Lego Thingies

This thing is great. It lets you create lego characters. Check out my brilliant creations:

CD with drumstick and Cluebat™

I realized that I'm almost as boring in Lego form as I am in real life, so I also created a character:

I don't know who he is or where he came from, but he has a funny hat, so there!

I think I'm done now...

Sunday Updates

All right, so I haven't posted since Thursday. I needed a break from blogging. I don't know if I'll be back to a regular schedule before the end of the week, but we'll see.

Until then, I'll post a few completely random updates just because I can.

First of all, college is still hard. Can someone please explain to me why I was able to pull off a B+ average in 11th grade "Pre-calculus and Trigonometry," but I can barely pass a test for "Probability and Statistics for the Liberal Arts" in college? I think I'm getting dumber from reading Democratic Underground too much.

I'm also having a slight problem with housing for next year. I was assigned a really high number (which is bad because low numbers get first choice), and I have to deal with the fact that I can't fill any rooms because I don't have any friends. Stupid social skills...

Life isn't completely f'ed up, fortunately. I have been working more on Infiltrating the Liberal Media™. Again, I'm not really infiltrating much right now. I'm basically just working with 'em to make sure I have connections when the real opportunities arise.

I'm actually going to be in a sketch for the next episode of "Syracuse Live." The sketch is about a "rock, paper, scissors" tournament, and it's actually pretty funny. In one of the segments, we did the RPS version of the Nancy Kerrigan thingy. I play a guy who was hired to smash a girl's hands so she can't play. Heh. It's funnier when you see it (I'll link to it once it's online).

(side note: if my roommate keeps talking on his cell phone when I'm trying to write, I'm going to hurt him. I don't know why you should care, but still...)

In other ITLM news, I am starting to see the liberal element of it. At the meeting this afternoon, our producer informed us that we need to recruit more minorities for the staff (all but 2 of the SU Live members are white). Someone suggested that we go to a party hosted by a black fraternity and try to get people interested. So, in case you were wondering, college sketch comedy shows DO use affirmative action. At least they're trying to.

Also, in one of the sketches for the next show, the basic premise is that one of the hosts (who is Catholic) is mad at the other host (who is Jewish) because he saw "The Passion of the Christ" and thinks the Jewish guy killed Jesus. The sketch somehow progresses to a sequence where the Jewish guy fights Jesus and takes his power or something.

However, the guy who was originally going to play Jesus actually saw the movie, and now he doesn't know if it's appropriate. The producer also saw it, and she told us it was one of the goriest things she's ever seen. Sounds like a great idea to spoof, morons.

I'm also trying to come up with some ideas of my own. I'm thinking that a sketch called "Idiot Quiz" would be funny. It's a trivia show, but the point is to give the dumbest answers imaginable while still sounding like you answered the question. So, for example, if the question is, "What is 2+2?" You could say "7" and get a point, or you could say "the square root of thirteenty-billion and negative six," and you'd get more.

However, if you said "two giraffes and a bagel," you'd lose points because you obviously didn't listen to the question. Since this is college, I came up with some more...uh...well, "mature" answers as well. Nothing too weird, but still...I may just write a sketch where the character I came up with is on a normal game show, but he keeps giving stranger and stranger answers.

Again, it's college humor, not my usual style (I have a sick mind most of the time). I've got three specific jokes in mind. I don't think they're appropriate for this particular blog, but let me know if you want to hear (read?) them.

I also think a sketch about the gay marriage thing would be funny (I want to have a guy trying to marry a toaster), but I don't know if I want to pitch that for a college show. Maybe I'll just write it for the blog and stick to more generally funny topics for the TV show.

So, that's what's happening now. To summarize: College math is dumb, housing is hard, I'm in a sketch where I smash a girl's hands with a (plastic) club, HillTV is trying to implement affirmative action, and I'm trying to write more PG-13 and/or R-rated humor just because I can.

More political stuff later (not necessarily today).

The Prattling of the Poodle

Maureen Dowd seems to be getting dumber with every column. I honestly don't know how this woman finds her way out the door in the morning. For proof of this theory, which I'll call "CD's Theory of Exponentially Increasing Dowdian Idiocy," let's look at her latest work:

Stations of the Crass By MAUREEN DOWD A Poodle

Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.

Mel Gibson and George W. Bush are courting bigotry in the name of sanctity.

You could say the same about the people they're supposedly oppressing.

The moviemaker wants to promote "The Passion of the Christ" and the president wants to prevent the passion of the gays.

"The passion of the gays" obviously isn't being prevented, or else there would be no gays, MoDo. Do you even know what you're saying anymore?

Opening on two screens: W.'s stigmatizing as political strategy...

This from a woman who just called Bush a bigot because she disagrees with him. Do I even need to say "hooray for consistency?"

...and Mel's stigmata as marketing strategy.

How dare he ask people to PAY for a MOVIE!

Mr. Gibson, who told Diane Sawyer that he was inspired to make the movie after suffering through addictions, found the ultimate 12-step program: the Stations of the Cross.

Every time Maureen Dowd makes a bad pun, a kitten dies. Won't somebody please think of the kittens?!

I went to the first show of "The Passion" at the Loews on 84th Street and Broadway; it was about a quarter filled. This is not, as you may have read, a popcorn movie. In Latin and Aramaic with English subtitles, it's two gory hours of Jesus getting flayed by brutish Romans at the behest of heartless Jews.

Is this supposed to be a news flash?

Perhaps fittingly for a production that licensed a jeweler to sell $12.99 nail necklaces (what's next? crown-of-thorns prom tiaras?)...

THE KITTENS! SAVE THE FUZZY KITTENS!!!

..."The Passion" has the cartoonish violence of a Sergio Leone Western.

Actually, "cartoonish violence" wouldn't be portrayed as realistically as possible, as Gibson apparently tried to do. What kind of cartoons has she been watching?

You might even call it a spaghetti crucifixion, "A Fistful of Nails."

At this rate, kittens will be extinct by the end of the week! Why does she keep making puns?!

In all seriousness, how can she say in one line that the film is too gory, and then call it "cartoonish" in another? Either way, what did she expect?

"You don't understand! I thought that 'flogged and nailed to a cross' was Biblical slang for 'given a firm slap on the wrist and sent to his room!'"

Writing in The New Republic, Leon Wieseltier, the literary editor, scorns it as "a repulsive, masochistic fantasy, a sacred snuff film" that uses "classically anti-Semitic images."

So, she just saw the film, but she's quoting someone else's opinion of it? An opinion that just happens to meet her expectations of what the film is like? Hmmm...

I went with a Jewish pal, who tried to stay sanguine. "The Jews may have killed Jesus," he said. "But they also gave us `Easter Parade.' "

WHAT?!

...no further comment.

The movie's message, as Jesus says, is that you must love not only those who love you, but more importantly those who hate you.

So presumably you should come out of the theater suffused with charity toward your fellow man.

But this is a Mel Gibson film, so you come out wanting to kick somebody's teeth in.

Sounds like the way I felt after I first read through this editorial.

In "Braveheart" and "The Patriot," his other emotionally manipulative historical epics...

"Emotionally manipulative?" Is that what they're calling effective screenwriting these days? My TRF professor must've forgotten that lesson.

...you came out wanting to swing an ax into the skull of the nearest Englishman.

You Anglophobe! How dare you!

I like this. It shows us that liberals really do think in terms of groups. For example, "White people in the 21st Century should pay for what white slave owners did in the 19th Century." In this case, it's, "I feel like taking an ax to an Englishman because his ancestors oppressed Scotland!"

Here, you want to kick in some Jewish and Roman teeth.

Did she just admit to being an anti-semite?

And since the Romans have melted into history . . .

So, without giving us any proof whatsoever other than the ramblings of some pretentious literary editor and the assurance that she did actually WATCH the movie, she concludes that it makes people want to kill Jews.

I'd advise my Jewish readers to stay away from Maureen Dowd. She seems a bit impressionable.

Now, let's see what she has to say about Dubya:

Like Mr. Gibson, Mr. Bush is whipping up intolerance but calling it a sacred cause.

No, what's intolerant is your refusal to accept any opinion other than your own, and your unbelievable willingness to blame any disagreements on ignorance and hatred, you self-centered Mauron.

Oh, right, the rest of you haven't read the entire column yet. I'll save the vitriol for later.

At first, the preacher-in-chief...

I'm practically swimming in tolerance and respect!!! It's so beautiful!

...resisted conservative calls for a constitutional ban on gay marriage.

Yes, it was the Evil Religious Reich™ whispering dastardly deeds in Dubya's ears.

He felt, as Jesus put it in the Gibson script (otherwise known as the Gospels), "If it is possible, let this chalice pass from me."

It's another edition of "Put Words in the President's Mouth!" This week, Jesus Christ Himself has contributed to the word bank! It's gonna be awesome!

But under pressure from the Christian right...

I'm sure it was all their fault, and Bush had absolutely nothing to do with it. That would suggest that he's capable of thinking for himself, after all. We wouldn't want to shatter the illusion that Dubya is a Rove puppet with no mind.

...he grabbed the chalice with both hands and swigged — seeking to set a precedent in codifying discrimination in the Constitution...

She didn't even come up with that "codifying discrimination" line, if I remember correctly. Was this entire column written by other people?

...a document that in the past has been amended to correct discrimination by giving fuller citizenship rights to blacks, women and young people.

And your point would be...what? Explain to me how gays aren't full citizens. Do they have to have a Pink Card™ to enter and leave the country?

If the president is truly concerned about preserving the sanctity of marriage, as one of my readers suggested...

DO YOU HAVE ANY ORIGINAL THOUGHTS AT ALL?!

...why not make divorce illegal and stone adulterers?

Worst. Analogy. EVER.

Our soldiers are being killed in Iraq...

Really? Why didn't someone tell me before? What a fool I was for supporting a WAR where people DIE!

Osama's still on the loose...

He's either dead or incapacitated.

...jobs are being exported all over the world...

"So let's keep 'em here by making companies pay more taxes and hire less workers!"

...the deficit has reached biblical proportions.

This is funny in two ways. First of all, she thinks the economy is still getting worse. Also, she somehow thinks she has the ability to define what's Biblical, despite the fact that she's probably never even looked at the Bible (or else she'd realize that yes, Christ really was crucified). Hilarious.

And our president is worrying about Mars and marriage?

He wasn't worrying about marriage until the judges tyrants in California decided that laws don't matter.

When reporters tried to pin down White House spokesman Scott McClellan yesterday on why gay marriage is threatening, he spouted a bunch of gobbledygook about "the fabric of society" and civilization.

I guess that to a brainless moral relativist like MoDo, gobbledygook=anything suggesting that right and wrong exist.

The pols keep arguing that institutions can't be changed when, in fact, they change all the time. Haven't they ever heard of the institution of slavery?

Correction from above: THAT^ was the worst. analogy. EVER.

The government should not be trying to legislate what's sacred.

So why do you want gay marriage? Are you a hypocrite, or are you just too dumb to actually have your own opinion?

...I'll take "both" for 600, Alex.

When Bushes get in trouble, they look around for a politically advantageous bogeyman.

"Because when Republicans take a stand on an issue, it's ALWAYS for political gain. Only Democrats are allowed to have personal beliefs."

Lee Atwater tried to make Americans shudder over the prospect of Willie Horton arriving on their doorstep; and now Karl Rove wants Americans to shudder at the prospect of a lesbian — Dick Cheney's daughter Mary, say — setting up housekeeping next door with her "wife."

No, they can already do that. What Americans are afraid of is Mary and her wife (without the scare quotes, because the marriage is official) forcing people to accept their behavior as perfectly normal and branding those who disagree as bigots and homophobes.

I've said this once before: Gays used to want people out of their bedrooms, which they got. These days, they want to give a free guided tour of their bedrooms, complete with souvenirs and postcards.

When it comes to the Bushes' willingness to stir up base instincts of the base, it is as it was.

Of course she blames it all on Bush. It couldn't have anything to do with the fact that gays are forcing their opinions down the throat of the nation with no regard for the LAW. That's just civil disobedience, and all good "progressives" know that civil disobedience CAN'T be bad!

As the Max von Sydow character said in Woody Allen's "Hannah and Her Sisters," while watching a TV evangelist appealing for money: "If Jesus came back and saw what's going on in his name, he'd never stop throwing up.

I'm sure Jesus would be perfectly accepting of gay marriage. After all, He never told people they were wrong, did He? He just told them to "love everybody," and that obviously makes it okay for two men or two women to love each other with government approval!

Maureen Dowd needs to be struck repeatedly in the vacuum she calls a cranium with the largest Cluebat™ available.

That would be some good "cartoonish violence."

What?

Okay, I'm back. I'm going to start working on several posts right now. Until then, I have one question:

Why is this story considered "national news" by the New York Times?

Announcement #2

The way things are looking right now, I'm going to have to take today off too.

Sorry. College is hard.

UPDATE

Correction: I'll have some stuff posted around 11 PM if everything goes according to plan. That is all.

UPDATE #2
I've still got stuff to do, but when I get back, I'll be fisking Maureen Dowd, among other things. She really deserves this one, believe me.

Announcement

I've got a lot of work to do, so unless something monumental happens, I won't be blogging today. The same probably goes for Thursday, but we'll see.

UPDATE
Okay, real quick:

1- Today is my 5 month blogiversary, if anyone cares.

2- I've gotten a few search hits for "impeach Lockyer." Heh heh. I wish I could help with that, but I'm in New York.

3- Go check out the Carnival of the Vanities. Watch out for teh b00biez!

...Okay, I'm done now.

Today's Question for the Left

I've been thinking about this for a while, and I'd really like to ask a few liberals for an answer. Ready?

According to some people, since Mel Gibson's father is anti-Semitic, Mel Gibson must be anti-Semitic. Also, since President Bush's grandfather had some sort of Nazi connections (supposedly), Bush must also be a Nazi.

So, here's the question: My grandfather was in World War II. Does that make me a veteran?

Idiots.

Marriage Thoughts

Okay, the same-sex marriage debate seems to be intensifying. I've posted about this quite a few times, so I won't go repeating the same arguments I've made before, but I want to touch on a couple of points:

#1- President Bush wants to amend the Constitution to ban same-sex marriage once and for all. This may surprise you, but I'm actually opposed to this right now. Here's the process we need:
-Make sure judges are following existing laws (like the one in California that was passed BY VOTERS) instead of writing their own. If they try to be activists, they're done. Immediately.
-If this continues, and the issue is still a problem, let the states vote to determine whether or not they will institute same-sex marriage.
-If officials continue to defy the law after the voting is complete, THEN you amend the Constitution. Go through the proper channels first, Dubya.

#2: Laws against same-sex marriage are not denying rights specifically to homosexuals. Anyone who makes this claim is an idiot. I know people might say that only homosexuals want to marry members of their own gender, but that logic doesn't work. If we followed through on the logic that people with an inclination to do something have a right to do it, it would be legal for kleptomaniacs to steal, and it would be legal for alcoholics to drive drunk. It doesn't work that way.

#3: Comparing same-sex marriage to interracial marriage should carry about as much weight in a serious debate as comparing President Bush to Hitler. If you can't see the difference between color and gender, I feel sorry for you.

#4: I've seen an argument that denying same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. Where in the Constitution does it guarantee the right to marry? I've actually seen people cite the 14th Amendment, but that doesn't make sense either. They say it violates the Equal Protection Clause. Let's take a look:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

What part of that passage are they interpreting as a defense of same-sex marriage? Could someone PLEASE explain this to me? Last time I checked, homosexuals had equal protection under the law. They're subject to the same laws as everyone else. That's equal protection. Get over yourselves.

#5: This is related to #2, but I have to say it one more time: HOMOSEXUALS. ALREADY. HAVE. THE RIGHT. TO MARRY. The issue is whether PEOPLE should have the PRIVILEGE to marry members of their own gender. I'm getting tired of saying this, but a lot of people still don't seem to get it.

So, that's where we are now. Once again, I'm currently opposed to the Constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. It seems like Bush is trying to take the same path as the activist judges by going above the American people.

Let. The. States. Vote.

If judges continue to defy the law after the states vote, amend the Constitution to protect the will of the people. I know I said that already, but it's worth repeating.

"Transgenders" at SU

NOTE: If you happen to be a faculty member or student at Wells College, I'd be interested to know why you keep linking to this post from your e-mail accounts. Come on, enlighten me.

-CD

This story is just too strange to ignore:

Transgender teach-in investigates identity: Forum offers answers and challenges assumptions through six discussions

The bras, stilettos and lipstick came off only hours after they'd been put on. Performers of last Thursday's Totally Fabulous Drag Show gender-bended for only one night.

Yes, you read that right. The school had a "drag show." I believe it was in the student center, actually.

But long after the show ended, many of the show's questions of gender identity remained unanswered, said [the] director of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Resource Center.

Questions like, "Why the f**k did we just put on a cross-dressing show at a university?"

This year, some campus officials decided to provide an outlet for these questions and answers through a Transgender Teach-In, Monday morning in the Hall of Languages.

Teach-ins are always a good sign of progress. (/sarcasm)

"When I walked away from the show last year, the question I had was, 'Why is this so much fun?'" [she] said. "Why is this so much fun to play with gender and see how gender isn't perfect and how freeing, in many ways, it felt to be in that environment."

Maybe because...uh...you know, I don't think there's an answer to that question that isn't disturbing in some way.

Within its six different sessions...

It's amazing how much time they devote to little subgroups like this. Gotta respect gender diversity!

...the teach-in addressed many of the issues facing those who identify as transgender. The term transgender applies to those whose gender identity does not match the gender assigned at birth.

Biology? What's that?

It applies to transsexuals, drag queens or kings, cross-dressers or gender queers...

Sexual...Newspeak...hurting...brain!

...or people who identify as neither male nor female...

You know, there's this handy device called a "mirror" that can help you solve that dilemma.

...said...the graduate assistant at the LGBT Resource Center and graduate student in social work.

In the first session...an associate professor in social work...

What's with all the social workers?

...and [the graduate assistant] discussed the dangers transgender people face while living in jail, including rape, sexual abuse, unsafe conditions and lack of access to hormone therapy.

Hormone therapy? Uh...shouldn't the need for hormones tell them something about their "gender identity?" Like...maybe...it's not what they wish it was?

...[edited] an instructional technology analyst in Project Advance who identifies as transgender...

Why's he using his evil male name, then?

...presented responses from various transgender college students in the second session of the event. Some of the students said they felt very uncomfortable participating in campus organizations for fear of ridicule or felt as though others assumed they were either gay or heterosexual.

Young adults who still can't identify their own gender face ridicule? What kind of world are we living in?!

Two students shared some of their experiences in finding gender neutral bathrooms...

I'm speechless.

...and the process of officially changing their name.

