The Abu Gharib photos.
First off, I have to say that a defense of "If you release all these photos they could harm our image!" isn't the best defense in the world to make. Kinda makes it difficult to argue the photos are innocent. We did absolutely nothing wrong, but don't let anyone see these pictures, it could hurt our image. Huh? Couldn't any criminal make this claim? "Don't put my name on a list of convicted child abusers - it could hurt my image." We wouldn't buy THAT argument - why should we buy this one? Judge Hellerstein said it best: "Our nation does not surrender to blackmail, and fear of blackmail is not a legally sufficient argument to prevent us from performing a statutory command. Indeed, the freedoms that we champion are as important to our success in Iraq and Afghanistan as the guns and missiles with which our troops are armed."
When the news of these photos - the ones that the Bush Admin tried to suppress - came out, I e-mailed a discussion group and said, "If there are true, we've lost the war." These are the bad ones, the ones that even Rush Limbaugh can't explain away as "blowing off some steam" (which did make me wonder exactly where Rushie pledged). These are the ones that can't be defended at all - rape, murder, and the raping of young kids done on camera, if what Seymour Hersh claimed is true. We know the pictures and videotape contained acts of rape and murder - Congressmen who saw the tapes said so. I can only hope the claim of kids being raped are wrong. All of these acts are unforgivable - but raping kids deserves a special level in Hell. (As a side note, compare how hard the Bush Admin. fought to keep these tapes and pictures out of the public eye to the energy placed into investigating Captain Ian Fishback's abuse reports.)
There's still an appeals process, and knowing the Bush penchant for keeping bad facts out, I wouldn't be surprised if they try to classify these things as a last attempt to keep them out of the public eye. I, for one, would love to see that all the original reports were wrong - but the more they try and hide them, the more I don't think that will happen.
Friday, September 30, 2005
Piss off a Lock Brain!
Read a banned book.
I'm ashamed to admit that Banned Books Week is almost over by the time I realize it's happening. Color me behind the news. However, to celebrate it, go to this list of challenged books (read "Books that didn't say what I wanted them to say" there) and buy one, or check it out of the local library, and read it. See how many people say anything about it to you, if any, given our increasingly post-literate society. (When I hear that the average amount of books an American buys is around two a month or so, I wince, thinking that I buy 10-15 a month...so how many people aren't buying any at all on average?) Note those people, and now you know who you can have fun with. For example, I almost sent a copy of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince to the people I know who are actively trying to ban it here. I wanted to see how fast a minister would come out to their house for some kind of spiritual cleansing. I didn't send the books in the end...but I really came close.
I'm ashamed to admit that Banned Books Week is almost over by the time I realize it's happening. Color me behind the news. However, to celebrate it, go to this list of challenged books (read "Books that didn't say what I wanted them to say" there) and buy one, or check it out of the local library, and read it. See how many people say anything about it to you, if any, given our increasingly post-literate society. (When I hear that the average amount of books an American buys is around two a month or so, I wince, thinking that I buy 10-15 a month...so how many people aren't buying any at all on average?) Note those people, and now you know who you can have fun with. For example, I almost sent a copy of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince to the people I know who are actively trying to ban it here. I wanted to see how fast a minister would come out to their house for some kind of spiritual cleansing. I didn't send the books in the end...but I really came close.
Wednesday, September 28, 2005
"THEY deserve it!"
The shorter version of Hank Erwin's theory about the devastation of Katrina. As noted in the article, he's in good fruitcake company, at the table with al-Qaeda, Louis Farrakhan and Pat Robertson. (Sensing a theme there?) I personally think the lowlight of his ideas are the lines:
"He said he didn't think the hard-hit residents of the low-income lower 9th Ward were singled out for especially harsh punishment but were merely in the way, as were the shrimpers in the struggling fishing town of Bayou La Batre on the Alabama coast."
Just "in the way"? Hey, parents, really sorry you lost kids. Hey, spouses, damn shame about your love being killed. Hey, everyone who lost someone, I feel for you. But YOU WERE IN THE WAY.
I guess if Mr. Hank "God's will" Erwin gets hit by a drunk driver, he will demand that person be set free. After all, it's the same deal - he would have been "in the way". Or if his house is destroyed by some natural disaster - maybe all his hot air causing a fire - it was "in the way" of God's will. Heck, I bet "Hairshirt" Hank won't even file for insurance then.
He also vomits: "America has been moving away from God," Erwin said. "We all need to embrace godliness and church-going and good, godly living, and we can get divine protection for that point." 'cause you know every single person killed by Katrina wasn't embracing godliness and church-going and good, godly living. Mr. Erwin said so. Or were they, and they were just in the way?
There are cases of open mouth, insert foot. There are cases of open mouth, swallow foot. And then there are these cases - open mouth, remove brain.
Lord, protect me from your so-called followers.
"He said he didn't think the hard-hit residents of the low-income lower 9th Ward were singled out for especially harsh punishment but were merely in the way, as were the shrimpers in the struggling fishing town of Bayou La Batre on the Alabama coast."
Just "in the way"? Hey, parents, really sorry you lost kids. Hey, spouses, damn shame about your love being killed. Hey, everyone who lost someone, I feel for you. But YOU WERE IN THE WAY.
I guess if Mr. Hank "God's will" Erwin gets hit by a drunk driver, he will demand that person be set free. After all, it's the same deal - he would have been "in the way". Or if his house is destroyed by some natural disaster - maybe all his hot air causing a fire - it was "in the way" of God's will. Heck, I bet "Hairshirt" Hank won't even file for insurance then.
He also vomits: "America has been moving away from God," Erwin said. "We all need to embrace godliness and church-going and good, godly living, and we can get divine protection for that point." 'cause you know every single person killed by Katrina wasn't embracing godliness and church-going and good, godly living. Mr. Erwin said so. Or were they, and they were just in the way?
There are cases of open mouth, insert foot. There are cases of open mouth, swallow foot. And then there are these cases - open mouth, remove brain.
Lord, protect me from your so-called followers.
Scopes 2
(What the heck, I'll follow the current meme here.)
