off in another direction entirely. The willful kind.
Since Steve has already shown himself to be a 3rd dan blackbelt in the art of Obtuse, today's offering should come as no surprise. Cribbing off another man so dumb he'd drown in the rain looking up to see where the water was coming from, Don Surber, Steve thinks he's found the holy 'gotcha' to all us anti-war leftists. We are traitors because we agree with Osama bin Laden and want the same things (notice that those are 2 distinct issues). Feeling all pumped with his sarcastic coup in the bag, Steve boldly declares that he won't question our patriotism; that might hurt our feelings.
I'm not such a squeamish wuss, and I don't care if I hurt Steve's feelings by pointing out the obvious ... that he's an idiot, and the proof is in his own argument. Since it's customary to look before pointing and laughing, let's just check this touch of comedy out.
Surber notices that many of the things that bin Laden said in his recent address are similar to many of the things having been said by prominent Democrats. Coincidence? No, couldn't be. And it probably isn't. Here's where Don and Steve go so terribly wrong. They assume that these Democrats, indeed all Democrats, *agree* with Osama (it's still unseemly to refer to him as bin Laden because his father has disowned him, but that's a small matter.) Oh the horror! They make one of the most stupidly colossal leaps of logic imaginable: because someone agrees with a monster on some things, that one must be a monster as well. The stupid ... it burns!
Steve even goes so far as to pretend he knows logic. He lays out the possibilities:
1. Both are right; 2. Both are wrong; and 3. One is right and the other
wrong. But how can that be you ask? How can both be in agreement, but
one be right, and one wrong? (Uhhh Steve, if they've really said the same thing, it's not possible that one be right and one wrong, so why did you list this as a possibility, and separate it from your number 4? Just askin ... W.) Maybe there is a fourth category. Both are
pursuing agendas that require cooperation with what would otherwise be
Wait just a second here. Even if we ignore that 1, 2 and 3 are possibilities, and 4 is a "category", what should be obvious is that number 4 doesn't stand as distinct, or in any way preclude, possibilities number 1, 2 or 3. I smell a rat.
And indeed that is the case. Steve assumes that number 3 is possible, actually he assumes that it is seen as the case at hand, and argues that his mythical number 4 somehow explains how the impossible is fact. What he writes next is absolutely true:
It's not that I think that Democrats want to cooperate with bin Laden.
Rather, I think that the Democrats seek to maximize their political
holdings by going after Bush. And OBL recognizes that having this
division is beneficial to him as well.
That appears problematic. Steve is saying that Osama and the Democrats want the same thing, and we know that Osama is bad (hence 'wrong' ) ... so really the fact is that possibility number 2 is the correct one. Osama and the Democrats are wrong because they have agendas that call for the same things.
Too bad for Master Eschenbacher that he confuses fact with agenda. There is no fourth category or possibility. The obvious truth to be had is number 1. There are facts that Osama and the Democrats agree on. I'm certain that Osama agrees with Steve that 2+2=4. That doesn't mean that Steve has the same agenda as the terrorist, does it? But knowing that 2+2=4 helps bin Laden and Steve, right? So, I certainly wouldn't question Steve's patriotism, even though he agrees with what the terrorists want.
No. Osama and the anti-war Democrats do not have the same agenda, regardless of whether we recognize the same facts. Part of our agenda is to find Osama's ass and kill him. I doubt that's on the bin Laden to-do list. Osama ain't in Iraq, and we can't find and kill him while we're blowing $2 billion a week avoiding the problem ... and making it worse. Steve, ever the dim one at this, applies the all-knowing will, and conjures up his fantasy world where getting out of the clusterfuck in Iraq is what Osama wants and so we shouldn't do it. To Steve, allowing the terrorists to manipulate and dictate our actions is the right thing to do. Steve may sarcastically hold my feelings in esteem and not call me a traitor. I'm not as stupid as he is, and I will flatly and certainly call his patriotism into question when he offers our country's sovereignty over to al Qaeda just because Steve wants to feel like he's resisting them (reaction is juvenile, Steve lad. And in this case, it's the seriously wrong thing to do. Grow up and choose your actions for once.)
There is one huge factual difference between the Democrats and Osama bin Laden. Thanks to the incompetence and narrow-minded ball-shriveling partisan-power-grabbing terror on the part of Republicans ... Osama got away with it.
"I remember so much more betterer than you bitches. Now is the time on sprockets where we are sad. ~Don't cry for me, Amarillo~. Have you bought my books yet? Be Mad! Durka durka durka, fatwa, jiHAD! ... on liberals. I'm so much prettier than Cindy Sheehan. Don't forget to report your neighbors, and nevar Forgit ... in the ideologically correct manner, of course. (Jesse, get me another Fresca, you lazy bitch!)"
Sadly, that really is shorter than what Michelle penned.
Dave Neiwert lobs another hand grenade at Michelle's fantasy force field. Dave, you know I love you, buddy, and I respect the hell out of you for trying to breach Malkin's wall of denial. But it ain't gonna happen. This woman wears the Armor of Ignorance, and carries the Shield of Vanity, and the perky little Cap of Hypocrisy. Keep up the good work, but don't expect reason to ever breach her beautiful (little) mind.
Since I'm poking the fun at the genus Wingnut, I should mention that a funny thing happened on the way to this post. I stumbled on a new website that should actually have content soon. This is how the author describes it:
The blog will include writing by myself and other men writing on the state of manhood and masculinity in the 21st Century.
At a time when it's difficult to distinguis the men from the girls
at times, us "real" men need a place to vent, scream, beat our chests
and share ideas and stories about our manhood.
It would probably be advisable for wives to read the blog for better understanding.
All I can say is if you like sports, guns, action movies, reading
the paper in the john and consider french fries a vegetable of its own,
you'll love Testosterone HQ.
I'll have more soon on our illustrious contributors.
Untill then: Long live Clint Eastwood!
Yes, the spelling and grammar errors are all his. He calls the place ... Testosterone HQ, and this ought be a comedy riot. You wives out there better sharpen your thinking caps and hustle your bustle right to that site if'n you want to know what a real man like you got is thinkerin'.
Any bets on whether or not this poser will link to Michelle Malkin? (Jesse, get me another beer, you lazy bitch!)