"I have no formal Christian name. I am called 'Exclamation Point.'" (the first person to tell me where that quote originated gets a free box of absolutely nothing)

"I don't always want to be an educator, sometimes I just want to live my life," said...a student at Onondaga Community College and teach-in presenter, who identifies as transgender. "But in a situation like this, I'm happy to do it, if it'll make a difference."

Fight those oppressive gender absolutists!

The third session focused on health care issues facing transgender people, including access to hormone therapy...

That's not health care if they don't need it.

...disrespect or misunderstanding from medical officials...

I can't imagine why that would happen...

...and unfair treatment, such as poorly executed mastectomies.

"Screw cancer patients! You need to hack off these infernal boobies of mine NOW!"

"The problem is that there's been no education," said presenter [edited]an assistant professor of social work. "There's no way of them knowing that these issues exist."

Maybe because they didn't until you freaks started inventing them (yes, I said freaks. Deal with it).

SU can better accommodate the needs of transgender students through six inclusive policies and practice, [the LGBT director] said. It must add gender identity and expression to its non-discrimination policy, provide on-going education and workshops, complete an inventory of what resources currently exist for transgender students, identify what essential elements transgender students need, and encourage faculty to integrate transgender media into their courses.

Hey, I've got a better idea: Why don't we stop treating gender as some sort of nebulous personality trait with no biological basis? That would be a lot simpler than manipulating an entire set of policies because a few people can't decide what their genitals are for.

"We preach diversity, so it'd be good to actually show it in practice, not just on paper," said...a senior sociology and political science major.

This is not diversity. This is idiocy.

Presenters of the fourth session focused on sexuality and gender, saying that many people assume transgender people are gay or lesbian.

At least gays and lesbians can make up their frickin' minds.

But sexual orientation, sexual identity and gender identity are separate entities, said [a] professor of psychology and women's studies at Wells College.

"Gender is whatever we say it is, you heterosexist bigots!"

"Once you become comfortable with yourself, you realize how many people are uncomfortable with you," said [edited,] who transitioned from male to female last year and identifies as a lesbian.

Wouldn't it have been simpler to stay male if you were attracted to women before? Sounds to me like someone just wants to live out a fantasy.

"But all that matters is who I am, not what I am."

Okay, I just decided that I'm actually a retarded wood nymph who is sexually attracted to shrubbery. Do I get a teach-in and a resource center? All that matters is what I think, after all!

Some participants and organizers of the drag show reviewed their experiences in another session and explain how it relates to being transgender.

...The president of the Pride Union who performed as Ginger in the show, said the night of shaving body hair and painting nails was a commentary on gender expression in society.

I feel dirty for having read that.

The performers learned what women must do to meet their gender requirement, and the blending of both male and female gender identity allowed them to see the societal constructs of gender, [edited] said.

"Societal constructs of gender." This is what happens when you create an entire theory based on misconceptions. I guess biological differences between the sexes are socially constructed, too.

"It is fun to mess with people's gender and sexual orientation in a safe environment," [edited] said.

Did you hear that? It sounded like the fabric of society ripping in half!

The teach-in concluded with a documentary called "Just Call Me Kade," following the transition of Kade Collins, a 16-year old female to male. The audience watched as Kade experienced hormone therapy, survived depression and maintained relationships with friends and family.

At 16? Six-friggin-teen? Shouldn't you at least wait until you're considered an adult to go messing with your gender like this?

"Well, you see, the reason I'm your grandfather and not your grandmother is because I was a very confused adolescent. Kinda like that "XFL" tattoo I got. Think before you act, kids!"

"We wanted to end on something more triumphant," said [the] co-chairwoman of the senate of the LGBT committee and associate professor in the writing program. "It makes me tearful, and it makes me happy."

That's really sad.

After attending the teach-in, organizers hope that the campus community may begin to ask questions and consider making changes that could make the university a safe and welcoming place for transgender students.

How is it not? They had six friggin' talks! Some academic classes don't even meet that much!

"My hope is that after all of these conversations and awareness-raising talks, we can't go back to the normal ways of thinking about the LGBT community, and we have a better grasp on resources on transgender people and what's available," [LGBT director] said. "This is something that campuses across the country are dealing with. This is not a phase. It's not going away."

I like how they can take an issue that just started getting attention and pretend that it isn't a phase. I guess the last 50,000 years or so of human history were just full of bad ideas about gender.

This whole "transgender" mindset really disturbs me. People are basically saying that gender has no basis in biology and can be changed at any time, but then they go and do things like hormone therapy and surgery to attain the desired results.

Just another result of the futile search for "utopia." If you don't like reality, create a fantasy world. Then, make fantasy public policy and accuse those who disagree of being intolerant.

It's worked before, and it seems to be working again.

I'll be on the lookout for the "Retarded Wood Nymphs who are Attracted to Shrubbery Resource Center."

Go. Read. Laugh. Maybe.

I almost forgot: The permalink contest is up at Frnak's.

Honestly, I'm disappointed. The lists weren't that funny, and NONE OF 'EM WERE FRIGGIN' SPELL-CHECKED! Take some pride in your work, people!

My list was funnier than most of theirs. And everything was spelled right. I should've entered.

/ego inflating

Observation:

The guy sitting next to me in math lecture was eating a bag of "Soy Crisps."

Draw your own conclusions.

State Laws? What Are Those?

The Governator seems to be having some trouble with the same-sex marriage situation. Check this out:

State Attorney General Bill Lockyer on Saturday rebuffed Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's demand that he force an end to San Francisco's same-sex marriages, calling the directive political rhetoric.

Um, no, jackass, it's the LAW.

"The governor can direct the Highway Patrol. He can direct the next 'Terminator 4' movie if he chooses. But he can't direct the attorney general in the way he's attempted to do," Lockyer said...

He's the f**kin' governor, idiot.

...adding that Schwarzenegger's written directive "was a statement designed for consumption at the Republican convention."

"Those eeeeeeeeeeevil Republicans could NEVER have principles! If they were principled, they'd agree with us!"

In a fax Friday night to the home of a Lockyer aide, the governor wrote: "I hereby direct you to take immediate steps to obtain a definitive judicial resolution of this controversy." The message also said that San Francisco's actions to wed gay couples "present an imminent risk to civil order."

I'd agree with Ah-nold on that one.

Lockyer called that statement "preposterous" and said it is the kind of "exaggerated, hot rhetoric" that risks stirring people up to commit hate crimes.

"...Lockyer then called Schwarzenegger a 'big meanie' and cried until someone gave him his apple juice."

That's the image I get. I love how Lockyer Logic™ can somehow determine that abiding by the law causes hate crimes.

He said that he and Schwarzenegger have agreed all along that same-sex marriage is illegal under California law.

...Which means that he, by his own admission, isn't upholding the law. Can they impeach attorneys general?

He said it is his duty to defend the state against a lawsuit by San Francisco that calls the state's prohibition against same-sex marriage unconstitutional. Lockyer said his office will file a response early this week.

By dumping the gay marriage hot potato in Lockyer's lap, Schwarzenegger has managed to ease the concerns of his conservative supporters while still staying well clear of an issue he doesn't really need to get involved in.

Am I seeing things, or did the author of this article just manage to blame the whole fiasco on Arnold?

Schwarzenegger told Republicans at their state convention in Burlingame Friday that he is opposed to gay marriage, but his letter to Lockyer leaves all the heavy lifting on the issue to the attorney general. The fact that Lockyer is a possible Democratic challenger to Schwarzenegger in 2006 is just a bonus for the Republican governor.

...No comment. Friggin' media.

Attacking San Francisco has always been a surefire applause line for the conservative activists who typically fill the seats at Republican conventions...

Why does that strike me as a really condescending line?

...and the governor's assault on same-sex marriage...

Which, of course, is an ASSAULT ON THE LAW!

...brought the crowd to its feet Friday night. On Saturday, the GOP Senate candidates also used the stage to bash Mayor Gavin Newsom and the city.

Hmmm...my "Liberal Media Biased Bulls**t Detector" may just be working overtime, but it seems like the word "bash" is very deliberately employed here.

On the issue of civil defiance, San Francisco has to follow the law,'' said Bill Jones, former secretary of state. "It needs to be laid in the lap of the attorney general and he needs to deal with it.''

The tiff at the top between Schwarzenegger and Lockyer serves to clarify the lines of authority in the otherwise messy, often emotional struggle over same-sex marriage, legal experts told The Chronicle on Saturday.

A governor cannot tell an elected attorney general what to do, and neither can he tell a mayor what to do.

Can you say "downside of checks and balances," children?

"The governor really has very limited authority to do anything in this situation," said Jesse Choper, a constitutional law professor at UC Berkeley's Boalt Hall and the school's former dean. "And the mayor does not report to the governor. The mayor is the chief executive officer of the city and county of San Francisco. He works by himself."

Nor, apparently, can a governor tell a judge what to do.

So...what exactly DOES Schwarzenegger do?

Despite urging from Schwarzenegger, a Superior Court judge decided on Friday not to impose a temporary restraining order on the city to halt the marriages.

A decision which proved quite shocking to NOBODY.

Legal experts said Saturday that regardless of the legal outcome in California, the question of whether gays and lesbians may marry someone of their own sex is almost certainly destined for federal court.

Dang it dang it dang it dang it dang it dang it dang it!!!!! It's not a question of whether gays and lesbians can marry! It's a question of whether people can marry another member of their own gender!

If California's Supreme Court ultimately upheld the legality of same-sex marriage, a couple might decide to file a joint tax return, said Joseph Grodin, a former state Supreme Court justice. Or, if the court rejected such marriages, a same-sex couple from Massachusetts might attempt the same thing. (Earlier this year, the Massachusetts Supreme Court upheld same-sex marriages and said the state may issue licenses beginning in May.)

"So if a couple tried to take advantage of the federal law and was rebuffed, then someone may raise the constitutionality of that statue and argue that under the federal Constitution, it is unconstitutional to discriminate," Grodin said.

Misuse...of...the...word...discriminate...hurting...BRAIN!

Under another scenario, Grodin said, the issue might jump to the federal level if another state questioned its obligation to recognize same-sex marriages authorized in California or Massachusetts.

"States' rights? What are those? You talk funny words!"

"One way or the other, the issue of gay marriage is likely to reach the U. S. Supreme Court," he said.

"We can't let people VOTE! Those bigots would cause more discrimination!"

Two recent rulings also lend favor to the viability of same-sex marriage, said Vikram Amar, a professor at Hastings College of the Law. One is the ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Court, he said. And the other is the U.S. Supreme Court's recent ruling that invalidated a Texas law, which said homosexuality was illegal.

Wrong AGAIN! It said homosexual SEX was illegal. Homosexuality can't be made illegal. How would you enforce that law?

The high court's ruling made such sodomy laws illegal everywhere, he said.

"The court was clear that that wasn't about marriage," Amar said. "But together, these rulings suggest that both state and federal constitutions have something to say about discriminating against same-sex couples when it comes to marriage."

Discrimination is fine in this case, because it excludes people who can't. get. married. Are we discriminating against unmarried couples when we marry people, too? OH NO! YOU SINGLOPHOBES!

Looming in the background, Amar said, is the possibility that Congress would propose a constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage, which would have to be ratified by three quarters of states.

"Then it wouldn't matter what (state law) had to say on the issue," Amar said.

Let. the. people. f**king. vote. It's called democracy. USE IT.

Meanwhile, in San Francisco, Mayor Newsom said he will continue allowing same-sex marriages until a judge says otherwise.

Why is Newsom still the mayor? Shouldn't he be...uh...you know...IN PRISON FOR BREAKING THE LAW?!

"I'll respectfully keep moving forward and doing the right thing and stopping the practice of discrimination," said Newsom, as he paused for an event honoring black heritage at Yerba Buena Gardens.

If you were doing it respectfully, you wouldn't be breaking the law, you douchebag. What is with these people and their "I'm always right because my opponents are hateful bigots" attitude?

He brushed aside criticism from U.S. Sens. Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, fellow California Democrats who said last week that Newsom was wrong to defy state law and to force the sticky issue in an election year.

"Next year won't be the best time, and the year after won't be," Newsom said. "There are midyear elections, mayoral elections and governor elections. There will never be the best time. It's the same script."

The best time would be after the people vote to legalize same-sex marriage, a**hat. Until then, do your job and don't try to be a social activist.

Newsom said he has received threats but declined to elaborate. Flanking the mayor were a pair of suited bodyguards not often seen at the mayor's public appearances before the weddings began on Feb. 12.

Newsom acknowledged he is taking the issue of security seriously, adding: "You don't do the same things you did yesterday, every day."

Okay, one more time: Each state should vote individually on same-sex marriage. Whatever the majority decides will become the law. That's the way this country works.

By the way, I need to briefly rant about something: This issue has nothing to do with discriminating against people because they're homosexual. When people say that homosexuals are being denied the right to marry, they're wrong.

People of the same gender can't get married. Your sexual orientation does not make a difference.

Misplacing the Blame

Every time I think people can't get any dumber, something happens to prove me wrong. Remember this post from last week, where I mentioned the incident at SU involving camouflage that was mistaken for blackface? Check out this letter to the editor in today's Daily Orange:

IFC is disappointed

Recently a member of a fraternity that is part of the Interfraternity Council (IFC) painted his face black before attempting to take back a fraternal composite that a sorority had stolen from his fraternity.

In other words, he was trying to be inconspicuous. Or was he...?

We, the governing body of the 19 IFC chapters, are extremely disappointed in the actions of both parties and are in the process of investigating the situation. We are also discussing plans to address the larger issue at hand, which we believe is the insensitivity and ignorance of this greek member.

Okay, by a show of hands, who WASN'T expecting this? Anybody? No? I didn't think so. This is why the PC-fanatics still have so much power. Every time something is even perceived as offensive, it's blamed on "insensitivity and ignorance." What kind of world are we living in where people aren't aware of EVERY SINGLE THING THAT COULD POSSIBLY OFFEND SOMEONE???

The 19 IFC fraternities are composed of a diverse group of young men, from all cultures, religions, and parts of the world.

That sounds suspiciously like the old "some of my best friends are [insert minority group here]" defense. Way to stand up to the victim-creating squad.

This is something we pride ourselves on and strive for. When a member commits an act such as this it is simply unacceptable and contradicts everything we stand for and work towards achieving.

He. Didn't. Do. Anything.

Public frickin' Safety thought he had blackface makeup on, but it was F**KING CAMOUFLAGE! Have you people heard of this magical thing called "context?" Morons.

I just thought of something: This is similar to people getting upset over the word "niggardly" because it sounds like a racially offensive word even though it isn't.

Camo...blackface...they're both POTENTIALLY offensive, so what's the difference?

As of now, the IFC believes this was simply an act of ignorance, and blackface to stereotype or demean African-Americans was not the intent;

DO YOU F**KING THINK, YOU F**KING IDIOTS?! IF HE WAS TRYING TO BE A RACIST, HE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN SNEAKING AROUND!

however, that does not make it right.

"If we can't find any racism, we'll imagine some! We can't let the precious victims feel safe without Big Brother's help!"

We need to do a better job educating our members on the history and culture of all members of our community and to understand that we are leaders in the community and our actions and poor judgment affects the entire campus.

Does "poor judgment" include apologizing for something you didn't do? I think you screwed up on that one already.

The fraternity in question has issued apologies to the university and to the Syracuse community.

For what? Making them think unhappy thoughts?

While that is a start, it is by no means an end.

It SHOULD be, but it isn't.

The IFC will investigate the burglary scenario that the fraternity says was the reason for the face paint...

Brilliant. Fighting pretend racism is more important than fighting F**KING BURGLARY!!!!!! You make me sick.

...and we will ensure our members understand our cultural diversity and how to act as member of our diverse group of young men.

Yeesssss...there's that Newspeak we all like so much! Cultural diversity good! Bigotry bad! Me likey everybody! Why I laugh?

...I think I forgot what I was talking about for a second there.

The IFC does not condone any of the actions of this past weekend and will continue to do all we can to educate our members to improve our way of life for the entire Syracuse University Community.

You know how you can improve MY way of life? Stop inventing these stupid incidents and start thinking for yourself. I don't need high blood pressure and other anger-induced conditions at 19, but you sure aren't helping.

I wonder how they would react if there was actual racism on campus. If this is how they treat stuff that was only mistaken for racism, I don't think I want to be here if they have to deal with the real thing.

Super Lucky Happy Fun Waste of Time

Okay, now that I'm a comedy writer (see previous post), I figure I should work on my laugh inducing abilities. Luckily, Frnak provided the perfect opportunity with his new permalink contest, in which he challenges contestants to come up with a hilarious top ten list.

I'm not actually participating, but the topic was too good to ignore, so I made a list of my own just for the heck of it. So, here's my totally meaningless list, based on the prompt in the contest:

Top Ten Ways the Loony Moonbat Left Will Make Themselves Look Even MORE Hopelessly Ridiculous in 2004

10- After President Bush and his family have their annual Christmas picture taken, the media will call it a cheap photo-op. The suit and tie the president is wearing will be used as proof.

9- Political correctness fanatics will demand the removal of the American flag from all government buildings, because they feel that it is just as offensive to Arabs as the Confederate flag is to blacks. Suggested replacement flags will include France and the U.N.

8- Terry McAuliffe will state that, although President Bush claims to be a Christian, nobody has seen any evidence. He will then request that the Bush administration prove, as dictated by the Bible, that Bush's name is written in the Book of Life. When God cannot be reached for comment, McAuliffe will call Bush a heretic.

7- The ACLU will claim that public churches are an unconstitutional violation of "separation of church and state" because they're churches and they're in a state.

6- In his new film, "Fahrenheit 911," Michael Moore will claim that George W. Bush and Osama bin Laden are actually the same person, since both are very religious and they've never been seen together.

5- California will begin issuing drivers' licenses to children in an attempt to combat "ageism."

4- The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will decide, after a lengthy process, that the Second Amendment actually guarantees the right to wear sleeveless shirts. The previous interpretation will be blamed on a spelling error.

3- Hillary Clinton will introduce a quote from Martin Luther King, Jr. by saying that "He ran a KFC up in Detroit." The media will not notice.

2- Al Franken, in an attempt to write exciting fiction, will pen a novel about undercover cops who pose as monks in a bakery to solve a string of mysterious murders. The book will be called "Pies and the Spying Friars Who Sell Them."

1- Howard Dean will sever all ties with the insect community after the members of his personal ant farm refuse to dig a new tunnel.

So, what do you think? Funny? Not funny? Don't care?

Feel free to add any of your own in the comments.

Infiltrating the Liberal Media, Part 1: The Saga Begins

Remember that "undercover work" I mentioned yesterday? I just got back from my first "mission." You're probably wondering what that means.

Basically, I just volunteered to work at HillTV, Syracuse University's student-run television station. More specifically, I am now a writer for "SU Live," which is a sketch comedy show.

I know that's not quite the "liberal media," but it is a start. Now that I'm working at the TV station, I can begin my quest to take back the media from the left, and I can also report on the liberal media from the inside.