As some of you may know, there's a case in Dover, PA, concerning Intelligent Design. At first, the School Board wanted to force the teachers to teach this theory that's neither scientific nor intelligent instead of evolution. After the science teachers refused (and were called "atheists" for it, but remember, this isn't about religion) the Board settled on having them read a statement about Intelligent Design to the class instead, saying evolution is "not a fact" and has "inexplicable gaps", maybe hoping this would sneak by.
It didn't. The school board is now being sued to stop this anti-science position. The ACLU is part of this case, and for all the bad things I think they do, they are moving up in my opinion here.
Now, the defendants swear this isn't about religion, oh no, it's about offering alternatives. Yet, as mentioned, people against the IDiocy were called atheists. Also, for a while, the board was pushing a 50-50 split between evolution and creationism outright, I guess using Monday and Tuesday for creationism, Thursday and Friday for evolution, and on Wednesday a discussion of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. They tried to get the pro-ID book "Of Pandas and People" as the new textbook, and when that didn't fly, they held off ordering another science textbook because it was "laced with Darwinism". All this can be read here.
(And the defendants are claiming they have been misquoted but all the tapes that could verify this have been erased. Possibly by some (un)Intelligent Designer?)
Perhaps one of the lamest arguments the IDiocy people have come up with is the claim of "free speech." Brendan Nyhan demolishes this fallacy, and we have to if wonder that people who feel THIS is a good argument to make here should have ANY say in education at all. I think I'll demand that my school board start teaching the flat-earth theory as a part of freedom of speech.
Chris Mooney has been covering this trial, and has linked to a good new blog covering this and other cases as well. Balloon Juice has been commenting on it as well.
As some of you may know, there's a case in Dover, PA, concerning Intelligent Design. At first, the School Board wanted to force the teachers to teach this theory that's neither scientific nor intelligent instead of evolution. After the science teachers refused (and were called "atheists" for it, but remember, this isn't about religion) the Board settled on having them read a statement about Intelligent Design to the class instead, saying evolution is "not a fact" and has "inexplicable gaps", maybe hoping this would sneak by.
It didn't. The school board is now being sued to stop this anti-science position. The ACLU is part of this case, and for all the bad things I think they do, they are moving up in my opinion here.
Now, the defendants swear this isn't about religion, oh no, it's about offering alternatives. Yet, as mentioned, people against the IDiocy were called atheists. Also, for a while, the board was pushing a 50-50 split between evolution and creationism outright, I guess using Monday and Tuesday for creationism, Thursday and Friday for evolution, and on Wednesday a discussion of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. They tried to get the pro-ID book "Of Pandas and People" as the new textbook, and when that didn't fly, they held off ordering another science textbook because it was "laced with Darwinism". All this can be read here.
(And the defendants are claiming they have been misquoted but all the tapes that could verify this have been erased. Possibly by some (un)Intelligent Designer?)
Perhaps one of the lamest arguments the IDiocy people have come up with is the claim of "free speech." Brendan Nyhan demolishes this fallacy, and we have to if wonder that people who feel THIS is a good argument to make here should have ANY say in education at all. I think I'll demand that my school board start teaching the flat-earth theory as a part of freedom of speech.
Chris Mooney has been covering this trial, and has linked to a good new blog covering this and other cases as well. Balloon Juice has been commenting on it as well.
Tuesday, September 27, 2005
Acts of Nature, Ptui!
From Balloon Juice, we find that the Republicans have decided that little things like a category 4 hurricane, a city being devastated, being forced to go to a another city and live on the charity of others and the like just ain't enough reason to allow some wiggle room in the Credit Company Beneficiary Act, otherwise known as Bankruptcy "Reform".
But House Republicans, who fought off a proposed amendment that would have made bankruptcy filings easier for victims of natural disasters, said there was no reason to carve out a broad exemption just because of the storm.
Representative F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. of Wisconsin, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, rejected the notion of reopening the legislation, saying it already included provisions that would ensure that people left "down and out" by the storm would still be able to shed most of their debts. Lawmakers who lost the long fight over the law, he said, "ought to get over it," according to The Associated Press.
You may remember Sensenbrenner as the man who took his l'il gavel and sulked away during a Patriot Act hearing.
Those who try to beat the Oct. 17 deadline in hopes of filing under the less-onerous current law may find it impossible to do so, because residence rules generally require that individuals seek protection against creditors in their hometowns. (Assuming people in New Orleans can find their lawyers and records, they can file for bankruptcy protection in their bankruptcy court, which has reopened and is sharing space with another court in Baton Rouge.)
Moreover, most people displaced by the storm will probably not know for months if they even need to file for bankruptcy. By that time, the tougher new law will be in force.
...
The law has stiffer requirements as well for what records must be produced by the debtor. But hurricane victims will have a hard time doing that. "Thousands and thousands of people no longer have checkbooks, insurance papers, car titles (or cars), birth certificates, Social Security cards or wallets," a group of Louisiana lawyers said in a letter two weeks ago to the state's Congressional delegation.
Eh, get over it!
But here's the probable real reasons they don't want to allow this exemption:
Professor LoPucki said he thought the majority of lawmakers were averse to enacting blanket bankruptcy relief for hurricane victims because that might raise questions about why victims of other uncontrollable events - like accidents, major illnesses or mass layoffs - should not get a break, too.
"If you admit that the bill is bad for Katrina victims," he said, "then there's really no reason it isn't bad for the others, too. They're all in some kind of problem. For most of them, it's largely their fault. But for a lot of them, it isn't their fault."
Makes sense to me.
But House Republicans, who fought off a proposed amendment that would have made bankruptcy filings easier for victims of natural disasters, said there was no reason to carve out a broad exemption just because of the storm.
Representative F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. of Wisconsin, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, rejected the notion of reopening the legislation, saying it already included provisions that would ensure that people left "down and out" by the storm would still be able to shed most of their debts. Lawmakers who lost the long fight over the law, he said, "ought to get over it," according to The Associated Press.
You may remember Sensenbrenner as the man who took his l'il gavel and sulked away during a Patriot Act hearing.
Those who try to beat the Oct. 17 deadline in hopes of filing under the less-onerous current law may find it impossible to do so, because residence rules generally require that individuals seek protection against creditors in their hometowns. (Assuming people in New Orleans can find their lawyers and records, they can file for bankruptcy protection in their bankruptcy court, which has reopened and is sharing space with another court in Baton Rouge.)
