And who are looking to find hot (same sex) dates, this might be a great place to go.
A city packed with confused, tortured men and women trying desperately to control their desires and praying to Jesus must be such easy targets it's like dynamite in a fish farm.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Unlike that previous, useless, do-nothing government...
Why is it that when THE government issues a press release, they insist on using "This Government"? Of course, we all know that "This Government" is shorthand for "Unlike the previous government". I'm not sure how they do it, but when I read the release, my mind automatically added a Harper-esque sneer. And the capitalized 'G' on government is a nice touch. Memories of CNG. Really conveys that This Government is serious about Governing.
Get your hands off my bulbs!
Wonkette highlights some crazy Yankee legislator's attempt to restore freedom of choice . . . in lightbulbs.
(Amusingly, the woman is against abortion--so women can't decide what to do with their bodies, but can control what they do in aisle 4 . . . ).
While certainly phasing out the incandescent bulb makes sense, don't we have bigger environmental fish to fry (er, dry in the sun according to traditional native methods that don't involve any fossil fuels or carbon emissions)?
Commentator procrastinator has a good point:
(Amusingly, the woman is against abortion--so women can't decide what to do with their bodies, but can control what they do in aisle 4 . . . ).
While certainly phasing out the incandescent bulb makes sense, don't we have bigger environmental fish to fry (er, dry in the sun according to traditional native methods that don't involve any fossil fuels or carbon emissions)?
Commentator procrastinator has a good point:
How about we ban SUV's first?
"Anthropological" argument against SSM totally PWNED!!!11!!!
Here is an awesome takedown of purportedly "anthropological" arguments against same-sex marriage (i.e. the contention that everywhere in the world the natural state of marriage is one-man one-woman.)
Worth reading, not least because it really highlights the fact that people mustering arguments against SMM just plain make up the facts.
Sort of like Republicans do generally.
Closing lines:
Worth reading, not least because it really highlights the fact that people mustering arguments against SMM just plain make up the facts.
Sort of like Republicans do generally.
Closing lines:
As an addendum, I call upon Focus on the Family to acknowledge they deceived their readers when they recently said anthropologists agree with the so-called “traditional definition of marriage” and issue a public apology and correction. They must honestly inform their readers that the American Anthropological Association has previously and publicly condemned attempts to exclude homosexuals from marrying, declaring that marriage, as defined cross-culturally, is inclusive of same-sex marriages. A failure to do so simply reaffirms the view that Focus on the Family is more concerned about its political agenda than its Christian identity.
Kady & Wells, also tag-teaming
We are big fans of tag-teaming, of course, but when the full power of our two favourite columnists gets applied to the Tories, we are truly smitten.
Much Paul and Kady, we think the whole attack by Flaherty on the Ontario budget to be a little bizarre. I mean, what can they hope to accomplish if they're trying to break into the Ontario electoral market? Although we Ontarians (even those of us who live in LA) aren't really very nationalist and don't ever see ourselves as Ontarians before Canadians (ut incipit sic fidelis permanet and whatnot), surely this will drive Tory sympathizers to the Liberals?
The only real rationale we could think of is that it's for consumption outside Ontario; i.e. "Look at those Liberals in Ontario, screwing everything up. That's why you should vote for us. Also, we're going to bat for you, because, Alberta, once Ontario becomes a have-not province, all your oil money will be going to support the pinko-latte-sipping-homo-commies in Toronto. And then it's only one step further to a new NEP."
But that just doesn't make any sense. Because the Liberal brand is pretty moribund in Alberta anyway.
Some might say it's just more of Harper's brand of corrosive, divide-and-destroy politics.
Much Paul and Kady, we think the whole attack by Flaherty on the Ontario budget to be a little bizarre. I mean, what can they hope to accomplish if they're trying to break into the Ontario electoral market? Although we Ontarians (even those of us who live in LA) aren't really very nationalist and don't ever see ourselves as Ontarians before Canadians (ut incipit sic fidelis permanet and whatnot), surely this will drive Tory sympathizers to the Liberals?