The "Infiltrating the Liberal Media" series will be a regular feature on the blog as I travel closer to the source, and I'll use it to report on how they work, what they're up to, and things like that.

This is my mission in life, folks. The main reason I chose Syracuse was to get the best possible education in the TV/film business and use my knowledge to change the way it works. Did you think I wanted to be a screenwriter just to "entertain" people? Heh heh.

So, like I said, I'm a writer for SU Live. It's not really "liberal" per se, as it's basically just regular college humor (they had a very enlightened discussion on whether the word "nutsack" is better as an insult, an exclamation, or a person's name that's actually pronounced "noot-sok"). However, now that I'm working in TV, I can start figuring out how the media operates and give you some inside information. It's gonna be great.

Did I mention I might also be in a few shows? The writers are also the actors for SU Live. You can watch some of them online provided you have a Windows Media Player (stupid Mac...I won't even be able to watch my own shows). I'll let you know when I contribute if you want to check it out. I suppose I'll have to use my real name on the blog at least once to prove it's me. We'll see...

Anyway, that's the start of "Infiltrating the Liberal Media." This is going to be exciting. The revolution WILL be televised!

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Dean Goes Home

By the way, I'm a bit late on this, but I did notice that Howard Dean is no longer running for president. That's both good and bad. Good because we don't have to deal with his idiocy/lunacy/perversion of religion anymore. Bad because I can no longer make fun of him.

So, I've decided to post an assortment of the various ways I've mocked Mad How on SIT in the past couple months. If you missed any of these, now's your chance to check 'em out. So, that being said, I present:

THE DEAN GALLERY

First, here's a picture based on this original image that was used in a Fark Photoshop contest. I tried unsuccessfully to enter a slight variation, but I hadn't been a member long enough.

Next, here's a picture I made that was almost completely ignored because of a certain "Dean strangling a cat" variation. Luckily, VRWC posted it at one point.

I also used the infamous "church sign generator" to make fun of Dean a few times. You can check out the "Reverend Dean" series here.

At the beginning of January, I made a DFilm called Dean vs. America. It's a couple minutes long, but I think it's funny. Of course, I may be slightly biased in that respect.

Other than that, there are quite a few regular blog posts about Mad How. This one is by far the most popular. I get a few hits every day from people searching for "Howard Dean is an idiot" and other similar terms. I also got a troll in the comments a couple weeks later, but as you can see, he's outnumbered.

In this post, I attempted to start a Google bomb of Dean's site using "idiot," and Chad informed me that the proper Dean Google bomb was actually "douche." I ended up using both.

Soon after, I wrote this post, entitled "Douche for America," that dissected the policies outlined on the Dean website. About half of it is just me attacking him for being pro-abortion, but it gets more varied from there.

I've used Dr. Douche a few more times, but those are the really memorable ones. The Dean Gallery will probably be up at the top for a while, because unless I catch the stomach virus that dozens of people seem to have now, I'll be out for most of the day today. Again, I may have some "undercover" type stuff to do soon. And yes, it involves liberals (probably). More details later.

So, until then, let's all leave on a positive note as we say farewell to Dr. Howard Dean...

YEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH!!!!

Get Me Outta Here!!!

Half my frickin' floor is sick! That means I'm probably going to get sick, but I have work to do! This is crap!

Anyone know how to build a sanitary plastic bubble with enough oxygen to last a month?

F-in' flu season...

Daily Orange Roundup

Okay, I'm going to start off with an anecdote totally unrelated to the post. Just skip to the 2nd paragraph if you don't care. Anyway, I had about an hour in between two classes this afternoon, so I decided to sit down in the lobby of the building I was in to read through the Daily Orange (which inspired the second part of this entry). After about 10 minutes, a girl walked in and sat down across from me. Then...she took out her cell phone and proceeded to talk for 20 FREAKING MINUTES. Why would you do this when the person across from you is clearly reading? Here's the best part: I caught some of her conversation, including the phrase: "...It's worth it to get a Democrat in office." SHE WAS RUDE AND A DEMOCRAT!!!! I love college.

Okay, now for the actual post. There aren't any full editorials in the DO today that I can cover, but a couple items caught my eye. Let's take a look. First, we have Cheers and Jeers, which gives us a rather unique perspective on the week's events. Here's a sample:

Cheer - Wheelchair-bound owner of Hustler Magazine Larry Flynt is rumored to be in the process of publishing a story about a woman who allegedly had President George W. Bush's 1970 abortion. According to America's favorite smut peddler: Bush allegedly paid for and drove his then-girlfriend to have an abortion, presumably conceived by the future president. If the story proves true, it would be an embarrassing revelation for Bush, given his stern opposition to abortion. The Daily Orange cheers Mr. Flynt for having the testicular fortitude to pursue such a story - something another news media outlet (like CBS) would likely be scared sh*tless by.

Keep in mind that this paper published an editorial a few days ago about how pathetic the John Kerry adultery charges are, and how the right should stop attacking him. Hooray for consistency.

There are also some interesting news items, such as this

A new brother of the Delta Tau Delta fraternity was stopped by DPS (Department of Public Safety -ed.) after it was reported that he was dressed in blackface, according to a Public Safety report.

Director of Public Safety Marlene Hall said the case is now being reviewed by the District Attorney, although the university will continue to pursue the case.

The brother said that he was not dressed in blackface, but instead was dressed in camouflage in an attempt to take back a composite, a collection of all current members of the fraternity, from a sorority...

This is frickin' hilarious. Apparently, it's now a hate crime to even RESEMBLE someone in blackface. It gets better, too:

Although the brother said he was not dressed in blackface, [the fraternity president] said he understood that it could have been perceived as offensive.

"We apologize," [he] said. "We don't consider that behavior or mind-set to reflect on the fraternity."

The Thought Police have struck again. Allow me to sum this up in case you're confused: A fraternity member was wearing camouflage for some kind of prank. Public Safety thought it was blackface and reported him. After they sorted out the case, the president of the fraternity apologized.

Who else sees the problem with this? THE PRESIDENT OF THE FRATERNITY HAD TO APOLOGIZE BECAUSE PUBLIC SAFETY MADE A MISTAKE!!!!!!!!! Since when is it a crime for someone to perceive you as a racist? Unbefreakinlievable.

Finally, we have yet another story about "diversity" that fails to explain what that word means. Here's a summary:

Calabash spread diversity through music
The Women of the Calabash don't just make their own music - they make their own instruments.

The trio plays on the hard shell of the calabash, a squash-like gourd, along with an array of homemade wooden instruments crafted by group member Madeleine Yayodele Nelson.

The Office of Multicultural Affairs will bring the Women of the Calabash to Goldstein Auditorium tonight at 7:30. This performance, free to SU students, is also funded by the U. Encounter Diversity Grant, S.A.M.E. and the RAICES dance troupe.

First of all, I think it's funny that they're sponsored by so many groups, especially those with names like S.A.M.E. and RAICES. I've never even heard of them. Also, how exactly does one "spread diversity?" Let's see if they tell us:

Infusing natural sounds with lyrical poetry, the female trio illustrates its heritage and culture through music. The performance will include musical influences of the Caribbean, Latin America, and Africa.

"(They are) bringing a cultural show to Syracuse University to emphasize diversity through music and dance," said James Duah-Agyeman director of the Office of Multicultural Affairs.

Okay, at least that sounds a little more like what you would call "diversity," but still, how is it a "cultural show," exactly? Isn't any show technically a cultural show? I've gone to see a couple stand-up comedians (Jim Breuer and Dane Cook) since I came here. Aren't they part of our culture?

There's more, but that pretty much sums it up. I would really like someone to explain what diversity is, because I still can't figure it out.

That's all for now. I have a lot of stuff to do in the next 36 hours or so, but I will hopefully have a very important message posted sometime tomorrow. I'm not giving you any details, but I'll just say that it involves what you might call "undercover work" (no, not that kind, you perverts). More on that tomorrow night.

The State of Diversity at SU

AAAAAHHHHH!!!! I'm surrounded by sick people! My roommate is sick, my roommate's girlfriend was sick, one of the guys across the hall is sick, four people on my floor have vomited in the past 24 hours, my astronomy professor has a cold...AAAAAAHHHH!!!!! I can almost guarantee that I'll have some sort of debilitating illness by the end of the week.

Until then, I'll focus on the topic I mentioned earlier. I was checking my SU "Orangemail" today, and I noticed a message that included the following:

Chancellor Kenneth A. Shaw has created a comprehensive report on
efforts to support the core value of diversity at Syracuse
University. Titled “Reinforcing Diversity’s Importance at
Syracuse University”... The report outlines initiatives in the areas of prevention and education, and sets forth the challenges for the future in this
critical area.

This sounded interesting, and it's probably the last major work for Shaw before Nancy "The Illinois mascot is a negative stereotype of Native-Americans" Cantor takes over as chancellor next year, so I checked it out. In this post, I'll look at some of the ways Syracuse has "reinforced diversity's importance." I'll just be quoting selectively (I hope this is legal), but you can see the entire report here. I'll begin the review in the extended entry.

Incidentally, I know at least a couple of my readers are also college students. If your schools have done something similar to this, it would be interesting to hear about it (I also know from my Sitemeter stats that at least one Syracuse student reads the blog on occasion. If you have an opinion on what "Buzz" has written, feel free to leave a comment). Just a suggestion. Anyway, let's look at SU's strategy (this post is going to be very long, just so you know):

As a result of the recent Supreme Court rulings on Affirmative Action in higher education, some members of the Syracuse University community have asked about what we are doing to further our commitment to our core value of diversity.

What'll we do without our precious quotas?

I assure you our commitment is deep and ongoing, and we are committed not simply to tolerance of various peoples and views, but to an appreciation of the richness that these differences create for all of us. It is the diversity of our community that enriches our experiences and offers opportunity for robust academic dialogue and personal growth, which is the reason why we are all here.

Uh...I'm here to learn how to write and produce films and TV shows. I didn't apply for the diversity.

Enhancing diversity for our community members is one of the top priorities of the University. It is a major focus in the University's Academic Plan and the Division of Student Affairs Strategic Plan. The Divisions of Academic Affairs and Student Affairs published the Diversity Digest...

Yes, you did actually read that. They published "Diversity Digest." Fascinating. Do you think they like diversity? I can't quite tell for sure.

...in 2003 to outline the many programs and activities that support diversity at Syracuse University. This inaugural edition focused on race and ethnicity and highlighted the following related activities:

* 7 Pre-College Programs
* 37 College Programs
* 4 National Awards
* 10 Graduate Programs
* 11 Offices and Centers
* 11 Annual Conferences, Programs and Events

All this for a concept that isn't even clearly defined. How do they do it?

The first edition was designed to stimulate discussion and growth on the topics of race and ethnicity. Future issues will explore diversity in all its facets, including gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, internationalization, and disability.

I'm confused here. Is there anything that DOESN'T count as diversity? What standard of homogeneity are they using for comparison (my guess is something along the lines of "the agents in 'The Matrix,'" but that's just me)?

Skipping ahead a bit...

Resident advisors conduct ongoing programming around diversity issues.

I remember that. At the first floor meeting, one of my RAs said something to the effect of, "Don't go saying stuff like 'that's gay' or 'that's retarded.' You never know who you're offending. Where I come from, we talk like that all the time, but you have to be careful here."

Also, the "No Place for Hate" campaign continues in our residence halls to raise student awareness around issues of discrimination and bias and to educate students on the appreciation and acceptance of diversity and multiculturalism at Syracuse University.

Notice the phrasing there. Did you see "tolerance" listed? Nope. Know why? Because they've decided that tolerance is no longer good enough. You must now appreciate and accept whatever diversity is. Anything less is hateful.

This program sends the message that we want all students to have experiences that allow for holistic development, growth, and maturity into global citizens who can function and contribute while at Syracuse University and beyond. We believe a campaign of this magnitude will spark dialogue, interaction, and reflection to create a safe and welcoming environment for all students.

...Except those students who dare to question the idea that diversity and multiculturalism are as important as knowledge, if not more.

I know I'm exaggerating this a bit, but I've seen enough that I know where this kind of thinking can potentially lead. As a straight white male, I apparently don't contribute to "diversity," so it's assumed that I need the concept pounded into my head repeatedly. Let's skip ahead again and see how they're doing that:

One aspect of securing SU's foundation as a student-centered research university is enhancing the intellectual climate through diversity. Strategies for accomplishing this include:

* Increasing the diversity of faculty;
* Continuing to increase the diversity of the student body; and,
* Improving the intellectual climate of respect and inclusion for all members of the University community.

I still don't know what they mean by "increasing diversity." What standard are they judging this concept against, and why won't they tell us? Unless this is "Brave New World," and everyone belongs to a specific genetic class, I'd say diversity is an innate human characteristic.

Efforts to increase the diversity of faculty have resulted in historically underrepresented groups making up almost 18 percent of the full-time faculty, putting SU ahead of the national average for private universities in this regard. Last year, resources were made available to the schools and colleges to help them aggressively find, recruit, and retain outstanding scholars from ethnic and cultural groups that are currently underrepresented.

At least they're using a strategy that's legal. I wonder, though, if there's any limit to diversity. What happens if traditionally underrepresented groups make up more of the university population than the non-diverse groups? Will they have to fire minorities? I doubt it, because firing people based on race is racism. Isn't it?

I'll skip ahead again, because I noticed some interesting juxtaposition in the next section:

The University continues to work toward increasing the diversity of the student body...This position has led to the formation of a special committee on diversity that includes a broad range of faculty, students, and staff that functions not only as an advisory committee but actively participates in recruitment events for African American, Latino/a, Asian American, and Native American students.

Now, knowing that they target specific groups, you should be caught off-guard by this next sentence:

An intellectual climate of respect and inclusion for all members of the University community has been fostered through a variety of initiatives.

"Respect and inclusion" apparently doesn't apply to people who aren't "traditionally underrepresented." I like how they claim to foster a climate of inclusion for all students while focusing more energy on specific racial and ethnic populations. It's almost like they're excluding some groups. Hmmm...

Now, we'll look at some of the methods they've used to increase understanding and respect...or something like that:

Dialogue Circles on race and ethnicity are currently in place for students in the Honors Program. The Division of Student Affairs will introduce these programs to residence halls during the 2004-05 academic year. Dialogue circles can enhance intellectual understanding by bringing people from diverse backgrounds and experiences together in conversation that can help develop trust, understanding, appreciation, and collaboration. The dialogue process has the potential for building the trusting relationships necessary for long-term change.

Dialogue circles? I have no idea what that means, but for some reason, I have a feeling that it involves making white people admit that they hate minorities and have only gotten by on privilege. Just a thought.

The Kaleidoscope Project, a new collaborative diversity initiative between the divisions of Academic Affairs and Student Affairs, provides matching grants (up to $5,000 each) to support departments and recognized student organizations in fostering educational opportunities that expose students at SU to diversity-rich experiences that promote awareness, appreciation, and respect.

Does anyone understand what these things mean? Shouldn't the simple act of going to class be enough to expose students to diversity? What are they doing differently in these programs?

Moving ahead again...

The Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Resource Center maintains a web page called "Learn More" that has information on LGBT topics such as: coming out, allies, health, bisexuality, transgender people, career/job search, religion and spirituality, hate crimes and discrimination, and domestic violence in LGBT relationships.

I've always wondered something: How does sexual orientation contribute to diversity? Why don't we apply the "diverse sexual preferences" theme to the whole community? I hereby propose a "Guys Who are Attracted to Blonde Women with Big Boobies Resource Center." After all, we should learn to appreciate everyone's individual sexual preference, right? RIGHT???

Moving ahead again, we have a great example of doublethink (is that a word?):

...learning communities include the multicultural living-learning community (MLLC), whose goal is to "create an environment where multiculturalism in its various shapes is appreciated, respected, and valued." The MLLC links academic experiences with co-curricular activities, such as a visiting lecture series, a year-long programming calendar, peer advising, facilitated discussions, and skill-building techniques to counter oppression.

I'm amazed by this. Apparently, despite the fact that the entire university community is a diverse and multicultural environment, we can achieve true understanding by segregating students in "multicultural living-learning communities" and emphasizing the fact that they're being oppressed.

Do all the minorities living in randomly assigned housing know that they're in an oppressive environment right now? Why can't we celebrate multiculturalism in all the living communities? I had no idea that segregation was the key to inclusion!

Skipping ahead once again...

The Writing Program has embarked on a project that will design and field-test teaching materials that approach diversity through multiple points of entry and ultimately will teach students to take diversity into account as a key component to successful communication, from audience analysis to document design.

How exactly do you teach students to take diversity into account?

Issues-related information will be available on-line to assist in curriculum infusion, and the Diversity Speakers Series and Campus Forums on Diversity will continue.

From what I've seen, the Diversity Speakers Series basically consists of putting a famous black person behind a microphone and letting them talk about anything they want (James Earl Jones, Chuck D., Phylicia Rashad, etc.).

Students in Psychology 205...

Hey, I'm a student in Psychology 205!

...will learn about individual differences in regard to major topics in psychology.

The class is actually called "Psychology of Individual Differences." I don't recall diversity being mentioned yet. Today's lecture was about memory.

Diversity-infused coursework is also evident in numerous schools and colleges, including The College of Arts and Sciences, the College of Human Services and Health Professions, the College of Visual and Performing Arts, the School of Architecture, the School of Education, the S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications, and other University offices and departments.

What qualifies something as "diversity infused coursework," dang it? They never explain what they mean by that. I'm in my second semester, and I don't recall any coursework dealing specifically with diversity or multiculturalism or any of these other values they talk about so much. Did I miss that?

Anyway, there's a lot more there, but I have to stop now and do some actual work. I just think it's strange how much these people talk about diversity without really explaining what it is or what specific methods they're using to enforce it.

The basic message I always get is, "Everybody can make a valuable contribution to the social and intellectual environment at this university, but if you happen to be a heterosexual caucasian male, your beliefs and cultural values count as the 'default' group, and you should step out of your 'comfort zone' and embrace every other group. The same standards will not be applied to these other groups, because you and your kind have oppressed them for too long and invaded their unique cultures, so you should just learn to appreciate them."

In all fairness, SU is still a lot less crazy than other universities. There's no zero-tolerance policy, there are no elaborate speech codes, and the professors don't seem to inject too many of their personal views into the lessons (I've blogged about a few exceptions to this). However, with the lengths some schools have gone to, you never know what'll happen here next...

Possible Post

I haven't blogged yet today for reasons that you don't need to know, but I just got an interesting e-mail about the Syracuse University commitment to "diversity" that I may write about later. We'll see.

One Sentence Spanish Rant

I freaking hate the preterit verb form. That is all.

Jumping on the Bandwagon Again...

Yeah, I found the license plate maker:

View image

I should be doing homework now.