Moreover, most people displaced by the storm will probably not know for months if they even need to file for bankruptcy. By that time, the tougher new law will be in force.
...
The law has stiffer requirements as well for what records must be produced by the debtor. But hurricane victims will have a hard time doing that. "Thousands and thousands of people no longer have checkbooks, insurance papers, car titles (or cars), birth certificates, Social Security cards or wallets," a group of Louisiana lawyers said in a letter two weeks ago to the state's Congressional delegation.
Eh, get over it!
But here's the probable real reasons they don't want to allow this exemption:
Professor LoPucki said he thought the majority of lawmakers were averse to enacting blanket bankruptcy relief for hurricane victims because that might raise questions about why victims of other uncontrollable events - like accidents, major illnesses or mass layoffs - should not get a break, too.
"If you admit that the bill is bad for Katrina victims," he said, "then there's really no reason it isn't bad for the others, too. They're all in some kind of problem. For most of them, it's largely their fault. But for a lot of them, it isn't their fault."
Makes sense to me.
Brown down? Rebound!
I don't know why my jaw dropped when I heard that "heckuva" Brownie is still on the payroll at FEMA for consulting. I mean, I feel foolish for even being surprised. This is an administration that continually rewards errors and screwups (see reasons for invading Iraq, cost of Iraq war, plans for post-war Iraq, FEMA, fake news broadcasts, budgets...) and only slams down on people who dare to find fault with them(O'Neill, Shinseki). In their eyes, everything is forgivable except being correct about them being wrong.
And maybe it's possible the Bush people have pulled the ultimate fast one. Imagine:
"heckuva" Brownie: "I feel that FEMA did excellent with their pre-positioning."
Intelligent people: "Jumping Jiminy on a crutch, we better fix the pre-positioning plan!"
"heckuva" Brownie: "I am concerned about communications."
Intelligent people: "Get the people on the communications to help out with the pre-positioning, it must be okay."
It's the reverse oracle - what he predicts is always wrong!
And, um, why exactly do we trust "heckuva" Brownie to say where FEMA went wrong? According to him, it didn't. This would seem to be a very short-term consulting job. "What went wrong?" "Nothing!" "Okay, that's lunch!" Of course, this is following Bush's promise to investigate himself what went wrong on Katrina relief efforts, so we can say this for "heckuva" Brownie - He can follow a leader.
And maybe it's possible the Bush people have pulled the ultimate fast one. Imagine:
"heckuva" Brownie: "I feel that FEMA did excellent with their pre-positioning."
Intelligent people: "Jumping Jiminy on a crutch, we better fix the pre-positioning plan!"
"heckuva" Brownie: "I am concerned about communications."
Intelligent people: "Get the people on the communications to help out with the pre-positioning, it must be okay."
It's the reverse oracle - what he predicts is always wrong!
And, um, why exactly do we trust "heckuva" Brownie to say where FEMA went wrong? According to him, it didn't. This would seem to be a very short-term consulting job. "What went wrong?" "Nothing!" "Okay, that's lunch!" Of course, this is following Bush's promise to investigate himself what went wrong on Katrina relief efforts, so we can say this for "heckuva" Brownie - He can follow a leader.
Monday, September 26, 2005
Hey, FBI? I got one for you!
Alberto Gonzales has decided to spend the FBI's time and resources on hunting down...porn. Not child porn. Porn involving consenting, informed adults. (But conservatives believe in individual rights, dammit - or was that the pre-Bush era?)
Already, one group has been hit by Operation Legal Poontang (nsfw). I'm sure many will follow.
So, FBI? I got one for you. From AmericaBlog, we get this charming place. I can hardly wait for these people to get shut down. And maybe we should check out some of the people submitting posts as well? Surely this is some violation of some military code somewhere? (Andrew Sullivan also mentioned this.)
You know, stuff like these sickos makes it a Hell of a lot easier to believe all the abuse stories are true - even before little things like, oh. evidence is considered.
Already, one group has been hit by Operation Legal Poontang (nsfw). I'm sure many will follow.
So, FBI? I got one for you. From AmericaBlog, we get this charming place. I can hardly wait for these people to get shut down. And maybe we should check out some of the people submitting posts as well? Surely this is some violation of some military code somewhere? (Andrew Sullivan also mentioned this.)
You know, stuff like these sickos makes it a Hell of a lot easier to believe all the abuse stories are true - even before little things like, oh. evidence is considered.
Only 13? What was the cutoff?
From Fark.com, we get this list of the thirteen most corrupt Congressmen:
Bill Frist
Roy Blunt
Conrad Burns
Bob Ney
Tom Feeney
Richard W. Pombo
Maxine Waters
Rick Santorum
Randy "Duke" Cunnigham
William J. Jefferson
Charles H. Taylor
Marilyn Musgrave
Rick Renzi
I know you're thinking "How did they stop at thirteen?" Me too. You may notice some people mentioned in here at times - Santorum and "Duke". And of course, they've got "Blind Trust" Frist in there as well.
If you live in a state with one of these fine, upstanding people representing you, why not write them a letter telling them how proud you are of their tireless work?
Bill Frist
Roy Blunt
Conrad Burns
Bob Ney
Tom Feeney
Richard W. Pombo
Maxine Waters
Rick Santorum
Randy "Duke" Cunnigham
William J. Jefferson
Charles H. Taylor
Marilyn Musgrave
Rick Renzi
I know you're thinking "How did they stop at thirteen?" Me too. You may notice some people mentioned in here at times - Santorum and "Duke". And of course, they've got "Blind Trust" Frist in there as well.
If you live in a state with one of these fine, upstanding people representing you, why not write them a letter telling them how proud you are of their tireless work?
More Katrina
As you may know by now, Aaron Broussard's tearful story of an old woman who died due to FEMA's ineptitude has been debunked. He originally said:
Mr. Broussard: Sir, they were told, like me, every single day, “The cavalry is coming.” On the federal level, “The cavalry is coming. The cavalry’s coming. The cavalry’s coming.” The guy who runs this building I’m in, emergency management, he’s responsible for everything. His mother was trapped in St. Bernard Nursing Home and every day she called him and said, “Are you coming, son? Is somebody coming?” And he said, “Yeah, Mama. Somebody’s coming to get you. Somebody’s coming to get you on Tuesday.” “Somebody’s coming to get you on Wednesday.” “Somebody’s coming to get you on Thursday.” “Somebody’s coming to get you on Friday.” And she drowned Friday night. She drowned Friday night.