The only real rationale we could think of is that it's for consumption outside Ontario; i.e. "Look at those Liberals in Ontario, screwing everything up. That's why you should vote for us. Also, we're going to bat for you, because, Alberta, once Ontario becomes a have-not province, all your oil money will be going to support the pinko-latte-sipping-homo-commies in Toronto. And then it's only one step further to a new NEP."
But that just doesn't make any sense. Because the Liberal brand is pretty moribund in Alberta anyway.
Some might say it's just more of Harper's brand of corrosive, divide-and-destroy politics.
Breakfast
Saw this picture on icanhascheezburger and had to post it.
Of course, it originally was addressed to Dick Cheney, and while I don't doubt that Darth Cheney eats kittens and puppies for all three meals, it seemed a little more appropriate for the Premier of Ontario.
For our stumped American readers, here's some background.
Perhaps one day
The world will look back and wonder why the freest, most stable country in the world, one of the oldest continuous democracies, one of the tiny minority of states without civil war, that has never flirted with totalitarianism (or endorsed terrorism) was not given the Olympics, to be hosted in the most multicultural city on the planet.
One day.
One day.
Saturday, March 22, 2008
Amen
Sam Harris is so awesome.
And he's kinda cute too.
Good quotes:
and
Waitaminit.
I grant, 100%, that Canada and the UK are more officially religious. Our Queen's title, in both countries, includes "Defender of the Faith." Ever last coin ever minted in Canada includes "Elizabeth II D.G. Regina," which means "Elizabeth II, By the Grace of God, Queen." Our second anthem (and Britain's first) is God Save the Queen. And, though I'm atheist, were I Governor-General, I would end every Throne Speech with the traditional invocation (more common in the Provinces) of "God Save the Queen" (or "May divine providence guide you in your deliberations.") Our constitution--easily the most enlightened on the planet--begins with placing god on the same plain as the rule of law.
But if a candidate for high office stood up and bragged about his faith, he'd be laughed down. Think of Stockwell Day (to which the response was "no, the Flinstones was not a documentary"). Simply put, in Canada, in the UK, in the rest of the Commonwealth and the EU, religion and politics are separate, notwithstanding "established religion."
This country (the US) is fucked up. In no other reasonable western country would a contender for the country's highest office (er, I should qualify that with, for constitutional monarchies, the phrase "head of government," because, of course, our head of state is not elected) have to say how much they love Jesus and how much superstition guides their world view. And yet here we are forced to endure--to the rapturous applause of the masses--how so-and–so's pastor and so-and-so's priest are important figures, and how great Jesus is, and whether Obama really is Christian blah blah blah.
America: Not only are you a pathetic nation of pussies who fall over in terror the minute bin Laden or whomever suggests he is looking at you, you're also a pathetic nation of superstition.
And I end this with a very secular statement: God Save the Queen.
And he's kinda cute too.
Good quotes:
Might the Senator from Illinois be unsure whether the Creator of the universe brought forth his only Son from the womb of a Galilean virgin, taught him the carpenter's trade, and then had him crucified for our benefit? Few suspicions could be more damaging in American politics today.and
Like every candidate, Obama must appeal to millions of voters who believe that without religion, most of us would spend our days raping and killing our neighbors and stealing their pornography. Examples of well-behaved and comparatively atheistic societies like Sweden, Finland, Norway, and Denmark--which surpass us in terrestrial virtues like education, health, public generosity, per capita aid to the developing world, and low rates of violent crime and infant mortality--are of no interest to our electorate whatsoever.
and
Obama's candidacy is also depressing, for it demonstrates that even a person of the greatest candor and eloquence must still claim to believe the unbelievable in order to have a political career in this country. We may be ready for the audacity of hope. Will we ever be ready for the audacity of reason?Mike and I were talking to a Yankee Friend ("YF") of ours re Canada having Good Friday off and the US not. Our YF suggested this was because the US was more secular.
Waitaminit.
I grant, 100%, that Canada and the UK are more officially religious. Our Queen's title, in both countries, includes "Defender of the Faith." Ever last coin ever minted in Canada includes "Elizabeth II D.G. Regina," which means "Elizabeth II, By the Grace of God, Queen." Our second anthem (and Britain's first) is God Save the Queen. And, though I'm atheist, were I Governor-General, I would end every Throne Speech with the traditional invocation (more common in the Provinces) of "God Save the Queen" (or "May divine providence guide you in your deliberations.") Our constitution--easily the most enlightened on the planet--begins with placing god on the same plain as the rule of law.