Double Standard Alert

Okay, without linking to anything, let me just present a scenario:

Case 1: George W. Bush is accused of being AWOL while in the National Guard. To counter the claim, he says he was there, releases all his records proving he was there, gets numerous testimonials from people who saw him there, and even finds dental records. After all this, the left decides that they need more proof.

Case 2: John Kerry is accused of committing adultery with an intern. Kerry and the intern both deny it. Case closed.

Who can tell me what's wrong with this picture?

ADD Debate

Joe Carter of Evangelical Outpost has started a series about the validity of ADHD and various forms of treatment. This hits home for me, since I have ADD (I've written about that here.) If anyone has anything to add, you can check out the 3rd post of the series here.

I stand by my previous statements. If ADD isn't a neurological disorder, I must have a really f**ked up personality.

UPDATE
The discussion seems to be focused more on terminology and treatment at this point than the actual existence of ADD, since that's been established in at least some cases.

In terms of behavioral therapy for ADD, I've found playing drums to be a pretty good short-term solution. It burns extra energy and allows you to release tension. Plus, you get to beat the crap out of stuff with wooden sticks. Heh heh.

Another Celebrity Criticizes Dubya Overseas (yawn...)

This really shouldn't surprise anyone, but it's still kind of irritating:

Liberal Hollywood actor/comedian...

That was redundant.

...Robin Williams was in Berlin promoting his upcoming science-fiction flick called "The Final Cut." However, Williams decided to use the platform to launch an all-out assault against the President of the United States.

Why do these people keep going to other countries to insult the president? I find it interesting that the same people who want to ask "why do they hate us?" are the ones who always go to other places and say, "this is why you should hate us. In fact, I hate us too!"

Speaking at the Berlin Film Festival before a group of international journalists and film critics...

Talk about preaching to the choir.

...Williams was harshly critical of Bush's handling of the war in Iraq and the search for weapons of mass destruction.

"Bush is complaining about a lack of intelligence, which seems sort of redundant," Williams joked to Reuters.

"Hey, did you know that Bush is dumb? Neither did I! Also, John Kerry was in Vietnam. Why didn't anyone tell me these things?!"

"They say they don't know if Iraq had any WMDs - well, all they have to do is ask [Vice President Dick] Cheney for the receipts."

How asinine is that? He's going to other countries and basically telling them that we armed Iraq. Wait...but Iraq didn't have WMD because Bush lied...but they have to have had them because America is evil and we arm dictators...but that would mean that Bush told the truth...OW! My head hurts!

Revealing his opposition to war and the Bush administration's decision to go to war with Iraq last year, Williams described America as "broke" and personally ridiculed Bush.

"We have a president for whom English is a second language," Williams exclaimed. "He's like 'We have to get rid of dictators,' but he's pretty much one himself."

You know what we should do? We should round up people like Robin Williams and Sean Penn and let them live in a REAL dictatorship for a while. Then, after a year of being beaten, starved, and having their "personal area" repeatedly electrocuted for being infidels/traitors, we'll see how much they hate America.

On another occasion, Williams continued his personal attacks against the president by questioning his intelligence.

How original! You, Mr. Williams, are a truly great comedian!

"We're here tonight because of the Shrub, you know who I'm talking about. George W. Bush, Jr.," Williams stated. "The W stands for 'where the Hell is it?' You know, you look at George W. and you realize some men are born great, some achieve greatness, and some get it as a graduation gift. So sad. I just want to ask the Secret Service, is it true that his Secret Service code name is Gilligan?"

I seem to remember that he was funny at some point. Now, he's just reaching for stereotypes. "Bush is dumb. Bush is evil. Bush is an oppressive white devil who never worked a day in his life." Give it up, hack.

Williams joins the Dixie Chicks, William H. Macy, Willie Nelson, and many others in the entertainment world who have used their celebrity status to make political statements against the president.

I think I've mentioned a few times that I want to be a screenwriter/director. If I ever make it out to the Left Coast, I'm going to beat talk some sense into people like this. It's my mission in life.

Until then, I can only blog and hope for the best.

The Daily Orange Doesn't Understand Satire

I'm sure a lot of you have heard about the "whites only" scholarship being offered at Roger Williams University. Personally, I think it's a great idea. Maybe even better than "affirmative action bake sales." Sometimes, the only way to show people the craziness of an idea is to apply the same principle to another situation.

However, some people apparently don't get the point. One of these people wrote an editorial for the Daily Orange today, which I will cover now:

Race scholarship misses its intent

The College Republicans at Robert (sic) Williams University in Rhode Island have recently created a scholarship for "whites only." The $250 prize requires applicants to "confirm whiteness" and write an essay on "why you are proud of your white heritage."

Don't you see? They're explaining why their unique cultural perspective can help contribute to campus diversity! Don't you like diversity? Everyone likes diversity, even the idiots that pronounce it "die-versity" every time they say it (my apologies to people who pronounce it like this, but it sounds dumb)!

The goal of the College Republicans was to take aim at race-based scholarships as discriminatory and unfair.

Looks to me like they did a pretty good job.

While scholarships and college admissions awarded on the basis of skin color do not in any way solve the racial tension in this country, this scholarship does not either.

I say work with what you've got, since merit-based admissions are apparently racist.

Jason Mattera, head of the Republicans at Roger Williams, makes the argument that not all whites are affluent and guaranteed college admission. This is an important point to make, but it can be done in more effective and diplomatic ways.

Like what? If they just came right out and said that, they'd be accused of denying their deep-seated racist beliefs and trying to hold back minorities.

Similar to the very scholarships Mattera is fighting against, his actions are perpetuating and exacerbating racism rather than working to solve it.

How? It's a friggin' joke! By pointing out that race-based scholarships are stupid, they're working to eliminate them. How is that contributing to racism, unless people are too dumb to understand satire?

Mattera, for example, is of Puerto Rican decent and receives a $5,000 scholarship because of this. Were he truly so against such practices, it would stand to reason that he would not accept the scholarship.

Maybe he realized they were wrong after he got the scholarship. Who knows?

But this exemplifies the complicated nature of the issue. Race-based scholarships and admissions are difficult to avoid for many people when they stand to benefit from them - despite the fact that they are premised on discriminating on the basis of one's skin color.

And that makes them okay because...?

This perhaps, in a sickly ironic way, depicts how deeply entrenched racism is in our culture and also how it has become something that the traditionally oppressed have begun to benefit from.

At least they're acknowledging the truth. I still don't see why we shouldn't resort to satire to get rid of racism though. Maybe they're hurting someone's precious feeeeeeeeelings.

The scholarship at Roger Williams is simplified and misguided.

As are all other race-based scholarships.

It's very easy to tackle racism in the realm of race-based scholarships with the tactic employed by Mattera and his associates, but it is not necessarily effective in solving anything.

Did I just read a self-contradicting statement? I think I did.

If anything, all this stunt will accomplish is adding insult to injury.

I'd be more concerned about insults and injuries being directed toward the CRs.

It seems that all the group is trying to do is antagonize a sensitive and intricate issue.

...And? It's called controversy. It gets attention. For more information on controversy and attention, see "Janet Jackson's boobie." Thank you.

Ultimately, this idea may be based on some goal of ending race-based discrimination, but it clearly falls quite short of this.

I guess it's only clear to the author. I don't understand why this scholarship is so horrible. It points out what should be an obvious fact: Awarding money based on the color of your skin is racist, no matter who it applies to. It only becomes obvious for everyone when you apply it to the group that has traditionally been identified as the privileged oppressors, and you realize that we're not living in that kind of society anymore.

I support the efforts of the RWU College Republicans. Racial preferences need to go, and they need to go NOW.

Watching the (D)ebate

Okay, I just (6:50) switched on the Democratic debate. Al Sharpton is talking right now. This should be good.

Bring jobs back by cancelling NAFTA, bringing back manufacturing jobs, hiring people back, and creating jobs. Infrastructure redevelopment plan. Rebuild highways and ports in the name of homeland security. What the f**k is he talking about? He wants an unequivocal end to free trade or something. Edwards looks evil today for some reason. Kinda looks like Dick Gephardt meets Algore. Hmm...

"Jobs is the single most important issue for voters here in Wisconsin." They're gonna talk about health care next. This should be...uh...healthy.

Dean wants to repeal the tax cuts. "Wisconsinites." Is that a word? Bush cut half a million children and a million adults off health care, tuition went up. "There was no middle class tax cut." I guess that tax cut my MIDDLE CLASS family got was fictitious. Idiot. Mad How thinks raising taxes will solve all our problems. That's sure worked well in the past.

Oh, they're talking to Kookcinich. Why is he still in this race? This is actually the first time I've seen him on TV other than a clip of him saying "WHERE ARE THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION?!" He also wants universal health care.

Kerry wants health care, job creation...he met a fellow who runs a business with 500 employees. His health care costs went up 46% last year and he lost benefits. Kerry had prostate cancer. I did not know that. "As president, I will roll back [George W. Bush's] tax cut for wealthy Americans." You idiots. He wants to close the loophole for companies like Tyco that apparently do business outside the U.S. How horrible!

Gloria Borger has a lazy eye. I don't know if anyone else noticed that. She scares me.

You know, for a debate, there's not a lot of disagreement. They all want to raise taxes and fund universal health care so they can initiate some phantom job creation that nobody but Sharpton has actually tried to explain.

Edwards wants to help the 35 million Americans living in poverty out.

Here come the questions about Kerry's waffling. This should be good. "They're not inconsistent at all." HAHAHAHAHAHA! He likes NCLB, he just doesn't like George Bush running it. Same as your position on how he managed to "f**k up" the war, right?

The problem with the PATRIOT Act is John Ashcroft because he doesn't respect the Constitution. Kerry wants to kill the PA and rewrite it. JFK wants to bring back the Clinton economy. Better find more interns. Those seem to help.

Where exactly is Kucinich's accent from, anyway? It sounds like he's switching every time he talks. Now he's talking about waste, like self defense. Wow.

Sharpton again. He shouldn't be there either. "What is your priorities while you are doing deficit spending." I'm glad our politicians have such good grammar. Sharpton's right hand wants to hurt your family. You can tell if you watch it long enough. Sharpton was born in a deficit. Apparently the audience likes that one.

Voucher time. Why can't all parents have the opportunity? Sharpton says: The parent who has a child who didn't get a voucher says the same thing. Government's job is not to see-lect some students. "If your children is one of the children who didn't get a voucher." This guy thinks he's qualified to talk about education?

Here come audience questions. This should be entertaining. 1st question: Higher education...with tuition costs dramatically rising for public universities, how would you ensure ...crap, I lost track of what she was saying.

Now Mad How is dodging the question to talk about how good health care is in Vermont. Too bad nobody ASKED. Here comes higher education again: Dean wants to work with 8th grade kids, and give them 10,000 dollars for every year in college. That's funded by the tax increase, right? He wants to make them go into public service to earn it. "You are the state's property!" (okay, he didn't say that)

Kerry says Bush has no plan to make college affordable. That's because college isn't a government institution, nitwit. Maybe it's like that in France, but not here. They want to put the national government in charge of state business. What a surprise.

He wants to pay for public education for 4 years in full, funded by raising taxes and closing overseas loopholes for companies. Next, they'll talk about war. Typing this fast is hard. I should've taken more than one keyboarding class in high school.

Dean on the war: In war, you're almost certain to lose somebody. Is this news to anyone? Dean is unusually calm tonight. When does he explode? I want to see it!

Kerry's going to explain why he voted for a war he doesn't like. Apparently, he thinks Bush did it the wrong way. The president had the authority to do what he was gonna do without Congress, just like Clinton. So Bush actually had more support than Bubba, didn't he?

We were supposed to go to war as a last resort after the inspections process, so Bush chose the wrong way and rushed the war after only 12 years of trying that strategy.

Edwards did what he believed was right, and also said that it was critical when we got to this stage that America not be doing it alone, and the president is doing it alone, even though we have a coalition of countries from all over the world. Vive le France!!!

He wants to internationalize the effort, bring in NATO (for Saudi Arabia and Iran), and get on a real timetable for Iraqi self-government.

Kucinich: Did Bush knowingly lie to the American people about WMD, and why would he do that? He thinks the administration knew Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, Al Qaeda, or anthrax, that it wasn't trying to get uranium, and it didn't have WMD. So, Kookcinich is a "Bush lied, people died" kinda guy.

He never saw evidence that there was a reason to go to war, and we need to get out and stop this war now. "The president lied to the American people." He thinks he's going to be the next president. After that, I wouldn't put much stock in his belief that Bush lied.

I like how Sharpton and Kucinich are always together in this debate. Clearly, Bush lied, but he may not have known he was lying. That's the dumbest thing I've heard today.

"Crazy psychological breakdown." "He lied in Florida, he's lied several times, I believe he's lied in Iraq (inaudible)." "Why do people lie? I mean aigugdugugba..." What's he saying?

The facts presented to the world were not so. They knew they didn't know where the weapons were. He's subtly comparing Hussein to Bush because both of them said that Iraq had WMD.

Dean: The people surveyed ranked fear of terrorism dead last, so does that mean the president has done his job well? Dean thinks Bush gave money away to his buddies. He almost forgot to say "former" before "Soviet Union."

If bin Laden were captured, that would be important, but we're not safer from Hussein being captured. If we capture bin Laden, we'll be safer. I'm sure he'll be saying that when we find his rotting corpse.

My roommate's girlfriend, while watching the debate, said that it's "kind of stupid" that the Dems are still debating, and they should all form their own political parties. I hope that answers everyone's questions about how politically educated she is. (sigh)

Kucinich wants to be a "peace president." Tell that to Islamic terrorists, genius. Kerry is smiling at Kucinich in a condescending manner. Heh heh. Kucinich wants new hope in America for a nation that can work with the nations of the world to achieve security at home.

Dean: How will history judge the war in Iraq? We were not told the truth, and we don't know the outcome. Dean thinks Bush made no case for war. He thinks the war is responsible for bringing Al Qaeda into Iraq. I like watching Dean sputter and stutter while he tries to blame everything on Dubya.

Edwards is less sure. He wants to internationalize the effort, even though that's already been done. "Why in the world would we let George Bush define the terrain of this debate?" He has no health care plan, hundreds of thousands of people can't go to college, we've lost jobs...What will we do when we lead? "What is our bigger, broader vision for America?"

STOP RAMBLING, EDWARDS! Get to the point! I have work to do, dang it!

Here's another student talking about diversity. Oh, this should be great.

Kerry: Military service to chief prosecutor of a DA's office. He exercised affirmative action to hire prosecutors who reflected all of the minority face of the country. Here's an example: He went to Harlem in 1992, visited a building where 15 kids out of gangs and such were working, and they were rebuilding the building and learning a skill. He went back to Washington and wrote it into the law, which put it into 43 states so full citizens can have the opportunity. He didn't say anything about diversity. He just said that he helped a bunch of gang members. That sounds racist.

Sharpton: "I helped people that are non-black." He's gone to jail fighting for the rights of Latinos. He's going to lead the fight for diversity. He thinks people in D.C. don't have a right to vote. WOW. Just...wow. We're still fighting for civil rights, I guess.

Now they're talking about gay marriage. Kerry opposes gay marriage and supports civil unions. Would he support an amendment? "It depends on terminology." He thinks marriage is between a man and a woman, but he doesn't want to deny the rights that couples should have. My roommate and his girlfriend keep walking in when I'm trying to do this. It would be suspicious if I typed while watching, so I have to stop. They don't know that I blog. Heh.

Edwards takes college costs personally or something. It has to do with personal experience. Dean and Kerry want to do the right thing, but they haven't lived it.

Sharpton: Good people can have any background. "Clarence Thomas...he's my color, but he's not my kind." What a moron.

Dean on Kerry's success: Maybe it's because Kerry hasn't said "YEEEEAAAHGGH!" That's just my opinion. Dean is independent because he stood up against the war and NCLB before they were popular. Vermont's health insurance and job creation should be models for the country. Why is Dean saying "we" instead of "I?"

Last question: What role does the nomination process play in dividing the nation?

Kucinich: We can heal the country, and he wants to show the strength in America's unity. He wants us to recognize injustices done to African-Americans and Native Americans. He thinks gays, lesbians, and "transgenders" don't have the same rights even though they do.

Kerry: "I'm taking each state one state at a time." Makes sense, except that STATES DON'T HAVE THEIR OWN STATES! "People that want clean air and clean water to breathe." Can't leave out the all-important mermaid vote.

Oh, it's over. Why did I stick around for that? Maybe I'll watch Scarborough for a few minutes now. If you just read all the way through that, I really feel sorry for you. That is all.

News Flash

Just a bit of random information: My roommate's girlfriend just told me that she thinks "the electoral college is a piece of sh*t and they need to get rid of it."

Fascinating.

Brain Usage Profile

Well, as long as everyone's doing these:

Your Brain Usage Profile

Auditory : 56%
Visual : 43%
Left : 52%
Right : 47%

CD, your hemispheric dominance is equally divided between left and right brain, while you show a moderate preference for auditory versus visual learning, signs of a balanced and flexible person.

Your balance gives you the enviable capacity to be verbal and literate while retaining a certain "flair" and individuality. You are logical and compliant but only to a degree. You are organized without being compulsive, goal-directed without being driven, and a "thinking" individual without being excessively so.

The one problem you might have is that your learning might not be as efficient as you would like. At times you will work from the specific to the general, while at other times you'll work from the general to the specific. Sometimes you will be logical in your approach while at other times random. Since you cannot always control the choice, you may experience frustrations not normally felt by persons with a more defined and directed learning style.

You may also minimally experience conflicts associated with auditory processing. You will be systematic and sequential in your processing of information, you will most often focus on a single dimension of the problem or material, and you will be more reflective, i.e., "taking the data in" as opposed to "devouring" it.

Overall, you should feel content with your life and yourself. You are, perhaps, a little too critical of yourself - and of others - while maintaining an "openness" which is redeeming. Indecisiveness is a problem and your creativity is not in keeping with your potential. Being a pragmatist, you downplay this aspect of yourself and focus on the more immediate, the more obvious and the more functional.

Hmmm...I always thought I was right-brained due to the fact that I have no ability to process numbers. I wouldn't trust this thing completely, but some of the other stuff is fairly accurate.

DU Post of the Day: "What Country Should America Be Like?"

Okay, after that little Valentine's Day rant, I think some humor would be appropriate, and that's why I'm covering this thread on Democratic Underground. Check out the original (DISCLAIMER: As always, DU threads are for entertainment purposes only, and are not meant to represent the majority of the American left or the Democratic Party):

What existing country should America most strive to be like? Anyone who's traveled or studied knows that America is not the greatest place on Earth. The question here is: What country should serve as the model for our country?