The owners of the nursing home are now known to have failed to evacuate when Katrina was coming, and are under arrest for negligent homicide, and the original story was wrong almost all the way around:
When told of the sequence of phone calls that Broussard described, Rodrigue said `No, no, that's not true. ...I contacted the nursing home two days before the storm [on Saturday, Aug. 27th] and again on [Sunday] the 28th. ...At the same time I talked to the nursing home I had also talked to the emergency manager...to encourage that nursing home to evacuate...' Rodrigue says he never made any calls after Monday, the day he figures his mother died... Officials believe the residents of St. Rita's died on Monday, the 29th, not on Friday, Sept. 2, as Broussard has suggested."
The Moderate Voice and Crooks and Liars, among others, take issue with how Russert handled this, for various reasons. TMV seems to feel that Russert went after the source, not the story, and by implication tried to make the Federal response all that much better. C&L seems to take issue with how Russert handled it, calling it "callous". (These are all my takes from their posts, of course.) I didn't see the interview and won't on my computer - I'm still on dial-up and watching videos is just slightly slower than waiting for Bush to take responsibillity for any errors he makes. However, if the story was wrong, it should have been corrected. It was a damning and personal instance on supposed FEMA errors and deserves to be checked out and honestly told. I can't say for how it was done or for what ulterior reasons, but the underlying truth must come out.
It seems like people who want to believe the Federal gov't is the only one at fault shrug aside this correction, saying 'there were other instances of FEMA errors' and the like. Which is true - but it doesn't make this story true by association. On the other hand, people who feel the Federal gov't are not to blame at all seem to take this story as proof that all claims of FEMA/Homeland Security mismanagement are false. Again, not true. By the same token, reports that the violence in the Superdome was drastically exaggerated has had some people crowing the Federal government didn't do a bad job after all, instead of saying that that's one area where they had misjudged Louisana - since before this news all the violence was Louisana's fault, not the Fed's (and if there was no violence...?) and the people who blame the Feds for everything again shrug their shoulders.
These two stories need to be truthfully told. (The media has to shoulder much blame here. Not biased, just bad.) But the debunking of one or two stories does not invalidate the many others by proxy. There are still several things all sides must be held accountable for.
Mr. Broussard: Sir, they were told, like me, every single day, “The cavalry is coming.” On the federal level, “The cavalry is coming. The cavalry’s coming. The cavalry’s coming.” The guy who runs this building I’m in, emergency management, he’s responsible for everything. His mother was trapped in St. Bernard Nursing Home and every day she called him and said, “Are you coming, son? Is somebody coming?” And he said, “Yeah, Mama. Somebody’s coming to get you. Somebody’s coming to get you on Tuesday.” “Somebody’s coming to get you on Wednesday.” “Somebody’s coming to get you on Thursday.” “Somebody’s coming to get you on Friday.” And she drowned Friday night. She drowned Friday night.
The owners of the nursing home are now known to have failed to evacuate when Katrina was coming, and are under arrest for negligent homicide, and the original story was wrong almost all the way around:
When told of the sequence of phone calls that Broussard described, Rodrigue said `No, no, that's not true. ...I contacted the nursing home two days before the storm [on Saturday, Aug. 27th] and again on [Sunday] the 28th. ...At the same time I talked to the nursing home I had also talked to the emergency manager...to encourage that nursing home to evacuate...' Rodrigue says he never made any calls after Monday, the day he figures his mother died... Officials believe the residents of St. Rita's died on Monday, the 29th, not on Friday, Sept. 2, as Broussard has suggested."
The Moderate Voice and Crooks and Liars, among others, take issue with how Russert handled this, for various reasons. TMV seems to feel that Russert went after the source, not the story, and by implication tried to make the Federal response all that much better. C&L seems to take issue with how Russert handled it, calling it "callous". (These are all my takes from their posts, of course.) I didn't see the interview and won't on my computer - I'm still on dial-up and watching videos is just slightly slower than waiting for Bush to take responsibillity for any errors he makes. However, if the story was wrong, it should have been corrected. It was a damning and personal instance on supposed FEMA errors and deserves to be checked out and honestly told. I can't say for how it was done or for what ulterior reasons, but the underlying truth must come out.
It seems like people who want to believe the Federal gov't is the only one at fault shrug aside this correction, saying 'there were other instances of FEMA errors' and the like. Which is true - but it doesn't make this story true by association. On the other hand, people who feel the Federal gov't are not to blame at all seem to take this story as proof that all claims of FEMA/Homeland Security mismanagement are false. Again, not true. By the same token, reports that the violence in the Superdome was drastically exaggerated has had some people crowing the Federal government didn't do a bad job after all, instead of saying that that's one area where they had misjudged Louisana - since before this news all the violence was Louisana's fault, not the Fed's (and if there was no violence...?) and the people who blame the Feds for everything again shrug their shoulders.
These two stories need to be truthfully told. (The media has to shoulder much blame here. Not biased, just bad.) But the debunking of one or two stories does not invalidate the many others by proxy. There are still several things all sides must be held accountable for.
Wednesday, September 21, 2005
Lighter Stuff
I need a change of pace, so let's talk about some books and authors.
Terry Pratchett is one of my favorite authors. I picked up Soul Music in a Winn-Dixie across the street from me, read it, and started getting all his other books. (I have a weird thing - when I find a favorite author, I can tell you where I got the book and what it was. Stephen King = Pet Sematary, from a local grocery store. Harlan Ellison = Stalking the Nightmare, a local used book store. Peter Straub = Floating Dragon, local bookstore, on special sale. Kurt Vonnegut = Player Piano, another local used bookstore. Hey, I've already admitted I'm strange.) Terry Pratchett has a whole world, the Discworld, where almost all his stories take place, and it's funny, witty and often with some deep thoughts behind the story as well. Read Men At Arms, Hogfather, Reaper Man, Wyrd Sisters, Soul Music, Witches Abroad, The Truth, Going Postal, The Fifth Elephant, Feet of Clay...any of these will get you hooked on this series, and it will be an addiction well worth feeding.