But if a candidate for high office stood up and bragged about his faith, he'd be laughed down. Think of Stockwell Day (to which the response was "no, the Flinstones was not a documentary"). Simply put, in Canada, in the UK, in the rest of the Commonwealth and the EU, religion and politics are separate, notwithstanding "established religion."
This country (the US) is fucked up. In no other reasonable western country would a contender for the country's highest office (er, I should qualify that with, for constitutional monarchies, the phrase "head of government," because, of course, our head of state is not elected) have to say how much they love Jesus and how much superstition guides their world view. And yet here we are forced to endure--to the rapturous applause of the masses--how so-and–so's pastor and so-and-so's priest are important figures, and how great Jesus is, and whether Obama really is Christian blah blah blah.
America: Not only are you a pathetic nation of pussies who fall over in terror the minute bin Laden or whomever suggests he is looking at you, you're also a pathetic nation of superstition.
And I end this with a very secular statement: God Save the Queen.
Memo to the American Nation: You are pussies.
I'm sorry, America. You are fucking pathetic.
In 1939-45, we faced down the greatest threat to freedom that has ever existed. A force with real armies, a force that took over countries and destroyed cities and enslaved nations. And we fought them back--the combined power of the West and the USSR. And we (the West) did it without spying on our people, without torture, without forgetting who we were.
And now, some dude in a cave makes a pronouncement, and you fall all over yourselves, shitting your pants and cowering, duct-taping your houses, bowing down to your leaders, all-too-happy to surrender your freedoms, to turn on your neighbours, to give in to fear.
Fuck you.
You never faced what the world faced in the 40s. And I'll bet if you did now, you'd all die of fucking heart attacks.
Get some goddamn balls.
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
If you think
In 1939-45, we faced down the greatest threat to freedom that has ever existed. A force with real armies, a force that took over countries and destroyed cities and enslaved nations. And we fought them back--the combined power of the West and the USSR. And we (the West) did it without spying on our people, without torture, without forgetting who we were.
And now, some dude in a cave makes a pronouncement, and you fall all over yourselves, shitting your pants and cowering, duct-taping your houses, bowing down to your leaders, all-too-happy to surrender your freedoms, to turn on your neighbours, to give in to fear.
Fuck you.
You never faced what the world faced in the 40s. And I'll bet if you did now, you'd all die of fucking heart attacks.
Get some goddamn balls.
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
If you think
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
More stupid religion
NPR today did a story on some dude in Israel who wants to help people who can't physically get to various "holy" sites nevertheless pray there. Basically you call in, record your prayer, and then it gets broadcast over speakers to whatever particular "holy" place you choose.
Right. Let me see if I have this straight. What really apparently matters is that the sound of you intoning whatever mumbo jumbo you think will curry god's (or gods') favour hitting the "holy" place, not the act of your saying it or the intentions behind it.
What a cool god(s): Up until now, all those people who could never make it to Jerusalem/Mecca/etc had less-effective prayers--so for centuries god's basically been discriminating against the poor or the sick or the immobile. Great. Well done, god. All that "help the poor" and "blessed are the meek" shit really doesn't matter--your prayers are far better if you say the in the right place at the right time.
Right. Let me see if I have this straight. What really apparently matters is that the sound of you intoning whatever mumbo jumbo you think will curry god's (or gods') favour hitting the "holy" place, not the act of your saying it or the intentions behind it.
What a cool god(s): Up until now, all those people who could never make it to Jerusalem/Mecca/etc had less-effective prayers--so for centuries god's basically been discriminating against the poor or the sick or the immobile. Great. Well done, god. All that "help the poor" and "blessed are the meek" shit really doesn't matter--your prayers are far better if you say the in the right place at the right time.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Arthur C. Clarke, RIP
This makes me incredibly sad.