I was guessing they would say France before I even clicked on this thread, so the next part of the post didn't surprise me very much:

I would have to say France. There is enough socialism to prevent the destitution seen in countries like the US, but not enough to render life as dull as, say, Sweden. There is also a strong national identity in France that you don't see in our consumeristic country here. Sure, Americans buy their made in China American flags; but there's really no national culture aside from Britney Spears and Eminem. France takes pride in its history without exploiting it. The seven year presidential term would also do well in America, eliminating reliances on the political business cycle and forcing presidents to look at the long term effects of their decisions. And I love the 14 Juillet military parades in Paris. I can't understand why we don't have a 4th of July celebration like that in America, instead of Pepsi-sponsored, consumer-culture trash.

I love DU so much. I don't understand why people avoid it. I was in depressed/enraged mode because of Valentine's Day, and this thing cheered me up right away. Let's see what others said:

Canada They are polite, well educated, multilingual, socialy aware, and have universal healthcare. The Canadians are the best neighbors in the world. (The second-best neighbors in the world are the Mexicans.)

France, Canada...what's the difference nowadays?

Canada. My friends up North have the right idea. They believe in diplomacy instead of guns. Talk first instead of action right off the bat. They have health care...they consider it an imperative. We don't seem to be able to understand that access to health care, in a country as wealthy as ours, is a basic right. Canada is many times more progressive than we are...especially in terms of gay people.

Health care is a basic right. That's news to me.

Of course, a few people actually think America is the greatest country on Earth (how did they avoid being banned?), like this one:

 Is this a joke? Sorry - America IS the best country to live. I've lived in Greece, Germany, England and spent many months in Colombia, Peru, Panama anyone who says it's great to live there has some home grown pussy on the side keeping him there. BTW - most people I met would of given all they had just to VISIT this country.

But other posters (who, keep in mind, aren't unpatriotic at all) disagree:

Some U.S. rankings: 37th in health care, 31st in freedom of the press, and 19th in life expectancy. You have been to the wrong places. Additionally, I have friends who prefer small, backward South American countries because they can escape the plastic, corporate, right-wing, advertising, puritanical bullshit of the U.S. and like living without air conditioning and other luxuries that only weaken the enjoyment of being alive and relating to others. The U.S. is mostly a hillbilly Las Vegas.

"But don't you DARE question my patriotism! I love America, just not NORTH America!"

[sarcasm] Surprisingly [/sarcasm], it eventually turned into a discussion of the "religious clothing" debate in France:

France? Perhaps we can force secularization on all of our religious minorities just like them...

And the first reply:

Hahahaha. This is what FAUX wants you to think. It forces secularization on ALL religions, not just minorities. Public institutions should be secular. Your argument is straight of the O'Reilly book of fallacies. And you have to understand the religious friction going on in France between the Jews, Muslims, and others. More Muslim women support the ban on religious displays in school than oppose...The Socialist Party is also overwhelmingly supportive of the ban.

O'Reilly=wrong, socialists=right. I love it! What else have you got for us, crazy people?

What about "Freedom from Religion".... France's predominately secular society don't want to see religion creep into their cherished institutions like it has here. They see the danger.

HOORAY FOR TOLERANCE!!!!!!!!! Don't stop now! What else do you think of America?

I have been all over Europe as well, and have even lived there for a period...I loved it - I felt like it was an oasis of sanity compared to this country and life seemed more leisurely and purposeful.

Why the crap are you in the U.S. then? Hmmm....

Great Britain. Only because that's the only other country in which I've lived. They have a social safety net, civilised laws, and great beer. They also have a healthy respect for intellectuals and sarcasm. Their music scene and youth culture rocks. OK, we are emulating colonial Britain now, but I mean modern Britain.

Social safety net and civilized laws. Is that what you call welfare and gun control these days?

 how dare you imply that America isn't perfect, splendid, wondrous? The more insecure and jingoistic amongst us will crawl outta the woodwork and burst into inexplicable fits of nationalistic frenzy at the mere thought!

I like this one. Apparently, loving other countries is healthy, but loving America is jingoistic and nationalistic. Fascinating.

America should strive to live up to her potential. What works in other countries may not necessarily work here. On a related note, I can just imagine the wingers getting hold of this thread and showing Fox News viewers how anti-American we DUers are.

Well, at least they saw it coming.

 If not America....the old one twenty years ago? If I can't have America as it was twenty years ago? We lose this next election...and Bush stays in power....and they come after more citizens, etc.? You have to realize this is a world wide grab for power by the Neo Cons to set up their World Union (called Order in the past). They have divided up the world (head of the World Bank...and corporate CEOs). The World Banks finance both sides of war. All they care about is profit. Canada, Scotland, Australia, New Zealand, etc are all under pressure taking away rights, WTO-World Union plans, etc. The British thing with Blair and the Queen. They're all previously Democratic and English speaking(like us).

Must...not...laugh...! Will...have...fatal...asthma...attack........

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA (cough cough cough...wheeze...)

Okay, I'm better now. That's just a sample of the responses. Click the link I provided for a lot more.

DU is better than anything on Comedy Central. I love it.

Valentine's Rant

I'll just come right out and say it: I think Valentine's Day is a stupid idea. Really. It's just a scheme to commercialize people's emotions and make them feel guilty if they don't act a certain way for one day of the year.

Why do people need a special day to celebrate love, anyway? If you have love in your life, shouldn't that be something you celebrate every day? Why do you need to buy chocolates and flowers and friggin' cards to prove it?

Furthermore, why is all this red/pink crap necessary? It's all over the place! As if we need a reminder of what day it is.

Of course, a lot of people feel the need to do something special to celebrate. Thanks to this brilliant idea, my roommate has his girlfriend visiting for the weekend, and I have to put up with their little displays of affection every 2 minutes. Okay, you're a frickin' couple. We get it already.

So, with that said, I'm not doing anything special today other than writing this rant. I really don't think we need any particular day to celebrate what should be treated as a universal human emotion, and it's disgusting how much companies try to cash in on it.

...Or maybe I'm just REALLY lonely.

...Probably more of the last one.

UPDATE
Okay, now the roommate and his girlfriend are watching "Sex and the City." Does anyone else feel physically dirty after so much as LISTENING to that show? I know I do.

Larry's Roundup

Hi, everyone. Larry the Liberal here with this week's roundup. I'm sure you're all ready for a more progressive perspective after a week of Repiglican lieing from CD, so let's get started.

First of all, why didn't anyone send me questions for Ask Larry? Aren't you interested in me? Wait...maybe you did send them, but Asscroft intercepted them before they got to me! I AM NOT A TRAITOR!!! Well, I don't care if you don't like me. You're censorship wont work on me.

Next, let's look at the obvious big story from this week: The Bush* AWOL accusation. I don't understand why this is still an issue. I mean, didn't they already prove that he was AWOL back in 2000? These revisionist historians are trying to make it seem like theres still some unanswered questions.

The fraudministration, of course, cant let average Amurkans know that their Chimp in Chief is a deserter, so they manufactured this pathetic excuse for a letter to the editor. It's obviously a lie written by Mclellan or Rove, but still, it doesn't even answer the questions we're asking:

George Bush and I were lieutenants and pilots in the 111th Fighter Interceptor Squadron (FIS), Texas Air National Guard (ANG) from 1970 to 1971.

SO? Where was he in 72-73? That's what we want to know! Could it be that they're afraid the truth will be revealed? That Dumbya was doing community service for being a COKEHEAD? Don't act like you don't know that! Not only did Pretzelboy inhale, he snorted his brains out!!!

With all this happening, I don't think this suprised anybody. Does anyone really believe this? Come on! It came out at the same time as the AWOL story, and it was broken by Drudge, the same media whore who pointed the religious reich at Clinton for the horrible crime of enjoying sex.

It's also overshadowing stories about Kerry's war protests, and that's just a little to coincidental for me. Why won't they let people know what a hero Kerry was? He stood up to the uber-patriots and told the truth about American crimes against innocent minorities and women in Vietnam! People need to know!

In any case, why are people so interested in Kerry while totally ignoring the fact that Smirky got his girlfriend pregnant and drove her to the aboriton clinic? BUSH LIED, BABIES DIED! Not that theres anything wrong with abortion, but it proves that B*sh is a hypocrit!

By the way, none of this really matters, because Dennis Kucinich will win in the end. His "Department of Peace" idea is the most briliant thing I've ever heard! It's so obvious, but I guess the facist wing doesn't want peace. Look how well other goverment solutions work! If we institutionalize peace instead of hateful imperialism, we'll never have any wars! Go, Dennis! Fight for the truth!

Next story: The debate about gay marriage in Massachusetts. I can't believe some people are bigoted and homophobic enough to think that two people who love each other can't get married. I guess the religoius wrong has brainwashed you into thinking that gays arent human and shouldn't have the same rights as everyone else. If it were up to Xtians, interacial marriage would be illegal so the pure gene pool wouldn't be polluted!

What's worse, Chimpenfuhrer wants to codify hate and biggitry by putting an amendment in the Constitution against gay marriage! Why does he need that? Does he think gays are going to destroy society? "Oh no, we can't let people who love each other get married! That's unamerican!"

If you were really worried about marriage and society, you'd outlaw hetero marriage! Straight people have done more damage then anyone else, and now you need gays to fix it, just like you do when you don't know what color shirt to wear and have to call the Fab Five! I love that show! We need "Queer Bride for the Straight Groom!" Then we'll fix marriage!

That's not the only discrimination going on though. I already talked about the freedom of tree marriage that's being denied, but now I found another group with more freedom in other countries. Why can't living and dead people marry in the U.S.? Are you necrophobes too? Why should it matter whether someone is alive? If two people love each other, that should be the only qualification! You make me sick!

Now, in other international news, I found this intersting story:

Ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was probably high on drugs when he decided to invade Kuwait in 1990, said a former chief of protocol in a radio interview on Thursday.

Here's more proof that the Thief in Chief is a dictator! Just like Saddam Hussein, he's a drug addict who invaded a defenseless country and lied to people! CAN'T YOU SEE THE PARRALELS?!

I guess you can't, or else disgusting things like this wouldn't happen:

The Nobel Peace Prize awards committee reported a record 173 nominations for 2004, with known candidates including President Bush, jailed Israeli nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu and the pope.

WHAT????? How can Bush* be up for the Nobel Prize unless Rove and Cheney payed off the comitee? This is impossible! Whats worse, the biggest bigit of them all is there: The Pope! That hateful homophobe has done almost as much to destroy peace as Chimpy. This proves that Xtians and their bigoted buybull run the world. I'm scared.

Want even more proof of bigottry? Read this:

A National Guardsman suspected of trying to share military information with al-Qaida is a Muslim convert who complained bitterly in a letter to a newspaper about ``bigotry, hatred and mindless rage'' in the United States.

Of course he complained about bigotry, hatred, and mindless rage! This proves it! Asscroft and his racial profiling are to blame. Do you think that all Muslims support "terrah" just because they dare to question Jeebus? This is blatant racism against Muslims, and we can't let it continue. I support Spc. Ryan G. Anderson and his efforts to reveal the truth about the Divided Hates of AmeriKKKa. Don't give up!

That's about it for me. Remember to send you Ask Larry questions to impeachthechimp2000@yahoo.com. See you next time!

-Larry

Fun With Ads

Check out this great juxtaposition (I added a little visual aid in case you don't get it right away):

View image

...Well, I think it's funny.

More DO Fisking

Okay, I'm a couple hours later than I said I would be, but I've had a long day. The Daily Orange, after a brief period of moderate/irrelevant editorials, is back in true liberal form this week. Today's example uses the "why did we attack Iraq and not another dictatorship" argument, as well as some blatant lies, to try and undermine the war effort. Let's take a look:

Amid all tyrannies, why Iraq?
Saddam was a threat; Chris Malagisi got that right in his column ("Dems switch stance; WMD don't matter," February 10, 2004). Let's not fool ourselves about the evil Saddam perpetrated and the instability he created in the region. I will let down the liberal elements of the Democratic Party. Just because pre-emption is a fuzzy place of uncertain morality, it does not automatically mean "bad."

At least this author is sane enough to recognize evil. I'll give her that.

But here comes the perspective. Saddam is not the only evil dictator out there.

GASP! Really? I had no idea!

Kim Jong-Il of North Korea...

Nuclear inspections...

...Qaddafi of Libya...

"I will do whatever the Americans want, because I saw what happened in Iraq, and I was afraid."

...Castro of Cuba.

Pffft. He'll be dead in 5 years even if we don't kill him.

Add a dozen other rogue states and one wonders if we must launch war with these countries as well?

Well, since we're already making progress with a couple of the ones you mentioned, I'm guessing the answer is "no."

At what cost to our economy? The 18 to 21-year-olds at SU who would be drafted to achieve such objectives might argue from yet another reference point.

She's bringing up the draft now? Where the frick did that come from?

The problem is three-fold.

One, the United States should not deem itself responsible for picking off every leader that it considers a problem. Military intervention is not the first resort - it's the last.

Which is why we gave the Saddamster 12 f-in' years.

In between, there is something called "diplomacy..."

*cough* OIL FOR FOOD *cough* SANCTIONS *cough cough* WEAPONS INSPECTORS *cough*

...a concept as old as time.

I'm sure diplomacy was real common 15 billion years ago.

We are using it in North Korea in cooperation with China, Russia, Japan and South Korea.

Which basically refutes the argument you just made, doesn't it?

Two, Bush's list of American "allies" during his State of the Union was just hot air.

MoDo? You again? How often do you ghostwrite for college newspapers?

The only countries that provide military support are Great Britain, Australia and Spain.

REALLY???

While Bush had to dig into the dredges to find "allies..."

Poodles and lackeys, right?

...America forgot that our strongest allies are historically Canada, Australia, and the EU.

"Historically," a lot of countries have been our allies. What's your point?

By working so hard to ostracize them, we do not help ourselves.

Actually, by showing them that we don't need their approval, we help ourselves quite a lot. You can't redefine the word "ally" just because some countries aren't with us.

Diplomacy is not about how much everyone agrees with America, but how much we work with our allies to achieve common goals...

Unless our common goals were to leave Saddam Hussein in power and not kill his sons, I'd say we're working pretty well together.

...of which there are many - most importantly, a sound international economy.

What do you want us to do, switch to the Euro? Let them handle their own financial problems.

Iraq was not and should not have been a top priority.

Why don't you tell that to the millions of Iraqis we liberated? I'm sure they'd agree with you...

Three, Malagisi's inflammatory comment that the Middle East is home to "radical theocracy and fascism," further emphasizes the myopic, racially and religiously-charged hyperbole that qualifies as intellectual discourse.

I guess Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Palestine didn't get that memo.

Such short-sightedness ignores Jordan, Egypt, Turkey, Bahrain and that it is only a minority who are fundamentalists.

And this affects their ability to rule by force in what way?

His comments prove to non-Americans that we are as dumb and self-centered as they think.

I knew this was coming. Let's quickly review: Suggesting that the Middle East is home to a lot of terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism is "hyperbole," but suggesting that Americans are "dumb and self-centered" is fine.

Wait for it...wait for it...

HOORAY FOR CONSISTENCY!!!!!!!!!!

There is nothing like a dumb military He-Man to impress your friends...

Holy crap, she did it again!

"There are fundamentalist terrorists in the Middle East? Impossible! That's just an inflammatory stereotype! You dumb military He-Men are all alike!!!"

America is about more than that. Unfortunately, Malagisi forgot that. Don't you forget it too.

If I do forget it, it'll be because the massive amount of cognitive dissonance required to make sense of this article killed too many of my brain cells.

I might have more respect for anti-war types if they could argue consistently and honestly. On the other hand, it's a lot more fun when they make it this easy to disrespect them.

Preview

Okay...there's an even better editorial in the Daily Orange today that deserves a fisking, and I'll have that ready around 7:00 tonight. Just thought you might want to know.

I have to write some scripts and a storyboard now.

Another Bush=Hitler Thing

I don't have time to write about this at the moment. Just go there and look at the debate in the comments. It's either hilarious or terrifying. I can't make up my mind. (NOTE: It's also about a month old, but it's still great reading)

Feel free to comment back here after you've checked out the link. I've got TRF stuff to do now.

At Last, a Fiskable DO Column!

Man, it's been way too long since I did this. The Daily Orange editorials have actually made sense most days. Today, however, they've provided one worthy of a bit more attention, so let's take a look:

Arrogance and irresponsibility

The image refuses to fade. May 2, 2003: President George W. Bush lands on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln, instantly greeted by an enthusiastic crowd of sailors eagerly anticipating his already rumored message. Shortly after noon, he delivers. "In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed." The victorious commander-in-chief beams to thousands of clapping hands.

Last time I checked, occupying the enemy's capital city counted as a victory. I'm not sure where this is supposed to be going...

In response, Democratic presidential hopeful and decorated Vietnam War veteran John Kerry has concluded nearly all of his recent stump speeches with the promise that he "will show the president that I know something about aircraft carriers for real."

Since when is knowledge of aircraft carriers a prerequisite for being a successful politician?

And the Boston Globe and Associated Press have recently reported that military records from 1972, when the future president was scheduled to report for National Guard duty in Alabama, include no mention of Bush.

That's right. The DO is jumping on the AWOL story, despite the fact that it's already been debunked. And they call conservatives ideologues...

To be sure, the president served in the Guard during the early 70s, flying F-102 fighters on important test missions. Nevertheless, questions arise: did the future president, as a member of a powerful and well-connected family, use his father's ties to evade combat in Southeast Asia?

Considering members of his unit were in Vietnam at the time, I doubt it.

And, even after securing a safe position state-side, did the young Bush skirt his duties?

The fact that they're still asking this question says a lot about their need for "proof."

Yet a simpler question also appears: why should we care? Americans on the left and right seem to agree that the Vietnam War was waged for politics, not principle, and that the results were entirely negative. If Bush avoided fighting through any means, was that necessarily a bad thing?

Well, he didn't "avoid fighting by any means," so that point doesn't really matter. Do you think he was learning to fly crop dusters?

Maybe not; but it suggests a disturbing trend. The president's apparent ambivalence over matters relating to military service in the 1970s mirrors the sophomoric arrogance that has characterized his approach to foreign policy during his term.

"Sophomoric arrogance." I believe that, in English, that phrase translates to "making decisions and sticking with them." That liberal language is tricky.

I don't know about the rest of you, but "sophomoric arrogance" gives me a mental image of Bush sitting in the Oval Office throwing darts at a map to decide which country we're going to bomb. I wonder if that's what the left sees.

Similar to the way in which he "played" the Army thirty years ago...

How is the Air National Guard related to the Army, exactly?

...Bush is now prosecuting a prolonged struggle in Iraq with no measurable concern for responsibility, respect, or duty.

Oh, man, I should've put a drink alert on that one. Let's see what qualifies as irresponsible:

He began the war with what now appears to be errant intelligence.

Of course, he knew it was errant at the time, right? It was just the rest of the civilized world (and Saddam Hussein) who thought Iraq had WMD.

And he has paid only lip-service to the international community's demands for greater cooperation...

That's because the "international community" doesn't want to cooperate. It wants to coerce.