Another one of my favorite authors is James Ellroy (L.A. Confidential, from Amazon.com, as the movie came out.) Now, he's rough, no doubt about it, and his stories can be hard to follow, but it's well worth it. He writes in a style like Hemingway gone hard-core 50's gangster. Try reading American Tabloid and The Cold Six Thousand.
How about some lighter stuff, i.e. David Eddings? (Pawn of Prophecy, from my grandmother) This is not what you call deep stuff - he writes in five book series mostly, and you can pretty much tell where it's going from the first book down, but he writes well, and his characters are well drawn out. I read this when I don't really want to tackle anything hard; something to while away some time when I'm ready to go to sleep.
Robert McCammon (Boy's Life, from a bookstore to read on the plane to Europe for a summer semester) was a surprise. I had thought he was a knockoff Stephen King, and I was wrong. Boy's Life is one of my favorite books of all time, and I recommend almost all of his books, with the warning that the early ones show a writer in learning. He's admitted that basically he learned as he published, so while Night Boat is kinda schlocky, Mine and Swan Song and Stinger are exponentially better. Give him a go.
There's some suggestions to weigh down your bookcases.
Terry Pratchett is one of my favorite authors. I picked up Soul Music in a Winn-Dixie across the street from me, read it, and started getting all his other books. (I have a weird thing - when I find a favorite author, I can tell you where I got the book and what it was. Stephen King = Pet Sematary, from a local grocery store. Harlan Ellison = Stalking the Nightmare, a local used book store. Peter Straub = Floating Dragon, local bookstore, on special sale. Kurt Vonnegut = Player Piano, another local used bookstore. Hey, I've already admitted I'm strange.) Terry Pratchett has a whole world, the Discworld, where almost all his stories take place, and it's funny, witty and often with some deep thoughts behind the story as well. Read Men At Arms, Hogfather, Reaper Man, Wyrd Sisters, Soul Music, Witches Abroad, The Truth, Going Postal, The Fifth Elephant, Feet of Clay...any of these will get you hooked on this series, and it will be an addiction well worth feeding.
Another one of my favorite authors is James Ellroy (L.A. Confidential, from Amazon.com, as the movie came out.) Now, he's rough, no doubt about it, and his stories can be hard to follow, but it's well worth it. He writes in a style like Hemingway gone hard-core 50's gangster. Try reading American Tabloid and The Cold Six Thousand.
How about some lighter stuff, i.e. David Eddings? (Pawn of Prophecy, from my grandmother) This is not what you call deep stuff - he writes in five book series mostly, and you can pretty much tell where it's going from the first book down, but he writes well, and his characters are well drawn out. I read this when I don't really want to tackle anything hard; something to while away some time when I'm ready to go to sleep.
Robert McCammon (Boy's Life, from a bookstore to read on the plane to Europe for a summer semester) was a surprise. I had thought he was a knockoff Stephen King, and I was wrong. Boy's Life is one of my favorite books of all time, and I recommend almost all of his books, with the warning that the early ones show a writer in learning. He's admitted that basically he learned as he published, so while Night Boat is kinda schlocky, Mine and Swan Song and Stinger are exponentially better. Give him a go.
There's some suggestions to weigh down your bookcases.
Tuesday, September 20, 2005
Once Flooded, Twice Shy
Well, Nagin bowed to reality and to the Feds and called off Operation Water Slide, otherwise called "Laissez le paddleboats roulez!" And it only took the chance of Rita doing a Katrina sequel to make him.
And here we thought some people never learned.
And here we thought some people never learned.
Monday, September 19, 2005
Special Visitor to White House
SURPRISE VISITOR APPEARS IN WHITE HOUSE
Reality: "They weren't accepting my calls"
From Satire News Service
Today, Reality corporalized in the White House at a meeting between President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and Homeland Security Head Michael Chertoff. In the middle of the meeting, where everyone was congratulating themselves on the success of the Katrina efforts, Iraq, the budget and many other items, there was a pop in the air and Reality itself appeared in the form of an accountant who could bench press a Buick.
"I had to do something," Reality told us later. "I had been trying to reach them for some time, and they weren't accepting my calls, my letters, my e-mails, my passed notes, and even the skywriting was ignored. It was this or a Strip-o-gram."
Reality immediately assailed them all for their refusal to hear bad news. "President Bush, you have been telling lies about the budget balancing itself as you refuse to cut spending or raise taxes. When the only time you draw a line in the sand about the budget's cost and then ignore it, you are NOT, sir, being a good economic manager of the United States! And what the Hell was "Mission Accomplished" and "No one thought the levees would break."? I mean, seriously, what the Hell was that? I won't even comment about "Bring them on!"
Reality turned to Cheney. "The insurgency is in its last throes? How can you say stuff like that without your nose growing? Have you read the reports? Or did you just guess?"
Rumsfeld had been trying to sneak out when reality grabbed him by the collar and dragged him back. "Okay, it's real simple," he said, making two charts appear from thin air. "TROOPS NEEDED IN IRAQ. Note this high line. TROOPS ASSIGNED TO IRAQ. Note this low line. Get the picture? Would you like to look at the chart labeled IRAQI FORCES READY TO SERVE? Or ARMOR NEEDED? Would you? I got a lot more, how much time you got?"
He then turned to Chertoff, sighed, and made a private appointment for later. "It'll take too long," he claimed. "Just take my word for it, you need a lot of checking from me."
A shaken Bush later stated, "Was THAT reality? I don't recall ever seeing him all these years I was in the White House!"
Reality: "They weren't accepting my calls"
From Satire News Service
Today, Reality corporalized in the White House at a meeting between President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and Homeland Security Head Michael Chertoff. In the middle of the meeting, where everyone was congratulating themselves on the success of the Katrina efforts, Iraq, the budget and many other items, there was a pop in the air and Reality itself appeared in the form of an accountant who could bench press a Buick.
"I had to do something," Reality told us later. "I had been trying to reach them for some time, and they weren't accepting my calls, my letters, my e-mails, my passed notes, and even the skywriting was ignored. It was this or a Strip-o-gram."
Reality immediately assailed them all for their refusal to hear bad news. "President Bush, you have been telling lies about the budget balancing itself as you refuse to cut spending or raise taxes. When the only time you draw a line in the sand about the budget's cost and then ignore it, you are NOT, sir, being a good economic manager of the United States! And what the Hell was "Mission Accomplished" and "No one thought the levees would break."? I mean, seriously, what the Hell was that? I won't even comment about "Bring them on!"