I have always, always loved Arthur C. Clarke's science fiction, mostly because it is so categorically different from other Sci-Fi writers. Whereas others focus on action and adventure, Clarke's works always struck me more as ways in which he could project his different visions of the future, and of society. The story was simply the vehicle to convey the message--much as Tolkein's works started out as a way for him to use the new languages he had created. In reading his books, I always loved simply puzzling out the sort of society he had projected.
Similarly, his books The Trigger and The Light of Other Days explore how a single invention could change society: in The Trigger, there is an invention that causes explosives to detonate within a certain range, which almost instantly ends the scourge of handguns (with differing reactions in different parts of the world), and in The Light of Other Days, a way is found to project a sort of worm-hole to look at any place in the world at any time in history: the invention aside, his point was to explore what would happen in the world if privacy instantly vanished and everything you ever did could be looked at by anyone, any time now or in the future.
There was also something timeless about his stories. Even reading the works written long before the present, there are themes and ideas that resonate. So much Sci-Fi written in the 50s and 60s--and even in the 70s and 80s--can seem incredibly dated, relying too much on then-fantastical technology that to us now seems mundane. But you can read his stories and connect with them--much like Shakespeare and Mozart's operas are enjoyable and meaningful to audiences hundreds of years later.
I have not read everything of Clarke's, and so much of it is sadly out of print. Here's hoping that with his death, some of this older novels will be republished.
We lost a great author and great man today.
(Final aside: In all of his books that created future societies (instead of being set in the present), there was one constant: total acceptance and toleration of homosexuality. And in his Rama series, there is a direct parallel and deep compassion for HIV/AIDS and criticism of those who would quarantine those afflicted by it.)
I have always, always loved Arthur C. Clarke's science fiction, mostly because it is so categorically different from other Sci-Fi writers. Whereas others focus on action and adventure, Clarke's works always struck me more as ways in which he could project his different visions of the future, and of society. The story was simply the vehicle to convey the message--much as Tolkein's works started out as a way for him to use the new languages he had created. In reading his books, I always loved simply puzzling out the sort of society he had projected.
Similarly, his books The Trigger and The Light of Other Days explore how a single invention could change society: in The Trigger, there is an invention that causes explosives to detonate within a certain range, which almost instantly ends the scourge of handguns (with differing reactions in different parts of the world), and in The Light of Other Days, a way is found to project a sort of worm-hole to look at any place in the world at any time in history: the invention aside, his point was to explore what would happen in the world if privacy instantly vanished and everything you ever did could be looked at by anyone, any time now or in the future.
There was also something timeless about his stories. Even reading the works written long before the present, there are themes and ideas that resonate. So much Sci-Fi written in the 50s and 60s--and even in the 70s and 80s--can seem incredibly dated, relying too much on then-fantastical technology that to us now seems mundane. But you can read his stories and connect with them--much like Shakespeare and Mozart's operas are enjoyable and meaningful to audiences hundreds of years later.
I have not read everything of Clarke's, and so much of it is sadly out of print. Here's hoping that with his death, some of this older novels will be republished.
We lost a great author and great man today.
(Final aside: In all of his books that created future societies (instead of being set in the present), there was one constant: total acceptance and toleration of homosexuality. And in his Rama series, there is a direct parallel and deep compassion for HIV/AIDS and criticism of those who would quarantine those afflicted by it.)
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
That ought to shut them up
I'm still torn on which Democratic candidate for President I'd favour, but I have to admit, all this NAFTA bashing from both of them is very irritating indeed. Bash Chindia, if you want to target the real job loss boogie man.
Well here comes our Minister of Trade, David Emerson with a 'friendly' warning that re-opening NAFTA is a two-way street.
Its an odd day indeed when I support a Conservative cabinet minister's sharp words to US Democrats.
Its also astonishing that a Conservative (albeit, a former Liberal) would play the oil card. Recall it was instant recrimination and hellfire from Ralph Klein and his Alliance proxies whenever Chretien even joked about using oil as leverage.
But that was a long time ago, and these ain't your father's Conservatives no more.
Well here comes our Minister of Trade, David Emerson with a 'friendly' warning that re-opening NAFTA is a two-way street.
Its an odd day indeed when I support a Conservative cabinet minister's sharp words to US Democrats.