...offering the embarrassingly tiny "coalition of the willing" as a token of his alleged support for multilateralism.

Did Maureen Dowd co-author this thing? Oh, well. I guess that when you think about it, the coalition is pretty embarrassing. I mean, who's ever heard of insignificant little countries like Spain and Great Britain? What a joke!

If a younger Bush could only be counted upon to ignore responsibility and seek the road of no accountability, this Bush appears equally averse to maturity.

I just realized that he never actually explained why Bush is "immature." It seems to me that denying any evidence that refutes your position is kind of immature. Come to think of it, so is hypocrisy.

In a more peaceful time, the issue might not matter. But 500 American kids have died and thousands more injured while a thoughtless cavalier sits at the wheel.

Of course. That makes a lot of sense, because any mature, intelligent person would disregard hundreds of reports that a hostile country known to fund terrorism has chemical weapons.

Only a "thoughtless cavalier" would actually ACT on intelligence that could prevent another 9/11 and would still liberate millions of oppressed people. How immature!

Do facts still exist? It seems like they don't make a difference anymore.

So Long, Weaselly!

Ha! Who else is posting about this story at 1:30 in the morning?

Retired Gen. Wesley Clark, who finished third in both Tennessee and Virginia, will announce his withdrawal Wednesday afternoon in his hometown of Little Rock, Arkansas.

Howie, I believe it's now your turn.

UPDATE
Crap! Hamster Shocker beat me to it!

Curse you, Evil Glenn!!!!!!!!!!

Fun With the French

I'm sure most of you are aware of this by now. I'm particularly interested in this part:

The bill stipulates that "in schools, junior high schools and high schools, signs and dress that conspicuously show the religious affiliation of students are forbidden."

Here's a thought: What would happen if someone decided to form and subsequently follow a religion where all clothing was a sign of devotion? Would followers of that religion have to come to school naked, or would there be an exception?

After all, if their main religious symbol is clothing, wearing clothes is a clear indication of their religious affiliation, right?

More Proof that Amerikkka is Full of Bigots!!!

Hey, this is Larry the Liberal again. You people haven't sent me any "Ask Larry" questions yet! Don't you want to know about me?

Well, anyway, that's not as important as this story:

Two trees "married" to appease rain god in Indian village

NEW DELHI (AFP) - Hundreds of people have attended a wedding between two trees in hopes of pleasing the god of rain, United News of India reported.
To the chanting of Hindu hymns a cleric tied a knot on a neem tree, which was the bride, to solemnise its eternal union with a peepul tree, the news agency said.

See how beautiful love between people other than "one man and one woman" can be, you born-again bigots? Why don't we allow tree marriage in this country?

I didn't even think about this until I saw that story, but it all makes sense now! You're all just a bunch of dendrophobes! If we amend the KKKonstitution so marriage is only defined in your anachronistic, redneck way, trees will never be allowed to express their devotion to one another! Why must you be so full of hate just because you don't understand how they feel?

The article also has this to say:

Rituals to bring rain such as marriages between animals are common in rural India.

SEE?! You call this a free country, but trees and animals aren't even allowed to get married like they can in India! Why do you treat anyone who isn't a rich straight white male as a second-class cititzen???

AmeriKKKa: Land of the fundies, home of the hatemongers.

More from the "Religion of Peace"

This is just beautiful:

A FANATICAL pal of evil cleric Abu Hamza had told British children as young as ten they must “kill and be killed” for Islam.

Muslim extremist Omar Bakri — speaking in London’s East End — said suicide bombers were assured a place in paradise.

Assuming their idea of "paradise" is an eternal existence in conditions roughly equivalent to the space around them at the moment of their death.

Bakri described such bombings as “self-sacrifice operations”.

If they would stop taking innocent people with them, I'd be fine with their sacrifices.

An example would be to crash a plane on to 10 Downing Street or the White House, he told a cheering audience of Muslims, including around ten young children.

Here's my question: If this is isolated extremism, why were the crowds so enthusiastic, and why do we hear about this crap so friggin' much? The part about the children just makes it even better, doesn't it?

In one outburst he raged: “You must fight for the way of Allah, for the sake of Allah, to kill first and to be killed.”

Here's an idea, then: Why don't you fight each other to the death? That way, you don't know if you'll kill or be killed, and you'll still get your 72 virgin goats!

...The Syrian-born cleric read out a list where terrorist atrocities had been carried out — New York’s Twin Towers, the bombing of US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the Bali blast, and the bomb attack on the destroyer USS Cole in Yemen.

And he praised the September 11 bombers as the “Glorious 19 hijackers”.

Hey, I just thought of something: If it's so glorious to f**king kill yourself, then why is this guy still alive? And based on that logic, why do people listen to him if he's disobeying Allah?

HA! Critical thinking strikes again!

This makes me sick. This murderous moron is telling CHILDREN to Explode for Allah™, and it seems like the only people speaking out against it are British journalists. Where are the legendary "moderate Muslims" who should be shutting him the f**k up?

Maybe they exploded already.

GO AWAY, HOWARD!!!

This is crap. Howard Dean apparently won't be dropping out of the presidential race if he loses in Wisconsin, even though he specifically said that he would a few days ago.

Hmmm....

DEAN LIED! DEAN LIED! HE SAID HE WOULD DROP OUT, AND NOW HE'S NOT GOING TO! DEAN'S A LIAR!!!

See how easy it is?

You Learn Something New Every Day...

You know what sucks? Discovering, 8 hours before an exam, that all your psychology notes and lectures are posted online, and you could've looked at them there any time.

I am such an idiot...

Probably the Last Post of the Day

Be sure to check out the post below this if you want to participate in "Ask Larry."

Anyway, just one more thing before I get to work: I was looking at a DU thread that one of Frnak's commenters linked, and I found the following message near the bottom:

...I believe most Conservatives have suffered very subtle brain damage. They are against social programs unless the program is related to war, lower taxes, or the death penalty.

I won't insult your intelligence by going into detail about the purpose of government. I just think that's possibly the funniest thing I've ever seen in my life, and I wanted to share it with you.

Larry's in the Spotlight!

Hi, everyone. Larry the Liberal here once again. I guess CD already told you that he's been really busy lately, and he thought it would be a good time to try out an idea I had.

I realized that I just kind of showed up on this blog without a proper introduction, so you people really don't know that much about me. I want to fix that.

So, starting today, I'm taking submissions for a new feature called "Ask Larry." The questions can be about anything, from my personal info to my political stances. You can even ask questions that have nothing to do with me if you want. I just thought you might like to get to know me a little better, since I won't be going AWOL (like the pResident) any time soon.

If you want to ask me anything, send your questions to impeachthechimp2000@yahoo.com with the subject line "Ask Larry," and I'll try my best to answer somettime this weekend. Remember, you have to send 'em, or I won't have anything to work with!

Later!

More Syracuse Stuff

NOTE: I was going to post this at 2:45, but f**king IE pulled one of its random shutdowns, and I had to go to class before I got a chance to rewrite it

I missed this before (the article, not the actual fact): Syracuse University has a new chancellor-elect, and she did a brief Q&A session. Let's see how it went:

Diversity was the hot topic at the session.

"I am, as you may know, passionate about diversity for the following very simple reason, well two reasons," Cantor said. "One, really the heart of intellectual excellence of an institution is in how diverse the perspectives it can bring to the table. So diversity and excellence are completely intertwined in my opinion.

This makes me a bit nervous about the future of the school. Another one of these "different colors=different ideas" people is going to be in charge next year.

"The second reason I am passionate about it is that one of the main things that an institution of higher education can do is prepare citizens for the future. And the future of this country, and of the world indeed, is in a great multi-racial, multi-ethnic, multicultural mix."

Again, why does she think that we need to take any action to accomplish this goal? In any case, universities are supposed to teach knowledge. People learn about society from personal experience, not forced diversity. Let's see some more:

Her work in the Supreme Court cases on affirmative action at the University of Michigan last year, Cantor said, was emblematic of her avid support for diversity on campus. Being a social scientist, Cantor has allowed herself to study and understand the importance of diversity of perspective in higher education.

If they were really interested in "diversity of perspective," they wouldn't keep hiring people like this. The current chancellor supported the UM case too. I like how she acts as if her enforcement of racism is a testament to her commitment to racial equality.

Intellectual excellence lies in diversity of perspective, Cantor said, and the perspectives of different races and genders must be allowed to both create their own identities, and have access to come together for debate and understanding in the intellectual community.

Since when does this not happen automatically, and why does "diversity" affect intellectual viewpoints?

"I believe that access is absolutely critical to all our institutions, and as institutions, our excellence depends on having that access and having that diversity," Cantor said. "I don't think access is where it ends. And a lot of my work has been, and continues to be, in thinking in how you make use of, if you will, that diversity. That is, we just don't open our gates, we should be building integrated communities that bring different perspectives and life experiences to bear."

Notice how she can go through all that without actually defining what diversity means? It reminds me of a line from Macbeth: "It is a tale, told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

They talk and talk and talk, but they never really say what "diversity" is supposed to mean, or when we'll have enough of it to eliminate "affirmative action" once and for all.

I hope I'm not stuck taking Tolerance 101 next semester because of this woman.

Monday Roundup

I have an unbelievable amount of work to catch up on today (like 4 weeks of Spanish workbook assignments that I didn't bother to look at before), so blogging will be limited. Larry the Liberal has something he wants to try later, but other than that, there won't be a lot.

I do want to cover a few things, though. First of all, let's look at some Syracuse news. I haven't been fisking the Daily Orange lately, and there are 2 reasons for that. #1: Their editorial staff seems to have gone moderate on me, and I've actually agreed with a couple of them. I guess that's a sign of progress, but it gives me less to work with.

At the same time, when they do have editorials and letters, they're usually all cut from the same cloth that I've ripped apart numerous times before. Take one of today's, for example:

Homosexuality not a choice Since I was young, I knew that one day I would have the opportunity to marry the person I loved. Today, I do not have that opportunity. Currently, lawmakers are trying to pass federal legislation that will deny me that opportunity for as long as I live. Why? Because I'm gay...I never asked to be gay. The choice was never given to me, just like it wasn't given to you. I can't change my sexual orientation any easier than you can change yours...

...And so on. I've beaten that dead horse too many times, and there's really no point in doing it again. Give me something new to work with, people!

There's also some Syracuse-related stuff on Critical Mass today:

...students at Syracuse University are promoting their annual production of "The Vagina Monologues" with a giant six-foot vagina and other vagina-themed displays:

Their booth flows with glitter, glue and pipe cleaners for a "decorate-your-vagina" activity, but its main attraction is a 6-foot vagina. Passers-by and vagina aficionados can donate a dollar to stick their heads through a hole cut near the top of the decorative, cardboard creation and have their pictures taken.

It crossed my mind to blog about this when I first saw it in the DO a few days ago, but I never got around to it. Anyway, the post says:

Additional information about the "decorate-your-vagina" activity was not available at the time of this posting. If you are a Syracuse student who has engaged in or witnessed such decorations, please do write to explain--especially the part about the glue.

Well, I am a Syracuse student, but I don't spend much time at the student center, and I didn't actually see this event. However, the DO has some additional information that the referenced article didn't include, so I'll put some of that in the extended entry...now!

This weekend's "Vagina Monologues" productions kick off V-Week, a series of educational and inspirational fund-raisers sponsored by Students Advancing Sexual Safety and Empowerment. SASSE (pronounced "sassy") spearheads four big events throughout the week.

Last year the events raised $12,000, Hernandez said. This year SASSE will split its proceeds between the SU R.A.P.E. Crisis Center, the Rape Crisis Center of Syracuse, the Vera House, Planned Parenthood, the Chadwick House and an international organization. That organization aims to help Mexican women that "disappear" and are sold into prostitution or slavery.

Always good to see Planned Parenthood thrown into a "women's rights" cause. Here's more detail about the event itself:

Despite the absurdity of the latest addition to the student center, it seems most of the university community has warmed up to it. Even so, two faculty members in the lobby were too uncomfortable to talk about it.

The SASSE crew admitted that in past years the Food Services staff has asked them to move the word "vagina" away from the Schine Dining Center. They say Food Services thought it was unappetizing.

"I think it enables and excites the appetite," one vagina decorator chimed in. "Makes you salivate."

...a senior Spanish and television, radio and film major...was working at the Caribbean Student Association booth next to SASSE's display yesterday. She praised the giant vagina as an effective marketing technique, and said it is subtle enough to keep it from being awkward or offensive. She also commended the "Vagina Monologues" booth for attracting more attention than her own.

So, there's some more information. Hopefully, the trackback will serve its purpose and help to answer some of Erin's questions about this "empowering" event. I couldn't find much more, although today's DO has a review of the actual "Vagina Monologues" production, which is available for reading here. The basic premise is that the show stresses "sexual identity." You can read more for yourselves if you're interested.

I think that's enough for now. Larry will be here later to introduce a "brilliant" idea he came up with. We'll see about that...

What Year is it Again?

I really should be studying instead of blogging (huge psychology test Tuesday), but I couldn't let this go unnoticed.

I thought that "America is a lie" post was the craziest thing I would cover this week. As it turns out, I was wrong.

Thanks to a link on General Douchebaggery, Semi-Intelligent Thoughts brings you Citizens For Legitimate Government™. This organization "is a multi-partisan activist group established to expose the Bush coup d'etat, and to oppose the Bush occupation in all of its manifestations."

See what I mean? This is frickin' blogger's GOLD. Let's take a look at their charter for even more hilarity (I know this isn't really a current topic, but since they're still harping on it, why not? It's either this or "AWOL"):

Once it became probable that GW Bush would be the supposedly "legal"--though, in terms of democratic standards, by no means legitimate--president of the United States...

Gore would've gotten away with it if it weren't for that meddling Constitution!

...we began to focus on strategies to expose the coup and counter the Bush Occupation of the White House...

I think it's pretty clear that you failed (this page is current, by the way, and they still have the same objectives with a little bit of "oppose Bush's oilwar" thrown in for good measure).

...and to counter the attempt on the part of the administration, in conjunction with the media...

Why don't they just say "Fox News?" We know they mean it.

...to create the appearance of legitimacy.

I guess "legitimacy" means "Democratic." That's clearly the only kind of president they'll recognize. On another note, has anyone ever considered what the tone would've been if Gore had won the election? I bet there would be a lot less of this crap from the right than we've seen from the left.

GW Bush seized office by "virtue" of a contingency of GOPers who worked to ensure him, by various means...

In other words, they dared to vote for the (R) candidate. Those brainwashed peasants!

...(propaganda...

It's called a campaign, sh*twits.

...obstruction of justice...

Electoral college? What's that?

...voter and vote-counting intimidation...

"Exit polls show Al Gore in the lead..."

...legal delay...

I'm pretty sure Algore did that, too.

...specious and biased legal reasoning...

See previous response about the electoral college.

...an illegal purge of the voting rolls...

From what I've seen (which is, admittedly, very little), this is basically a veiled charge of racism, since minorities would NEVER vote Republican.

...illegally counted absentee ballots...

The military votes Republican! Don't you DARE count them!!!

discarded legal Democratic ballots...

*cough* CHADS *cough*

...and other factors) the U.S. presidency, as against the expressed will of the people, both nationally and in Florida.

Apparently, The People™ don't care what the evil, outdated Constitution says.

We are an activist group established to expose the Bush coup d'etat, making him utterly ineffectual as a putative leader.

Way to make the best of a bad situation. This once again proves my theory: If life gives a conservative lemons, he'll make lemonade. If life gives a liberal lemons, he'll complain that he wanted orange juice. Then he'll try to prove why for 4 years and deny the legitimacy of lemonade.

This effort involves opposing his cabinet choices when appropriate (i.e., in all cases)...

So much for being multi-partisan.

...making spectacular political announcements that remind the public that our president was not elected (see Rose Bowl Flyover press release and photo, and Super Bowl flyover release and photo)...

Aaaaaaaaand....so much for being against propaganda. I don't know if I should say it...ah, but I must...

HOORAY! HOORAY FOR CONSISTENCY! (insert fireworks and inspirational background music)

...supporting and contributing to the voter marches, supporting and contributing to the efforts to investigate fraudulent voting and non-counting practices in Florida, and much, much more.

Bush. Won. You. Idiots. This is incredible. But wait, there's also an amendment:

...Citizens For Legitimate Government™ is a coalition group that welcomes members from any party who are interested in opposing the Bush II administration, and exposing the coup d'etat that brought Bush to power.

This is a good example of how trying to advance a cause based on flawed premises can lead to flawed (although oftentimes entertaining) conclusions. I will AGAIN use this as evidence that we need to teach critical thinking in high schools. Add it to NCLB or something.

We will, unless a particular group is otherwise specifically objected to as reflected in a decision by CLG staff, work with any group that opposes Bush Occupation and the policies of the Bush mis-ministration.

They sound so professional. I also like how they can be "multi-partisan" while still being against Bush's party.

Our rationale...

You insult the very concept of reason by forming a group like this, but please, enlighten us.

...for opposing the Bush mis-ministration has to do with the rejection of the same by the American people, both by popular and legitimate electoral vote...

See? This is called self-deception, and it's a common cause of logical fallacies. Why are we teaching kids about diversity and safe condom use instead of stuff like this?

...as evidenced in the national vote count and the legitimate will of the Florida voters as reflected in their intentions.

Their intentions mean diddly-squat if they're too dumb to punch a friggin' ballot.

Further, the numerous and nefarious acts committed on the part of the Republican party...

B-b-b-b-b-b-but I thought you were MULTI-partisan!!!

...its propagandists, ideologues, media counterparts...

Again, this probably translates to "Bill O'Reilly, Pat Robertson, and Rupert Murdoch." I should add it to the Donktionary®.

...and its judicial apologists...

Judicial apologists like Bill Pryor and Miguel Estrada, you mean?

...warrants a complete rejection of the selection of G.W. Bush as president of the United States of America, as well as an investigation into that selection.

Unless, of course, that investigation discovers that Bush actually did win. In that case, anyone involved will be called a Rove plant and discredited for the rest of their public life.

The only requirement to work with the CLG, as a member or another group, is the desire to stop the George W. Bush mis-ministration, and to work within the said charter of inclusiveness.

How can they use the word "inclusiveness" after all that without causing their server to shut down from idiocy overload?

Behavior that indicates an unwillingness to work within this inclusive coalition...

"Remember, we're all-inclusive, but some are more included than others. Long live Animal Farm!"

...either by a demonstrated unwillingness to work with or accept members because of party affiliation or lack thereof...

"Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeevil Republicans don't count, by the way."

...or by a demonstrated verbal hostility to these members or their parties, will be not be tolerated. Such behavior is grounds for dismissal from the group.

It actually says "will be not be tolerated." I'm seeing a bit more Orwell in the doublespeak here. These guys are really goodthinkful!