Reality turned to Cheney. "The insurgency is in its last throes? How can you say stuff like that without your nose growing? Have you read the reports? Or did you just guess?"
Rumsfeld had been trying to sneak out when reality grabbed him by the collar and dragged him back. "Okay, it's real simple," he said, making two charts appear from thin air. "TROOPS NEEDED IN IRAQ. Note this high line. TROOPS ASSIGNED TO IRAQ. Note this low line. Get the picture? Would you like to look at the chart labeled IRAQI FORCES READY TO SERVE? Or ARMOR NEEDED? Would you? I got a lot more, how much time you got?"
He then turned to Chertoff, sighed, and made a private appointment for later. "It'll take too long," he claimed. "Just take my word for it, you need a lot of checking from me."
A shaken Bush later stated, "Was THAT reality? I don't recall ever seeing him all these years I was in the White House!"
Do You Like Risk?
So New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin is calling for people to come back to New Orleans and get it running again. If this were an ad in a paper, it would probably read "Orphans preferred."
I mean, in addition to the probably toxic sludge coating a lot of New Orleans still, and the snarled traffic, and the devastated parishes around New Orleans that will cause some problems one way or another, and everything else going on down there, we're still not done with hurricane season yet. Rita's about to hit Florida, and that's just how Katrina started. Imagine if New Orleans gets hit AGAIN. And the Army Corps of Engineers have stated the levees are still very weak.
All in all, it seems it would be wiser to do something safer for a while. Say, take a job feeding tigers in a zoo while being covered in raw meat. Or walking down the slums of a city wearing a billboard that reads "I'VE GOT $5000 DOLLARS OF UNTRACEABLE MONEY ON ME AND NO ONE KNOWS WHERE I AM!"
You know, something like that.
I mean, in addition to the probably toxic sludge coating a lot of New Orleans still, and the snarled traffic, and the devastated parishes around New Orleans that will cause some problems one way or another, and everything else going on down there, we're still not done with hurricane season yet. Rita's about to hit Florida, and that's just how Katrina started. Imagine if New Orleans gets hit AGAIN. And the Army Corps of Engineers have stated the levees are still very weak.
All in all, it seems it would be wiser to do something safer for a while. Say, take a job feeding tigers in a zoo while being covered in raw meat. Or walking down the slums of a city wearing a billboard that reads "I'VE GOT $5000 DOLLARS OF UNTRACEABLE MONEY ON ME AND NO ONE KNOWS WHERE I AM!"
You know, something like that.
Sunday, September 18, 2005
Brown 2!
Bush catches all kinds of justified Hell for nominating an unqualified person to head FEMA. (And the Congressmen who vetted him and voted him in should also be nailed to the wall.) Showing his fast learning and his speed in understanding where he went wrong, he places Karl Rove in charge of reconstruction efforts in New Orleans.
I only wish this was a line from Letterman or Leno. But nope, this is our President at work here - no man too unqualified to be in charge, no offense too great to be fired for except disloyalty.
He's making a whole new layer of political Lysenkos to match his scientific ones - people who may not have any idea about the field they're in, but they fit what qualities Bush feels are important, namely a.)being a Republican and b.)being loyal.
This isn't good at all. But par for the course.
I only wish this was a line from Letterman or Leno. But nope, this is our President at work here - no man too unqualified to be in charge, no offense too great to be fired for except disloyalty.
He's making a whole new layer of political Lysenkos to match his scientific ones - people who may not have any idea about the field they're in, but they fit what qualities Bush feels are important, namely a.)being a Republican and b.)being loyal.
This isn't good at all. But par for the course.
Witch Hunt?
Hearing about the Catholic Church's attempt to root out homosexuality in the priesthood makes me glad I decided to step away from the church a while back.
It seems like the powers-that-beautify are blaming homosexuals for the recent child abuse scandals, and therefore want to drive them out. Bastards like Bernard Law who facilitated and aided the abuse are fine and dandy for some odd reason, but for God's sake, don't be gay. Even if you never act on it, you'll be driven out.
Ignoring the obvious question of exactly HOW they will determine someone's sexual orientation ("Are you gay?" "No." "Are you SURE?") there's a deeper issue here, it seems. At least, it seems that way to me, and I state right off I am no expert.
But here's what I see happening: It appears the Catholic Church feels that homosexuality is part of what you are - close to a religious idea of genetic coding. They don't say, "If you are homosexual, stop doing it." They say, "If you are homosexual, you are not qualified to be a priest." They don't offer you a choice to stop it; they seem to say you ARE it. And being it, you can't be a priest.
So why is that disturbing to me? Because it seems to say, "We know that being gay is what you are - it's like having moles, or black hair. And because of that, regardless of whether or not you act on it, you are disallowed from being a priest. There's no chance of you changing what you are, and we don't like what you are."
Substitute the word "black" in there for gay, or "nearsighted" (which at least follows a Mosiac law anyway), or "lisping". It's very unfair for a Church to decide that uncontrollable factors that don't harm anyone are means for defrockment, to say the least. Let alone the fact that these factors may not even be acted on. Are heterosexual priests caught in affairs defrocked? At least one wasn't - he was allowed/encouraged to resign. Which isn't the same as being defrocked - when you get defrocked, you lose all priestly privileges and functions. Resigning doesn't involve the revoking of his functions.
But if you're a homosexual it doesn't matter - you're out. Being gay in and of itself is enough to get you removed from the priesthood, whereas abusing kids and having heterosexual affairs aren't in some cases. Is this fair at all to anyone? If a business decided to fire a man for being gay and not acting on it, but allowed someone who abused to kids to stay working...how confident would you feel in patronizing it? (For that matter, when someone does this I would argue they may be bettter off away from the priesthood as well.)
Andrew Sullivan has some other thoughts about this as well. He's done a good job on pointing out the disparities the Church is pushing.
It seems like the powers-that-beautify are blaming homosexuals for the recent child abuse scandals, and therefore want to drive them out. Bastards like Bernard Law who facilitated and aided the abuse are fine and dandy for some odd reason, but for God's sake, don't be gay. Even if you never act on it, you'll be driven out.