Its also astonishing that a Conservative (albeit, a former Liberal) would play the oil card. Recall it was instant recrimination and hellfire from Ralph Klein and his Alliance proxies whenever Chretien even joked about using oil as leverage.
But that was a long time ago, and these ain't your father's Conservatives no more.
Well, we certainly attract some flies
I'm vaguely astonished that after such a long hiatus we have people who still read us.
That said, I'm also astonished by the rank stupidity of some of our readers. Check out the comments.
First off: The "liberal" supreme court of Canada in fact had nothing to do with anything. It was the Court of Appeal for Ontario (the Chief Judge of which (and who wrote the opinion) incidentally happens to have been a TORY appointee and unless I'm mistaken, was also the Attorney General of Ontario under a TORY government), followed by the Courts of Appeal for every other province save for barbarian Alberta, that pointed out the constitutional flaw.
Second: Give me a fucking break with the "no input from the people" bullshit. Our constitution is crystal clear that the rights of minorities aren't subject to the whims of the people. Otherwise we'd have idiots like Jonathon and Trevor--mouth breathing slack jawed cro magnons--deciding that no, only white Brit-descended men can vote.
Third: Mike is abso-fucking-lutly right that the Jeanfather had to be dragged to the altar. And to his everlasting credit, he acknowledged that even he is subject to the rule of law (something that the US president would to well to recognize, pace extraordinary rendition and whatnot).
And lastly: Anyone (Trevor) who thinks that the Liberal government was the "most corrupt government in history" has a deeply shaky view/understanding of history and probably should read a little more. But then, if your only source of knowledge is Fox News, of fucking course you might have such a weak understanding of anything. Still, for these people, I suspect they don't make enough big-print simple-english books.
We will be vindicated of all of this. The Chretien years represent the flowering of our society. Canada sits on the pinnacle of human achievement, and though of course everything also rests upon our great predecessors and hundreds of years of work as a society (need I point out we are one of the oldest democracies going?), the ten years of the Jeanfather will rank as ten of the greatest we have ever had.
I am an unreconstructed devout Chretienite. I would have had another 10 years of him as Prime Minister. He stood up to the Yankees, he kept us from Iraq, he throttled that anti-Canadian protester, he introduced the Clarity Act and was responsible for the Separation Reference. Unlike Muldoon, he didn't open up the Constitution.
Our federation is immeasurably better because of him, particularly in light of the two small minded men who came after him. It may have been bland government, but god save us from visionaries. The MacKenzie King and Borden governments may have been the same, but those too were some of our greatest years.
And the small minded fools who think otherwise--likely former Alliance voters--can go back to their caves, club their wives, shoot the homos/blacks/asians/immigrants/Quebecois. But you are against the tide of history and one day we will be rid of you all. You have 10 years, and then finally the children who grew up in these glory days of Canadian society will be of age--the children who don't give a shit about race/language/colour/religion. You old guard are doomed, and maybe Alberta--the rural areas--will hold out as some old guard, but the rest of the country, particularly Toronto/Montreal/Vancouver, will be striding forward and will leave you in the dust.
That said, I'm also astonished by the rank stupidity of some of our readers. Check out the comments.
First off: The "liberal" supreme court of Canada in fact had nothing to do with anything. It was the Court of Appeal for Ontario (the Chief Judge of which (and who wrote the opinion) incidentally happens to have been a TORY appointee and unless I'm mistaken, was also the Attorney General of Ontario under a TORY government), followed by the Courts of Appeal for every other province save for barbarian Alberta, that pointed out the constitutional flaw.
Second: Give me a fucking break with the "no input from the people" bullshit. Our constitution is crystal clear that the rights of minorities aren't subject to the whims of the people. Otherwise we'd have idiots like Jonathon and Trevor--mouth breathing slack jawed cro magnons--deciding that no, only white Brit-descended men can vote.
Third: Mike is abso-fucking-lutly right that the Jeanfather had to be dragged to the altar. And to his everlasting credit, he acknowledged that even he is subject to the rule of law (something that the US president would to well to recognize, pace extraordinary rendition and whatnot).