Yeah. So, that's CLG. To give you an even better idea of what they're about, I'll cover some other aspects of their multi-partisan, inclusive organization. For example, their website includes the following:

-An "Iraq body count"
-A picture of the White House with the caption, "RICIN TARGET"
-A link to some "9/11 International Inquiry" page that seems to suggest that Bush planned the attacks
-Ads for books with titles like "Big Lies," "Bushwhacked," "America's Nightmare," "The Truth," "The Awakening of an American," and "Into the Buzzsaw: The Myth of a Free Press"
-Ads for "Bush+Cheney=Fraud" t-shirts

...And links with titles like:

-"Republican Propaganda Machine"
-"Yes, Gore DID Win!"
-"The BushWatch Lie Watch"

...And much more. They also have a forum, but I don't have time to check that out, and I think I've used enough space for one post.

SIT: Diving deep into the depths of liberal lunacy so you don't have to!

DU Post of the Day: "When did you realize America was a lie?"

Wow. This is almost too good to be true (in a "good for laughs" way, not a "good for humanity" way).

I didn't actually see it, but I did read through the transcript of Dubya's "Meet the Press" interview. Honestly, I have trouble reading transcripts of his impromptu appearances. The guy needs to think before he opens his mouth.

It's always something like, "Well that's you know I'm first of all we're I don't think that when you say Saddam had weapons and that's a Washington thing let me finish I don't they I you..." THINK, DUBYA! Think, then speak!

Anyway, I wasn't too impressed with that, but I figured that the DU moonbats would offset my slight dissatisfaction with their tinfoil-hatted idiocy. As it turns out, they did. They mostly talked about how much he "lied" and how his subtle body language could indicate when he was trying to dodge a question. They also tried to figure out how many of his answers were being relayed to him by the transponder he apparently has in his ear.

Another fun moment was their response to his refusal to talk about our knowledge of bin Laden's whereabouts. One person said something like, "He won't tell the TRUTH that we either have him in custody or know exactly where he is!" I hate to break it to you morons, but Osama bin Laden is probably now known as "Osama bin Rottin'." Just my opinion.

At this point, you're probably wondering about the title of this post, so I'll get back to that: After the "Meet the Press" thread, I noticed one entitled Fascism- when did you realize that America was a lie?. I couldn't resist checking it out.

As I've said before, DU threads are for laughs and are not meant to represent the leftist majority or my view of them. However, I really couldn't pass this one up. Get ready for some of the most insane DU ramblings to date, as I present samples from the 71 (so far) total responses (As always, I will use lots of ellipses and such, so you have to click the link to see it all. Don't stay too long, though. Reading threads like this probably kills brain cells):

First of all, here's an excerpt from the original:

Obviously some people will respond deny that is our reality. Go ahead and deny all you want. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything...Both democrats and republicans aided and abetted Hilter and bore no consequence for their acts of greed when they armed Hitler and helped to kill two-thirds of the Jewish population in Europe. And during this time, Americans were starving through a horrible depression brought on by the very greed of these financiers of fascism in Germany, Italy, and Spain. The fear of communism was the boogeyman before. Fear of terrorism is the boogeyman now...he majority in Congress, in the Republican party and with some democrats as well, pours scorn on the separation of powers, the separation of church and state, on the very foundations for our reason for being as a nation... we were founded as an experiment, by people who thought that humans could rationally govern themselves and could create laws which would reflect an evolution in democracy, rather than the revolutions which were the norm in that day. I do not know how to restore that democractic experiment in America. As it stands, it will not happen with a continuance of the status quo, and it seems that anyone who opposes the status quo is doomed to failure with a compliant media.

Sorry about the length of that one. The rest will be shorter. Let's look at a few more and find out when DU's posters discovered that America is a fascist lie:

it hit me on election night 2000 when the cameras went to the governor's mansion and they were asking bush about the florida returns not looking good for him. there was something about his smirk that told me the fix was in. over the next three weeks we painfully came to realiize it.

Ah, yes. We all know Bush stole the election. Thanks for reminding us.

The 2000 election was a definite "I took the red pill" moment I vaguely knew about the horrors of the Reagan/Bush era, but I had no idea just how craven that time was until after the 2000 election when I sought out more information. I had absolutely NO idea about the fascists here who tried to kill Roosevelt because of the new deal (including members of the DuPont family), and I had no idea of how far back the Bush family had been complicit in support of fascism.

Apparently the fact that Saddam Hussein is a fascist means nothing to these people.

Education and information are they're only enemies. They know that, so have taken control of the media and are beginning to take control of the schools and publishing houses.

Since they didn't teach you the difference between "their" and "they're," I guess the vendetta against education is working.

It is an indictment in itself that Ann Coulter is on tv after the things she and others did over the course of the Clinton presidency. It astonishes me that Ollie North is a free man, and worse, that he gets paid to go on tv...and that the boy scouts think he is a good person to speak to young boys.

Wow again. So, the fact that we allow people you disagree with to roam free is a sign that we're a fascist nation. Kettle, have you met my friend, Pot? (wait, that didn't sound right...)

I'm Having A Flashback.... I was a youngster during Vietnam but can remember the violent protests here in the US and the ease with which the college students were calling America fascist. Today, the equivalent is "racist"... an easy one to throw out when the speaker wants a quick and dirty put-down. In reality, it's no different than when a right-winger yells "Communist".

This one's not crazy. I'm just amazed that it hasn't been deleted yet.

The month when Hillary Clinton, Dick Gephardt, Joe Lieberman and half of the Democrats participated in the Gulf of Tonkin of the 21st century. I am young, and I had always thought that the Democratic Party was the stalwart opposition to the madness of the right wing. I thought Bill Clinton was a great leader who was a victim of ideologues. But there was that Iraq vote, and I couldn't understand how so many senators and representatives failed to see what I, a 21 year old, could see...I donate to Dennis Kucinich now, for I have no faith that the "frontrunners" would turn us back from the abyss.

BWAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

Today I suddenly realized how selfish I was to have children and now they are all on their own, and god only knows what will happen to them in this country. I am angry with myself for having them now, angry because I gave them life, and now they are living it in this quasi fascist farce of a country. Im so angry and tired. Im tired of thinking of the terror they will face , the terror my grandchildren will face, and the terror my stepson will face in Iraq. Sometimes, I just want to lay down and die, rather then know what they will all have to go through. I cant live in denial. I wish I could. But when you know that any minute your loved one could die, its too much to bear. Just thinking of what the future is for my kids, my stepson whose future in this war is so uncertain, and my grandchildren..I now wish I wouldnt have given birth to them in this country.. I should have gotten them all out LONG ago.

THESE. PEOPLE. HAVE. REPRODUCED. That's why DU worries me so much. This person's children are being raised by a lunatic.

absolutely. and teachers should tell the truth our schools are like factories, as I read from someone else, to turn out compliant citizens who question nothing and respect authority simply because it exists, not because it is right. fundie schools are even worse, and they are so prevalent in the south, is it any wonder that the south remains so stuck in regressive social stances?

I guess the "factories" taught you that the South is full of bigots.

The first one hundred days of this Misadministration... I can't pinpoint the exact day I realised it, but I can say with certainty that the first one hundred days of this Bush* administration erased everything I had worked for and believed in. Thirty years of work and dreams - gone, like it never existed! ...I want my country back!

I didn't realize Saddam Hussein was a DU poster. How'd he get to a computer?

The American Revolution was a revolution against corporations.

So, Great Britain was a corporation back then?

For me, it was Reagan being elected TWICE, and people actually LIKING that demented old fool because he was like their "kindly old uncle." I still have a scrapbook of news stories about what Reagan did/said -- to remind myself how much of an old fraud he was.

I'm speechless. That's kind of irrelevant since I'm typing, but still...

How long has it been since slavery was declared unconstitutional? --and how long after the civil war did it take war criminals in the south until they undermined the Union yet again by undercutting reconstruction? The Germans have undergone a long and somber examination of their past in relation to Hitler, yet we still have people who think it is perfectly reasonable to have a confederate flag as part of a state's emblem. Can you imagine the outcry if any province in Germany adopted a swastika as part of its flag? It is only because of the complicity of those in the highest levels of our govt at the state and federal levels that the racists in this country are not shamed and ostracized. (Jeb Bush, what will you do for the blacks in your state? Jeb: probably nothing. okay, he was wrong, he made sure he denied tens of thousands of them the right to vote.)

I'm running out of semi-clever responses to these. Make up your own for this one.

9/11 when there were no fighters in the air. I knew the Election was stolen in 2000, but I was still thinking things happen to align properly to allow Dumbya to steal Florida and the election. When 9/11 happened and there were no fighters protecting the second tower or the Pentagon, I realized we had just been given the red pill in suppository form.

I guess it makes sense that we should've protected the Pentagon and the second WTC tower BEFORE they were attacked, since Bush knew.

 December 12, 2000 a day that will forever live in infamy. On that day a vile and corrupt majority SCOTUS defied the US Constitution and committed treason against the Republic by selecting the American president.

You heard it here first, folks: Acting in accordance with the Constitution is unconstitutional!

Twas a graudal process... Patriot Act was a HUGE hint and then there was Bush's privatization of social programs, no child left behind, calling liberals unpatriotic, eventually it all became clear that we are living under a fascist regime.

Let's review: Privatization somehow increases government control, NCLB is a totalitarian policy, and Bush called liberals unpatriotic. I will once again restate my belief that we need to teach critical thinking in high schools.

Anyway, that's just a small sample of the craziness taking place in that thread. I'm surprised Larry the Liberal hasn't chimed in yet. Maybe he's afraid that John Ashcroft monitors the discussions.

That's about it for now. I just wanted to use this to point out that ADULTS in this country actually believe these things. Adults with CHILDREN. I'm afraid. I'm very afraid. This is why my tagline is "Dissent is healthy; Stupidity is deadly."

It's true, you know.

Another Random Question

Expect a lot of these for the next few days. I have to cut down on blogging so I can...what's it called...uh...oh, yeah: STUDY. I've recently discovered that when you don't study enough, tests tend to be a lot more difficult. Why didn't anyone tell me about this before?

Anyway, here's the question: Why do liberals oppose globalization, but insist on making the U.S. a member of the "international community" instead of letting us make our own decisions?

Anyone?

So Close!!!

I'm experiencing some mixed emotions right now. On the plus side, the Sitemeter is currently at 4,990. That means that I only need 10 more before reaching 5,000 visitors, which I consider to be a pretty important number for some reason.

The only problem is that I'm going to sleep in less than an hour, and based on my usual traffic patterns, I'll be past 5,000 by the time I get up (probably around noon). That means that I'm going to miss the big moment, and I won't get to take a screen shot like I wanted to.

However, I've decided to celebrate now, since I'll almost certainly be past 5,000 next time I post, so...

5,000 VISITORS! YEEEEEEEEAAAAHHH!!!!!

If this wasn't being typed, that would've sounded like Howard Dean in Iowa.

...I'm done now.

UPDATE (posted at 2 PM)
Wow. I got even more hits than I expected. According to my calculations, visitor #5,000 came from Trying to Grok at 7:19 AM. Thanks!

I won't be back until later today, by the way. I have a math test in an hour.

Wesley Clark Can't Make Up His Mind...Again

I just found this item thanks to Evangelical Outpost:

"Well, I'm against abortion," [Clark] said in response to a question from a voter at the Catfish Place, hard by the highway in the hills of West Tennessee. "But there is a law of the land that comes from the Supreme Court, and that law is called Roe v. Wade. And I support the Supreme Court. I have to support the law."

Fair enough. You have to support the law. However, I believe he's trying to use the old "abortion is legal, so you can't oppose it" argument, which is flawed because laws aren't permanent.

I think you're all smart enough to figure out my line of reasoning, so I won't go into detail about how Roe v. Wade wasn't always a law and laws shouldn't necessarily change your deeply held beliefs, etc.

However, it gets more interesting when you look at this next quote:

Last month, when General Clark spoke to a Planned Parenthood forum in New Hampshire on the anniversary of the Roe decision, he said: "I want to thank Planned Parenthood for all that you do every day to protect the right to choose." He added, "These are your values. They are my values. And they are the values I defended for 34 years in the United States Army."

So, which is it, Weaselly? Are you a pro-lifer who respects the rule of law, are you pro-abortion and just too cowardly to admit it to every group you talk to, or are you an opportunistic sack of crap who bases his personal values on popularity? Hmmm...

I'm not one to jump to conclusions, but I seem to remember something else that Wesley "won't you be my neighbor" Clark said a while back. Let's see here...what was it?

Oh, yeah, now I remember:

"Life," Mr. Clark said in an interview with the Manchester Union Leader in New Hampshire last week "begins with the mother's decision."     "I don't think you should get the law involved in abortion," he told the Union Leader. "It's between a woman, her doctor, her faith and her family and her conscience. You don't put the law in there."

And then, of course, there's this:

He also told the Union Leader that he would not appoint pro-life judges to the federal bench.     When asked how he would do this without applying a litmus test to the nominee, Mr. Clark explained, "You just work through what the judge has done and if you find guys who follow judicial and established precedent, you're not going to find a judge who is pro-life."

Interesting. What he's basically saying is that he's personally against abortion, but he doesn't think it's any business of the law, despite the fact that being pro-life usually means that you view abortion as MURDER. Are you against murder laws, Wesley?

At the same time, he thinks that no judge who believes in the right to life is competent to make decisions based on the law, but he identifies himself as pro-life and thinks that he's fit to choose the aforementioned judges. Hypocrisy, anyone?

I'm glad he's got no chance of winning the nomination.

Schoolwork? What's That?

Okay, here's the deal: In the next week, I have an astronomy test, a math test, a Spanish test, a psychology test, and a psychology quiz. I also have to catch up on a ton of reading I've neglected and write a few scripts for my TRF class.

Because of this, I probably won't be blogging a lot in the next few days. Just thought you should know now.

Here's a Question...

This has undoubtedly been asked before, but I still haven't seen an answer: Why do people who think that President Bush was selected by the Supreme Court have no problem with higher courts disregarding majority opinion on other issues (same-sex marriage, affirmative action, etc.)?

I'd really like to know.

Hey, This Slope is Slippery!

Well, looks like the words "marriage" and "unconstitutional" have been redefined in Massachusetts, according to this story.

With its decision to back marriage and not the concept of civil unions, the court set the stage for the nation's first same-sex marriages to take place beginning in mid-May.

We all knew it was coming, but this is still a bit of a shock. There are 2 aspects of this story, however, that I find particularly interesting. First of all, there's the classic "making same-sex marriage illegal is discrimination" argument:

"The history of our nation has demonstrated that separate is seldom, if ever, equal," the four justices who ruled in favor of gay marriage wrote in the advisory opinion. The bill that would allow for civil unions, but falls short of marriage, makes for "unconstitutional, inferior, and discriminatory status for same-sex couples."

Bullsh*t. That's all I have to say to that. I hope they realize that same-sex married couples still won't be equal. Why? Because THEY CAN'T REPRODUCE. That's why traditional marriage is so important. No matter how many laws you make, homosexual couples can never be equal to heterosexual ones. Ever. Nice try with that logic, though.

Let's skip ahead a bit and look at another argument that's actually very easy to refute:

The state "has failed to identify any constitutionally adequate reason for denying civil marriage to same-sex couples," the court wrote. "Barred access to the protections, benefits and obligations of civil marriage, a person who enters into an intimate, exclusive union with another of the same sex is arbitrarily deprived of membership in one of our community's most rewarding and cherished institutions."

This always cracks me up, because people still think that marriage is a right. Marriage is a PRIVILEGE, not a right. Also, it's only meant for certain people.

Saying that same-sex couples are being deprived of marriage is like saying that a cancer patient is being deprived of heart surgery. IT'S ONLY MEANT FOR SOME PEOPLE.

As much as I hate to say this, all this definition crap makes me think the government should stop trying to do anything with marriage, but then I remember that its purpose is to establish families, which hold society together. Some people seem to have forgotten that.

Now, among all this talk about "equal rights" and such, another story jumped out at me:

Despite this week’s lifting of the same-sex marriage ban in Massachusetts, a majority of Americans continues to oppose same-sex marriage, and nearly half oppose civil unions. According to a FOX News poll conducted in the days following the Supreme Judicial Court ruling in Massachusetts, 66 percent of Americans oppose and 25 percent favor same-sex marriage. These new results are similar to those from August 2003, as well as results from 1996, when 65 percent of the public said they opposed allowing same-sex couples to marry.

The poll they refer to was conducted last November, but I doubt that there's been a huge change since then. In any case, I find it interesting that the majority of Americans oppose same-sex marriage, but they're instituting it in Massachusetts anyway.

This could set a very dangerous precedent for future decisions. Can you say "judicial tyranny," children? If we let judges make all the decisions regardless of what the people say, we'll no longer have a democratic nation.

I think that, as a nation, we have 2 options that will settle this effectively:

1) Let the voters in each state decide if they want same-sex marriage in that state only.

2) Using the national numbers as support, along with the Defense of Marriage Act, make it national policy to protect traditional marriage.

That's about all that's left. Each option takes into account the opinions of the majority, not the personal views of a few judges. I'm personally opposed to same-sex marriage, but if a large majority of Americans supported it, I'd be less opposed to making it a government policy at the very least.

However, since it's obvious that Americans don't support same-sex marriage, I see no reason to institute it under the banner of "equal rights." That's not the way we do things in this country. At least it shouldn't be.

Finally, here's an actual real-world case against same-sex marriage (hat tip: Ripe Bananas):

The End of Marriage in Scandinavia

If you read that article, you'll see what happens when you take away the special, exclusive qualities of marriage. People will decide that they don't need it anymore, and families will suffer.

I guess we'll have to redefine "family."