Ignoring the obvious question of exactly HOW they will determine someone's sexual orientation ("Are you gay?" "No." "Are you SURE?") there's a deeper issue here, it seems. At least, it seems that way to me, and I state right off I am no expert.
But here's what I see happening: It appears the Catholic Church feels that homosexuality is part of what you are - close to a religious idea of genetic coding. They don't say, "If you are homosexual, stop doing it." They say, "If you are homosexual, you are not qualified to be a priest." They don't offer you a choice to stop it; they seem to say you ARE it. And being it, you can't be a priest.
So why is that disturbing to me? Because it seems to say, "We know that being gay is what you are - it's like having moles, or black hair. And because of that, regardless of whether or not you act on it, you are disallowed from being a priest. There's no chance of you changing what you are, and we don't like what you are."
Substitute the word "black" in there for gay, or "nearsighted" (which at least follows a Mosiac law anyway), or "lisping". It's very unfair for a Church to decide that uncontrollable factors that don't harm anyone are means for defrockment, to say the least. Let alone the fact that these factors may not even be acted on. Are heterosexual priests caught in affairs defrocked? At least one wasn't - he was allowed/encouraged to resign. Which isn't the same as being defrocked - when you get defrocked, you lose all priestly privileges and functions. Resigning doesn't involve the revoking of his functions.
But if you're a homosexual it doesn't matter - you're out. Being gay in and of itself is enough to get you removed from the priesthood, whereas abusing kids and having heterosexual affairs aren't in some cases. Is this fair at all to anyone? If a business decided to fire a man for being gay and not acting on it, but allowed someone who abused to kids to stay working...how confident would you feel in patronizing it? (For that matter, when someone does this I would argue they may be bettter off away from the priesthood as well.)
Andrew Sullivan has some other thoughts about this as well. He's done a good job on pointing out the disparities the Church is pushing.
Monday, September 12, 2005
Balancing Acts
I've been railing on FEMA and heckuva Brownie for some time, and I don't think I'm wrong. I saw several screw ups being made that are unconscionable for an agency supposed to be on the front line of natural disasters and terrorist attacks - the firefighters flap, the red tape holding up supplies, the dithering, the loss of communications (!!! - after the 9/11 attacks, this should have been one of the first things fixed, dammit!), the bungling of the rescue efforts in many places (the underuse of the Bataan, for example)...and these weren't just immediately after the levees broke. They have lasted up to the present day. I do think FEMA screwed up big time and Brown should have been fired, not allowed to resign.
However, in the interest of fairness, Protein Wisdom has been posting some defenses of FEMA, and at least in one case they may have a point - FEMA seemed to do a good job coordinating the National Guard people who came down to LA. (This is no way excuses their many other failings.) You can check them out for some defenses.
Also, the infamous pictures of school buses being used to slap Nagin around may have been in error. Media Matters has the story, and it seems like this talking point may fall away like "the Bataan never being called to duty" did.
However, in the interest of fairness, Protein Wisdom has been posting some defenses of FEMA, and at least in one case they may have a point - FEMA seemed to do a good job coordinating the National Guard people who came down to LA. (This is no way excuses their many other failings.) You can check them out for some defenses.
Also, the infamous pictures of school buses being used to slap Nagin around may have been in error. Media Matters has the story, and it seems like this talking point may fall away like "the Bataan never being called to duty" did.
Ding-Dong, Brownie's Gone!
The National Leader Ineptness warning system has lowered to fuschia, after "heckuva" Brownie resigned from FEMA. I notice he did it before Ophelia made landfall...
However, you should be ready for an upgrade any moment now. Brownie hands off FEMA to a man just as unqualified - Patrick Rhodes did stint at the SBA and Commerce Dept. (UPDATE - I am in error. David Paulison, a fire offical, has been selected to head FEMA. Conisider the next paragraphs to now be a last shot at heckuva Brownie.)
President: "So, you have no experience in this field, you've never trained in this field, you've never even volunteered to roll bandages at the Red Cross...why should you be leading FEMA?"
"I'm your number one fan, sir!"
"Congrats, son, you're in."
However, you should be ready for an upgrade any moment now. Brownie hands off FEMA to a man just as unqualified - Patrick Rhodes did stint at the SBA and Commerce Dept. (UPDATE - I am in error. David Paulison, a fire offical, has been selected to head FEMA. Conisider the next paragraphs to now be a last shot at heckuva Brownie.)
President: "So, you have no experience in this field, you've never trained in this field, you've never even volunteered to roll bandages at the Red Cross...why should you be leading FEMA?"
"I'm your number one fan, sir!"
"Congrats, son, you're in."
Friday, September 09, 2005
Brown, meet Peter!
LAURENCE J. PETER ADMITS "PETER PRINCIPLE" HAS FLAWS
Mike Brown called "the one I can't understand"
by Satire News Service
In a surprising announcement coming just after Mike Brown's removal from New Orleans recovery effort, Laurence J. Peter has admitted that his "Peter Principle" has flaws in it and should be removed from all future books.
"It seemed to work," said Mr. Peter. "Every person I'd seen had risen to some level of success and competence, and then was systematically promoted to a level where they couldn't handle it. But then I read about Mike Brown and traced his work history, and..." He shook his head. "I just don't know. My theory obviously has problems."
The pushers of an alternative theory, "Intelligent Job Structure", were not as ecstatic as one would think when their major competitor has admitted errors. Speaking on condition of anonymity, one of the major leaders in "The Bureaucracy Institute", had this to say.
"Well, while we are happy to finally hear that heathen Mr. Peter admit his principle is wrong, we at the Bureaucracy Institute are having trouble fitting Mike Brown in our theories as well. I mean, our whole theory is that some CEO of the universe placed these people in a cohesive, intelligently designed structure - which is obvious when you look at the world, isn't it? But then you get Mike Brown...suddenly you have to wonder about the intelligent part of it. This IS on deep background, right?"
Mike Brown, who has not been relieved of his job at FEMA, was removed from the hurricane recovery effort in New Orleans after many missteps and criticisms. His position was not helped after reporters found several parts of his resume were padded. Not daunted by the investigation, his new resume had the following extra lines added on line:
"2002-present. Leader of FEMA and the free world. Was mentioned in several papers and newscasts for his role in the Katrina relief efforts, being called "...a leader...we can't...live without", "...a man whose actions...were incredible...", and "The...leader of a...Federal agency that...was great."