And lastly: Anyone (Trevor) who thinks that the Liberal government was the "most corrupt government in history" has a deeply shaky view/understanding of history and probably should read a little more. But then, if your only source of knowledge is Fox News, of fucking course you might have such a weak understanding of anything. Still, for these people, I suspect they don't make enough big-print simple-english books.
We will be vindicated of all of this. The Chretien years represent the flowering of our society. Canada sits on the pinnacle of human achievement, and though of course everything also rests upon our great predecessors and hundreds of years of work as a society (need I point out we are one of the oldest democracies going?), the ten years of the Jeanfather will rank as ten of the greatest we have ever had.
I am an unreconstructed devout Chretienite. I would have had another 10 years of him as Prime Minister. He stood up to the Yankees, he kept us from Iraq, he throttled that anti-Canadian protester, he introduced the Clarity Act and was responsible for the Separation Reference. Unlike Muldoon, he didn't open up the Constitution.
Our federation is immeasurably better because of him, particularly in light of the two small minded men who came after him. It may have been bland government, but god save us from visionaries. The MacKenzie King and Borden governments may have been the same, but those too were some of our greatest years.
And the small minded fools who think otherwise--likely former Alliance voters--can go back to their caves, club their wives, shoot the homos/blacks/asians/immigrants/Quebecois. But you are against the tide of history and one day we will be rid of you all. You have 10 years, and then finally the children who grew up in these glory days of Canadian society will be of age--the children who don't give a shit about race/language/colour/religion. You old guard are doomed, and maybe Alberta--the rural areas--will hold out as some old guard, but the rest of the country, particularly Toronto/Montreal/Vancouver, will be striding forward and will leave you in the dust.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Finally
The Jeanfather gets the honour he deserves.
When the history books are written, people will look back on the Chretien years, and they will say that maybe we didn't have the most flamboyant leader, maybe we didn't have an orator, we didn't have a flashy leader, but we were well governed, we had a Prime Minister who steered us well.
Jean Chretien ushered in our current renaissance, the golden age that we are currently experiencing. And for homos, like me, the Jeanfather's courage in bringing forward same sex marriage catapults him into sainthood. The list of his quiet, untrumpeted achievements--and those of the Liberal government--is proof that we are truly blessed (not that there's a god to bless but you get the point.)
As the Jeanfather always said, Vive le Canada!
And for good measure, God save the Queen.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Sullivan is an idiot
This post, by Sullivan, is bullshit on so many levels, and perfectly illustrates both a) how pathological he is in his anti-Hillary obsession, and b) how pathetic American politics are that we have to dig up things from like 25 years ago.
Give me a fucking break. She was a 27 year old public defender. She attacked the credibility of a witness.
First: Of course she fucking did. I'm not thinking too hard about it but I think it would be borderline mal-fucking-practice not to.
Second: She was a PUBLIC FUCKING DEFENDER. These are people who get paid jack shit, who have to defend people who are most of the time guilty people who will lie to their attorneys, and who are basically looked down upon by the rest of the profession.
Rather than attack her for doing her job, Sullivan should be COMMENDING her. Because how many fucking Republican bastards ever did anything like shittily-paid public service working for low life scum because they believed that no matter what, everyone deserves a fucking defence attorney? (And I'll point out that when I clerked for a judge with a criminal docket, the government kept cutting back money to public defenders and CJA attorneys, meaning there were fewer of them who had to take on more cases.)
Give me a fucking break.
Give me a fucking break. She was a 27 year old public defender. She attacked the credibility of a witness.
First: Of course she fucking did. I'm not thinking too hard about it but I think it would be borderline mal-fucking-practice not to.
Second: She was a PUBLIC FUCKING DEFENDER. These are people who get paid jack shit, who have to defend people who are most of the time guilty people who will lie to their attorneys, and who are basically looked down upon by the rest of the profession.
Rather than attack her for doing her job, Sullivan should be COMMENDING her. Because how many fucking Republican bastards ever did anything like shittily-paid public service working for low life scum because they believed that no matter what, everyone deserves a fucking defence attorney? (And I'll point out that when I clerked for a judge with a criminal docket, the government kept cutting back money to public defenders and CJA attorneys, meaning there were fewer of them who had to take on more cases.)
