the blog of DC Drinking Liberally
Heh. Gotta love the 1% culture of life. Here are the rules:
1. If there’s even a fraction of a 1% chance that something will result in Republican voters having a baby, then it must be protected, and all contrary efforts are anathema.
2. Once a fetus hits puberty:
a. If it’s a boy (unless it’s brown, then see 2c, unless already directed here from another rule), give it a gun and point it at brown people. Or give it a keyboard and point it at Democrats or other undesirables. Otherwise, to hell with it; throw it in jail.
b. If it’s a girl (unless it’s brown, then see 2c, unless already directed here from that rule), administer under rule #1. Unless it objects, in which case see 2a.
c. If it’s brown, and it won’t talk like Anne Coulter or worse *cough* better, then see 2a.
Did I miss anything?
Couldn’t resist the opportunity to throw y’all some snark.
See y’all tomorrow at Timberlake’s.
Being out of touch with “mainstream America” is unpleasant in today’s United States, but I believe it’s better to walk on a path that both my mind and my heart have convinced me is correct, that to listen to voices that lie to me with every breath. It is better to look for the rocks in the path with my eyes, rather than with my nose stuck in any one of a number of books devoted to someone else’s dogma. I know from painful experience that it’s better to remember the past, than to pretend it never happened.
I want to be an American, in America.
What does that mean? I look to a few critical pieces of writing in our history, informed by the events that surrounded them to answer that question. The documents cited below are made by human beings, and therefore flawed - in some cases critically. But it gives me hope, because there is proof that mistakes can be corrected, which we’ll get to. To begin, the words of Jefferson are instructive.
A fun-filled Friday afternoon time-waster, brought to you by your friends at Drinking Liberally.
Unless you’ve spent the last few days in your Montana cabin writing your manifesto, you’ve probably heard that the Google China site censors out internet sites featuring dissent, freedom of speech, and anything to do with the Tiananmen Square massacre.
After a few searches, I tried this one. Hmmm. What are the Chinese censors afraid of?
You can play, too! Go to the Chinese Google sight, and see if you can trip up Dear Leader’s henchmen.
Everywhere I look today I see Cheney’s mug. Leering as if to remind me: “You may have been right about Iraq. you may be right about torture. And maybe we did screw the pooch on this Plame thing. But remember: I’m barking dog mad. And, I know where you live.”
It makes me nostalgic for happier times. When Cheney would spend his days holed up in an undisclosed bunker.
Here’s some other little tidbits that might get overlooked on Cheney’s big day out:
…like someone holding their phone bill and discovering that the huge total reflects some unknown person’s voracious phone-sex habit. Until they’ve been on hold for three hours waiting to talk to a human being, that is. The story, or ones like it, has been around for some time, but the Motley Fool tells us that being a customer isn’t what it used to be. While it’s a phenomenon most of us are familiar with, very rarely does anyone look at the history of consumer relations in order to find an explanation. With the post-war economic boom of the 1950’s (domestically driven by the families enthusiastically participating in the Baby Boom), “the customer is always right” was the watchword for service. Now, you don’t hear it anymore. Why not? I have a few ideas:
1. Because it’s expensive. The no-questions return policy (for example) costs a great deal more than just the lost sale. More to the point, a bad marketing decision can mean tremendous losses.
2. Because it’s messy. Customers want to be special cases when things go wrong for them. Special cases take time and money, and time is money.
3. Because it’s much, much easier to identify them as consumers, and assume that consuming is something they must do.
Tell Huffington’s Toast I sent you:
Blogfather: I have with me tonight Ann Althouse. Mrs. Ann Althouse.
Ms. Althouse: Ms.
Blogfather: You have a new theory about the blogosphere.
Ms. Althouse: Can I just say here Glenn for one moment that I have a new theory about the blogosphere?
Blogfather: Er… exactly. (he gestures but she does not say anything) What is it?
Ms. Althouse: Where? (looks round)
Blogfather: No, no. Your new theory.
Ms. Althouse: Oh, what is my theory?
Ms. Althouse: Oh what is my theory that it is. Well Glenn you may well ask me what is my theory.
Blogfather: I am asking.
Ms. Althouse: Good for you. My word yes. Well Glenn, what is it that it is - this theory of mine. Well, this is what it is - my theory that I have, that is to say, which is mine, is mine…
At Nieman Watchdog, Barry Sussman insists that Throat/Felt’s role was minor, as was the essential crime of Watergate:
Looked at in this light, the Watergate break-in was just a routine raid by White House thugs who thought they were above the law and who couldn’t distinguish tough politics from crime. The FBI, including Mark Felt, also was deep into illegal activities, infiltrating antiwar groups and at times prodding them to actions, including bombings, that they might not have committed on their own. In 1980, Felt was convicted for his role.
About as bad as anything else was the cover-up. It’s not known whether Nixon was aware of the break-in in advance, but it is clear that he personally directed the cover-up with its hush money payments, fake White House investigations, protestations of innocence, inveigling of the CIA and FBI into compliance (at least for a while), and assistance from members of both political parties on Capitol Hill to block inquiries.
As it happens, I’m reading All The President’s Men at the moment. Which leaves the reader with a much different impression. First of all, Deep Throat is mentioned about every 5 to 10 pages. His role was often confirming Woodward’s theories, occasionally being a second source. But it’s Woodward’s midnight encounters with Felt in an isolated garage that form the dramatic backbone of the book. Now Sussman’s impression may have been different from Woodward and Bernstein, but Sussman is being overly dismissive.
The other thing, and again it may just be Woodward, Bernstein, and Sussman weren’t on the same page, if that’s the expression, but the bit about “the Watergate break-in was just a routine raid by White House thugs” sharply disagrees with All the President’s Men. The break in was what got prosecuted, but the bigger issue was that CReeP had an organization of at least 50 people whose mission it was to subvert the electoral process. A lot of what CReeP engaged wasn’t illegal, but if the pattern of activities had been known, the public would have been outraged.
As an example, it was the job of one CReePer to hire rabble-rousers to disrupt Democratic rallies. The job of another to pose as a Democratic organizer and routinely change meeting times and places. The job of another to order unwanted pizzas, flowers, and caterers and send them to rallies, COD. The people on Nixon’s enemies were wire-tapped- that probably was illegal- but for whatever reason, the prosecution focused on the Watergate break-in.
This is more than just a historical question, of course. The investigation of L’affaire de Rove may lead us to understand Bush/Nixon parallels.
44 queries. 0.367 seconds