The actual quotes read as follows:
"Mike Brown is a leader who doesn't lead and a man we can't see doing any action we could live without."
"In the aftermath of Katrina, we have to single out a man whose actions, or lack of them, were incredible in their failure to relieve or help anyone."
"The incompetent Mike Brown, leader of a gutted and failed Federal agency that once was great, has smeared the name of FEMA forever."
When contacted about the seeming misquoting, a spokeswoman said Mr. Brown preferred not to talk to the press but wanted to go about preparing to help the rest of the nation. She also said, "We are tired of playing the blame game here. No one is to blame except for everyone but Mike Brown, FEMA, and anyone in the Bush Administration. It's very simple."
Mike Brown called "the one I can't understand"
by Satire News Service
In a surprising announcement coming just after Mike Brown's removal from New Orleans recovery effort, Laurence J. Peter has admitted that his "Peter Principle" has flaws in it and should be removed from all future books.
"It seemed to work," said Mr. Peter. "Every person I'd seen had risen to some level of success and competence, and then was systematically promoted to a level where they couldn't handle it. But then I read about Mike Brown and traced his work history, and..." He shook his head. "I just don't know. My theory obviously has problems."
The pushers of an alternative theory, "Intelligent Job Structure", were not as ecstatic as one would think when their major competitor has admitted errors. Speaking on condition of anonymity, one of the major leaders in "The Bureaucracy Institute", had this to say.
"Well, while we are happy to finally hear that heathen Mr. Peter admit his principle is wrong, we at the Bureaucracy Institute are having trouble fitting Mike Brown in our theories as well. I mean, our whole theory is that some CEO of the universe placed these people in a cohesive, intelligently designed structure - which is obvious when you look at the world, isn't it? But then you get Mike Brown...suddenly you have to wonder about the intelligent part of it. This IS on deep background, right?"
Mike Brown, who has not been relieved of his job at FEMA, was removed from the hurricane recovery effort in New Orleans after many missteps and criticisms. His position was not helped after reporters found several parts of his resume were padded. Not daunted by the investigation, his new resume had the following extra lines added on line:
"2002-present. Leader of FEMA and the free world. Was mentioned in several papers and newscasts for his role in the Katrina relief efforts, being called "...a leader...we can't...live without", "...a man whose actions...were incredible...", and "The...leader of a...Federal agency that...was great."
The actual quotes read as follows:
"Mike Brown is a leader who doesn't lead and a man we can't see doing any action we could live without."
"In the aftermath of Katrina, we have to single out a man whose actions, or lack of them, were incredible in their failure to relieve or help anyone."
"The incompetent Mike Brown, leader of a gutted and failed Federal agency that once was great, has smeared the name of FEMA forever."
When contacted about the seeming misquoting, a spokeswoman said Mr. Brown preferred not to talk to the press but wanted to go about preparing to help the rest of the nation. She also said, "We are tired of playing the blame game here. No one is to blame except for everyone but Mike Brown, FEMA, and anyone in the Bush Administration. It's very simple."
Not Good Enough
Breaking news says "heckuva" Brownie has been removed from overseeing the relief efforts in New Orleans. However, he's still the head of FEEBLE. So now, New Orleans may be spared his unusual mis-style of helping and saving, but the whole nation is still at risk from this resume enhancing, lie telling, bungling ol' boy network appointee.
Feel safer? I'm happy that New Orleans may actually get on track with relief efforts now...why not extend that privilege to the rest of us?
Fire Mike Brown.
Feel safer? I'm happy that New Orleans may actually get on track with relief efforts now...why not extend that privilege to the rest of us?
Fire Mike Brown.
As If We Needed Another Reason
In addition to his stunning ineptness already, we now learn that ol' "heckuva" Brownie lied on his resume, which presumably the Bush people used to hire him. Unless it was purely and simply based on the recommendation from his college buddy Joseph Allbaugh, the last head of FEMA. You know, the good ol' boy network should always trump things like experience and truthfulness.
"Heckuva" Brownie claimed he an assistant city manager with emergency services oversight in Edmund, Oklahoma. Except, well, gee, he was an "assistant TO the city manager", which translates as an intern. Word placement is really important, don't you think?
"Heckuva" Brownie also stated he was an "Outstanding Political Science Professor" at Central State University. Charles Johnson, the News Bureau Director at what is now the University of Central Oklahoma says, basically, "Huh?" No record exists of him being a professor - he MAY have been adjunct instructor.
I'm starting to understand how Guckert/Gannon managed to fool the fact checkers at the White House. I'm starting to understand that Baron Munchausen could get a job at the White House with these fact checkers.
There's even more. "Heckuva" Brownie states he's director of Oklahoma Christian Home, a nursing home in Edmond, and has been from 1983 to the present. But, and I bet you can see this one coming, no one remembers him being on said board, which by the way was dissolved a couple of years ago. How he can still be on a board that's dissolved is better left for another day.
I think falsifying a resume is grounds for dismissal, isn't it? Let me put it simply:
FIRE MIKE BROWN!!!
"Heckuva" Brownie claimed he an assistant city manager with emergency services oversight in Edmund, Oklahoma. Except, well, gee, he was an "assistant TO the city manager", which translates as an intern. Word placement is really important, don't you think?
"Heckuva" Brownie also stated he was an "Outstanding Political Science Professor" at Central State University. Charles Johnson, the News Bureau Director at what is now the University of Central Oklahoma says, basically, "Huh?" No record exists of him being a professor - he MAY have been adjunct instructor.
I'm starting to understand how Guckert/Gannon managed to fool the fact checkers at the White House. I'm starting to understand that Baron Munchausen could get a job at the White House with these fact checkers.
There's even more. "Heckuva" Brownie states he's director of Oklahoma Christian Home, a nursing home in Edmond, and has been from 1983 to the present. But, and I bet you can see this one coming, no one remembers him being on said board, which by the way was dissolved a couple of years ago. How he can still be on a board that's dissolved is better left for another day.
I think falsifying a resume is grounds for dismissal, isn't it? Let me put it simply:
FIRE MIKE BROWN!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)