Give me a fucking break.
Monday, January 14, 2008
Kady O'Malley...
...is the new Paul Wells. I'm kinda over him, actually, since he moved to France to lob the occasional pithy comment on Canadian politics over the ocean . But she'll do just fine as his replacement. In addition to being the mistress of liveblogging, check out her nice summary of the buried outrage that is the Paille Report. It really serves to convince me that the Conservatives are out of ideas, never had any good ideas, have no interest in living up to all their talk while in opposition, and simply don't have the brains or talent to understand what drives a modern economy. More of this, and Dion will be PM by the end of the year.
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Specious Nonsense from Mukasey
So Mukasey (the AG) is before Congress urging passage of the FISA bill. And he came up with some line to the effect of "back during the Second World War industry was not on the sidelines"--equating, essentially, the mobilization of Western industry to fight the war with complicity by telecoms to help Bush break the law by spying without a warrant.
For all those who thought that Mukasey would be a change and would be defending the rule of law, it turns out he's no better than Gonzo. What he's saying is that when the administration asks a company to do something--even if it's illegal--they should do it. He's saying that the invocation of that mantra, "national security," should be enough to justify any illegal conduct.
(And it's not like the lawyers for the telecoms wouldn't have known this. We're not talking about some fly-by-night institution with clueless general counsels.)
That is not the rule of law. That is tyranny.
For all those who thought that Mukasey would be a change and would be defending the rule of law, it turns out he's no better than Gonzo. What he's saying is that when the administration asks a company to do something--even if it's illegal--they should do it. He's saying that the invocation of that mantra, "national security," should be enough to justify any illegal conduct.
(And it's not like the lawyers for the telecoms wouldn't have known this. We're not talking about some fly-by-night institution with clueless general counsels.)
That is not the rule of law. That is tyranny.
Pilgrimage Bullshit
So, from someone who recently undertook the Hajj, we have this gem:
Well, no shit. All you fucking did was walk around a rock seven (eight? six?) times, pointing at one corner. When did God come down to chat? How many damn times have there been tragedies at the Hajj? Let's see--God tells them that this is the most important duty, that it's really important and special--and then decides to wipe out a few of the people who happened to obey? (I'd love a demographic study of those who die during the Hajj. I'll bet that there are among them people who've spent their life savings to attend. Nice, God, nice.)
Oh, and in case we have any Christians or Jews here thinking, oh yes, Islam sucks: you're no better. How about the Pope, who consistently claims that the Virgin Mary turned the assassin's bullet at the last instant, saving him? So let's see--she let him get close, she let him fire, she let the bullet pierce the Pope (likely hurting him fairly significantly), but chose at the last instant to save him? I'm sure someone will say it was to test him or something, but that's even better. What a capricious, sadistic God.
Pathetic, all of this.
The next day, having finished umrah and changed back into regular clothes, the Hajjalis seemed a little deflated. After traveling all this distance to perform what Ellen Hajjali believed was her ultimate religious duty, it simply didn't feel like she thought it would.
"I was expecting this immediate and powerful spiritual experience," she said. Instead, all she felt was overwhelmed and anxious -- desperately trying to stay upright and to keep track of which number rotation she was completing.
Well, no shit. All you fucking did was walk around a rock seven (eight? six?) times, pointing at one corner. When did God come down to chat? How many damn times have there been tragedies at the Hajj? Let's see--God tells them that this is the most important duty, that it's really important and special--and then decides to wipe out a few of the people who happened to obey? (I'd love a demographic study of those who die during the Hajj. I'll bet that there are among them people who've spent their life savings to attend. Nice, God, nice.)
Oh, and in case we have any Christians or Jews here thinking, oh yes, Islam sucks: you're no better. How about the Pope, who consistently claims that the Virgin Mary turned the assassin's bullet at the last instant, saving him? So let's see--she let him get close, she let him fire, she let the bullet pierce the Pope (likely hurting him fairly significantly), but chose at the last instant to save him? I'm sure someone will say it was to test him or something, but that's even better. What a capricious, sadistic God.
Pathetic, all of this.
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