DU Report

I've just been checking out the Democratic Underground message boards to see what the VERY far left is talking about. Here are a few "facts" I now know thanks to my visit (these are all paraphrased from actual posts):

-Bush wasn't elected.
-Bush knew there were no WMD before he even started talking about war with Iraq.
-We already have bin Laden, and he will be "caught" right before the election.
-We definitely gave Saddam Hussein chemical weapons, even though he never had WMD.
-Bush was definitely AWOL. No question about it. People only think it's an outrageous claim because the corporate media refuses to admit the truth.
-The PATRIOT Act has already been used to violate Constitutional rights.
-The Ricin found in D.C. was planted by Karl Rove to make us feel less secure and justify the PATRIOT Act.
-The Department of Homeland Security monitors DU. So does Rush Limbaugh.
-Michael Moore never lies. Ever.
-Bill O'Reilly is the spokesperson for the future state-controlled media.
-There has never been a good Republican president other than Lincoln, but he doesn't count because he was a "progressive."
-Bush is only interested in prison reform because he wants to protect his friends after they get thrown in jail for various scandals.
-One of the great things about DU is how respectful they are of all opinions, even the unpopular ones. (I can't make this stuff up, folks.)
-Watching Fox News for too long will cause you to support dictators.
-If Gore had been allowed to serve as president, 9/11 would not have happened.
-Bush has somehow managed to "rape the Constitution."
-"Anyone but Bush" is an acceptable voting strategy, but "Bush is better than the Democratic candidates" is a sign of brainwashing/impending dictatorship.
-Daniel Pipes is a bile-spewing racist who "is an ugly, mean looking, sad excuse for a human being."
-The death penalty is "primitive and barbaric," and is equivalent to a human sacrifice. However, abortion is perfectly fine, and anyone who is pro-life really just wants to keep people from having sex.
-"Neo-cons" are all imperialists and tyrants who want to force their religion on the rest of the world.
-Joe Scarborough is a murderer. (They said it, not me)
-A Constitutional amendment against gay marriage would restrict civil liberties.
-AOL's parental controls should be able to block conservative websites so parents can protect their impressionable children.
-Listening to Rush Limbaugh will cause you to become addicted to painkillers.
-Media websites are mostly fascist.
-Making fun of France is racist.
-The CIA apparently has a new director named George Tenant.
-The majority of conservatives base all their opinions on what Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Michael Savage say.
-The real problem with conservatives is their lack of empathy.
-Zell Miller, in addition to being a traitor who deserves to die and burn in hell, is a racist and wants to take the country back to the days of Strom Thurmond.
-The basic power structure of the Bush White House is as follows:
-Cheney runs the country.
-Rumsfeld runs the war.
-Bush goes to fundraisers and gives speeches from a teleprompter.

Again, those are all paraphrased from actual posts. I'd link to them if I had more time, but this is all the DU exposure I can handle for now.

Random Hilarity

Once again, I don't have a lot to write about, so I'll attempt to be entertaining by posting some random humor.

First of all, I can't leave out my Tuesday psychology lecture. I've mentioned it a couple times before, and this week provided more fun moments. For example:

-The professor talked about how the brain discriminates between different types of stimuli. He then gave us examples of discrimination, including this one: "Bill Clinton had to discriminate between an intern and his wife." HA! You thought it was going to be about racial discrimination, didn't you?

-Later, he tried to reenact an experiment in which a researcher taught pigeons to bowl with their beaks. He did this by using a volunteer from the class as a "pigeon" and having him poke a soccer ball with a metal pole, which represented the pigeon pecking a ball in the original experiment. He reminded him of this by pointing to the pole and saying, "That's your pecker, by the way." Predictably, laughter ensued.

-Without going into too much detail, I'll just say that his demonstration of conditioning involved a tarantula named Stanley. That's all you really need to know.

Now that I've confused you with unnecessarily long descriptions of my psychology professor's antics, check out some search terms that have brought people here recently:

-Dick Cheney single greatest threat to society-

That's odd...the VRWC newsletter didn't say anything about...wait! Forget I said anything!

-neocon propaganda-

You've come to the right place. Heh heh.

-things that happen on october 22-

Well, at 6:00 the next day, you can celebrate the calendar representation of Avogadro's Number. (/One of the few things I remember from 10th grade chemistry)

-consequences of past sexual relationships before marriage-

As opposed to past sexual relationships DURING marriage, I hope.

-mp3 And then we're going to washington to take back the white house!-

He said Washington, D.C., dang it.

-disney conspiracy theories childrens movies-

The Lion King told me to light old people on fire. Mickey said the government lies to us. Do those count?

-"die and I hope they burn"-

Why does it matter if they burn when they're already dead?

Finally, remember my last post about the weather? I have photographic proof that it is severely messed up. Look at these, while keeping in mind that it was raining 5 hours ago:

That's the roof, not the ground

You can usually see the Carrier Dome from this angle, but not today!

I really hope I get something interesting written later...

WTF???

Okay...when I left for class this morning at 8:15, it was cloudy and relatively warm (anything over 30 degrees is warm). By the time I was done with morning classes at 11:15, it was icy and raining. When I went to astronomy at 12:50, it was cloudy and icy, and when I got out at 2:15, it was snowing.

...I don't get it. I figured that I wouldn't have to deal with this kind of thing when I left Pennsylvania. I guess the entire Northeast has messed up weather.

Next it'll be raining frogs...

Political Philosophizing

This isn't related to anything in particular, but I figured now is as good a time as any to post it. Also, if what follows seems rather obvious to you, keep in mind that I'm 19 years old and didn't know anything about politics until a couple years ago.

Anyway, I've been thinking about the differences between liberals and conservatives (or left and right, if you prefer), and I realized a very profound difference: Conservatives try to deal with reality, while liberals try to create reality.

Let's look at a few examples. Take affirmative action. Liberals support affirmative action because they want to make sure that all races and ethnicities are equally represented in as many institutions as possible. They feel that some sort of nebulous oppressive force is keeping some groups out of college or denying them the opportunity to work.

Therefore, liberals believe that if they resort to racial preferences, it will cancel out the negative effects of White Racism™ and bring equality to all the happy little children of the world (that's probably the vision they get).

Now, the problem is that, although this may seem like a Good Thing™ (had enough trademarks yet?), it just doesn't match reality. There's never going to be racial equality or perfect representation, because outside forces and, in some cases, self-segregation make it impossible for an exact representation of the population to enter an institution naturally.

This applies to all the races, incidentally, since white people's lives aren't exactly sunshine and lollipops either. Show me an institution where the percentage of white people is equal to that in the general population, and I'll show you an area with a population of 1 person. That's the only way it's going to work naturally.

Conservatives tend to accept this, and instead of trying to create equality, we believe that merit should determine your place in life. An institution should be composed of the right kinds of people, not the right colors of people.

We know that in the Real World, you can't get an equal representation of every race and ethnicity without denying the abilities of someone else, but liberals tend to assume that inequality is always due to racism, and this compels them to try and create a world that fits their racial paradigm, even though it's a world that never has existed and probably never will.

This can be applied to other situations as well. The war in Iraq is a good example. The Bush administration, along with much of the American population, saw that 12 years of diplomacy and sanctions weren't going to work, and we decided to use force to get rid of Saddam Hussein. Makes sense, right?

Well, to a liberal, it might not. Even though they were there for the 12 years of failed diplomacy, they couldn't accept the fact that evil people exist, and they were convinced that negotiation would eventually make a difference. In other words, they formed their opinions in relation to the world they would like to live in, not the world they actually DO live in.

Another example is socialism. In a perfect world, the government would be able to provide just about anything for its people, and it would always be the highest possible quality. Unfortunately, the real world doesn't work that way, and if you try to give everyone the same thing, it's going to have a negative effect on a lot of areas.

A belief in the value of socialism also entails a belief that competition is bad. Recent incidents, like the school that removed the honor roll because it made dumber students feel bad, prove that liberals don't like competition.

In their ideal world, we'd all be dependent on the government for all our needs, and we'd never have to compete for resources. That way, everyone could be equal, and there would be no more problems! (parenthetical aside: According to the sociology class I took last semester, this is known as "conflict theory," or the belief that all social problems are the result of inequalities between people and classes, and the solution is to make sure everyone is equal, ensuring a lack of competition and, therefore, conflict. It's basically Marxism Lite)

Once again, conservatives realize that true equality isn't possible, so we believe that the people who work hardest should be rewarded more than those who don't work. This is, after all, a basic foundation of biological existence. You don't have to believe in Darwinism to realize that "survival of the fittest" is a pretty accurate description of the way most creatures live.

In all these cases, the main difference is clear: Conservatives try to make the best of reality, while liberals attempt to create their ideal version of it. This, of course, results in the basic ideological conflict of "stupid vs. evil." Conservatives think liberals are stupid for not grasping reality, and liberals think conservatives are evil because they can't see the happy rainbow world that exists in the liberal mind.

So, that's what I've been thinking about lately. Just remember this: If life gives a conservative lemons, he'll make lemonade. If life gives a liberal lemons, he'll complain that he needs limes, grapes, apples, and watermelons to represent fruit diversity. Then, he'll say that life is mean because his friend got less lemons than he did.

Simple, but true.

Just When I Thought Howard Dean Couldn't Get Any More Ridiculous

I think that's the longest title I've ever written. There's a good reason for it though, because Howard Dean is slowly becoming a bigger joke than people like Dennis Kucinich and Al Sharpton. Let's look at a few examples:

Struggling presidential candidate Howard Dean used a speech to a yelling, stomping, liberal Seattle crowd yesterday to paint fellow-Democrat John Kerry and President Bush as twin tools of special interests.

Dean railed against Kerry, the Massachusetts senator who has supplanted Dean as the front-runner in the Democratic race, and said news yesterday that Kerry took more lobbyist money than any other member of the Senate made him so mad he was sputtering.

I think Dean honestly believes he's some kind of political rock star. His only job is to get crowds excited and tell them what they want to hear, and he apparently doesn't care that a lot of people think he's nuts, as we'll see in a bit.

"When I came here the last time, the biggest issue was the war," Dean said to more than 1,200 people. "It's still a big issue. But there's another issue, and that's the issue of special interests running this government."

Special interests that you lefties created, from what I've seen. Immigration, health care, f**king NEA FUNDS...Of course, I'm sure he just means Halliburton.

"I think the American public has moved their attention," Dean said. "It's not as important an issue. People are losing their jobs. They are losing their health insurance. People are losing hope in the country. I think they are just throwing up their hands, saying, 'My God, what's happening here?' "

Okay, first of all, when Dean says "My God," I don't know what weird liberal moon-god he's talking about, because the God of the Bible sure ain't his.

Also, I guarantee that if a Republican happened to discover the cure for cancer, Dean would find a way to make it sound like a bad thing. He'd probably say that it was all for the drug companies, not the cancer patients.

Of course, Mad How couldn't stop there. He had to attack John "Heinz Botox 57" Kerry as well:

"It seems to me sometimes there's a little of George Bush in John Kerry," Dean said in the interview. "George Bush says the most blatant things that are just plain false.

I wish there was a Schoolhouse Rock song about projection, because it would be very appropriate here. Wait! I've got it! Take "Conjunction Junction," but call it "Election Projection!" HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

Wow, I need to get more sleep. Let's move on:

'No Child Left Behind' leaves every child behind, which is something John Kerry voted for," Dean said of the president's education plan.

And your proof of this horrible fact is...where?

"How many rationales has George Bush given us for the Iraq war? Well, how many rationales has John Kerry given us for the Iraq war, which he also supported?"

Notice how he doesn't even bother to claim that the rationales were false. He knows that "War bad! Appeasement good!" So the simple act of justifying military action is a cardinal sin. How else can you entertain us, Howie?

The candidate said he signed off on every important decision and every expenditure in Iowa and New Hampshire. He did say that as he went out to give his now-infamous speech after the Iowa caucuses, Trippi told him something along the lines of "let it rip."

I can just imagine the conversation after that one.

"When I said 'let it rip,' I didn't mean your shirt, Hulk."

What? What's that? You're telling me that it gets even BETTER?! Impossible!

...Dean said his test of how well he does in a speech is to watch it with the sound turned off. "I give myself an A for my speech in Iowa," he said. "I was smiling. I was pumped up. I was having a great time. I'd be the first to confess it wasn't very presidential."

See my previous "rock star" point. Apparently, what he says while he's entertaining the Deanie Babies isn't important. It's all about looking good and having fun.

This is not a president; This is an idiot. Here's more proof of that:

In his speech yesterday, Dean defended his idea to repeal all of the Bush tax cuts and use the money to reduce the deficit and provide universal health insurance.

Wow. You know, I seem to remember a sketch on SNL making fun of a candidate (I think it was Mondale, but my memory's fuzzy) because he was crazy enough to think that he could win an election by promising to raise taxes. Dean must really think Americans are idiots.

"Sure, we'll give you our hard-earned money, Mr. Crazy Man! In fact, why don't you take the money that other guy gave us too? We poor, uneducated peasants won't spend it as wisely as you will!"

The tax cuts have come at the cost of higher health-insurance premiums, college tuition costs and property taxes, he argued, adding up to "the largest middle-class tax increase in the history of the United States of America," a claim largely difficult to verify.

I love how they added "a claim largely difficult to verify" to the end of that quote, because it saves me a couple minutes of BANGING MY HEAD AGAINST THE WALL trying to figure out how they could print such a stupid statement without qualification.

Dean received one of his biggest ovations after a heckler asked what he'd do to reduce the abortion rate.

You could use Wesley Clark's strategy and wait until after they're born so it's technically not abortion anymore.

He suggested universal health care for children...

I think you're gonna need more money than the tax cuts will provide for that, Howie. In any case, I'm pretty sure universal health care would be harmful to children, particularly those whose families could AFFORD something better.

...sex education that isn't just abstinence-based...

"I know! Let's try a more 'hands-on' approach and let 'em f**k right in the classroom! That way, we can make sure they do it right!"

...and finally, "We're going to tell all those white boys who run the Republican Party to stay out of our bedrooms."

HE. ACTUALLY. SAID. THAT.

I hardly know where to begin analyzing that statement. In order for it to be valid, the following things would have to be true:

1: Dean is a woman.
2: Dean is a BLACK woman.
3: The Republican Party has no people of color in it.
4: The Republican Party has no women in it.
5: The Evil White Males™ of the Republican Party routinely invade people's bedrooms.
6: Being pro-life somehow entails a desire to be in the bedrooms of black women.

Let's see here...nope! None of 'em are true. This, ladies and gentlemen, is a desperate and broken human being. I almost feel sorry for him. Almost. Let's look at one more statement:

Dean knows, though, that the screaming crowd is not representative of voters across the country and volume does not equal delegates.

"B-b-b-b-b-b-b-but I'm DEAN FOR AMERICA! My fans represent the common American proletarian citizen!"

"You can be as enthusiastic as you want in here and hoot and holler, but if you don't translate that into votes we're not going to make it," Dean said before adding a more positive spin. "We're going to win sooner or later, but I'd rather it be sooner than later."

That's really sad. He still thinks he's going to win. Allow me to close this post with a one-word explanation of why this won't happen:

"YEEEEEEEAAAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!"

Thank you.

Educators are Funny

My statistics professor walked in today and said, "We don't have much left to talk about in chapter............wherever we are."

It's funnier if you think about it for a second. Or not.

Incidentally, this guy also has a habit of writing the wrong numbers/units in his graphs and forgetting what he covered in the last lecture.

This is Just Plain Funny

John Edwards' Penknife Taken at Airport

Sen. John Edwards had a penknife confiscated as part of a stepped up security search that caused a one-hour delay for the Democratic presidential candidate and others boarding his chartered plane.

It's hard to comment on a story like this, so I'll just say that it would've been funnier if it happened to Dean, because then I could ask if Bush was warned beforehand about the penknife.

As you can see, I have absolutely nothing to write about today.

Thanks, Super Bowl!

It's starting already. I just got my first hit from someone searching for "I hate the Patriots."

The best part is the fact that the post it takes them to ("The True Fan," if you're interested; check the favorite posts list) is a satirical sketch about anti-American liberals and has nothing to do with football.

I love having a blog.

UPDATE
Make that 2 hits. This is going to be better than when I got 140 hits in one day because so many people were looking for MP3s of Howard Dean's Iowa speech!

Larry's Super Bowl Review

THE PATRIOTS WON! I TOLD YOU THE F**KIN' PATRIOTS WOULD WIN! ASHCROFT SET THE WHOLE THING UP! WHEN DO THE BROWNSHIRTS START ROUNDING UP PANTHERS FANS, YOU FACISTS?!!! "OH NO! WE CAN'T LET THE PATRIOTS LOSE! IT WOULD BE UNPATRIOTIC!"

HOW MUCH DID HALLIBURTON PAY CAROLINA TO LOSE THAT GAME? YOU CAN'T FOOL ME! I BET IF CHIMPY HADN'T STOLEN THE WHITE HOUTSE, THE PATRIOTS WOULDN'T HAVE EVEN BEEN IN THE SUPER BOWL!

COME AND GET ME, BUSHENFUHRER! I'M NOT AFRAID OF YOU!

UPDATE FROM CD
Sorry about that. I think Larry had money on the Panthers or something. He'll be okay by tomorrow.

I hope.

Pretty Solid Proof that Bush Didn't Lie

You may have noticed that I'm not posting much on weekends anymore. Today, however, I noticed this story from The VRWC Information Department Fox News. Let's take a look:

President Bush will sign an executive order to establish a full-blown investigation of U.S. intelligence failures in Iraq, a senior White House official said Sunday.

The investigation will look at what the United States believed it knew before the war against Saddam Hussein's regime and what has been determined since the invasion.

Now, this raises an interesting question: If Bush lied, why would he be investigating this? Has he gone back to being a buffoon after being an evil genius since the war started? What other information do we have here?

Its mandate will be broader than simply what went wrong in Iraq, the official said. It also will look into issues such as gathering intelligence on stateless regimes, such as Al Qaeda, and weapons proliferation.

Wow, even more stuff that Bush supposedly lied about! You'd almost think he made some kind of mistake instead of intentionally misleading the entire civilized world!

Of course, the Loyal Opposition™ can't accept that every problem isn't Dubya's fault, so they've already begun the spinning. Check this out:

David Albright, a former weapons inspector, said the administration could use the commission as a way to delay judgments about the intelligence community and the administration's use of the intelligence information.

The fact that this idiot was a weapons inspector could explain why we didn't find anything. Does he realize that delaying judgments about the intelligence community will help those judgements to be ACCURATE? Does he know what "accurate" means?

"The bottom line for them [the Bush administration] is to delay the day of reckoning about their use of the weapons of mass destruction information," Albright said.

I love this. He's so convinced that the administration knew they had bad intelligence that he isn't even willing to let them discover the truth. Let's hear it for integrity.

"David Kay can blame the CIA and say 'Oh, I made all these comments based on what I heard from the intelligence community.' President Bush can't do that. He's the boss."

Uh, yeah, he is the boss, but he's also not in charge of gathering information. He gets it from people like David Kay and George Tenet, and they're the ones who should take the blame when the intelligence community f**ks up. The president does have other things to deal with, you know.

Albright said he disagreed with anyone who claims the president is blameless, or that anyone who had the intelligence at Bush's disposal would have reached the conclusion that war was warranted. "I was so involved in the whole debate [over weapons of mass destruction] and it's just not true," he said.

Notice how he doesn't say why it's not true. That says a lot about the kind of information he may have had. In any case, I find it hard to believe that the entire international community was convinced that Iraq had WMD if the intelligence was that bad. From what I've heard, even Saddam thought he had 'em.

I'd really like to see an example of just how much intelligence is needed to justify a war. Are we supposed to treat every country like North Korea, waiting until we know they have nuclear weapons, and then relying on diplomacy because they might USE those weapons?

Personally, I think it's a lot more effective when you go after these regimes before they have a chance to become an imminent threat, and in any case, how can anyone say that Bush wasn't justified in his actions against Iraq?

I can't wait until the investigators conclude that Bush isn't to blame, and the left accuses them of being Rove plants.

It'll happen. You know it will.