Viva Peace

Apparently the war in Iraq is going well--from the tone of the article, one might think "splendidly" instead of just "well."

Also, check out a long story on Obama's rise to prominence. Interesting info. And since the war's going so well and has made us so much safer, I guess it doesn't matter who's president in 08. Guess I'll vote Romney and hope he selects Jesus Christ as his VP.

I'm just glad Rage Against the Machine got back together and immediately started beef with Ann Coulter, and that this somehow relates to Rosie.

Perhaps, if John Edwards wins the Democratic nomination and everybody else bombs badly enough, he can select Rage frontman Zack De la Rocha as his VP. Then we're just one John vs. Mitt / Zack vs. Christ arm-wrestling competition away from restoring morality to the pale house.

Viva Rage.

Contagious Stupidity

From today's NYTimes:

Americans’ support for the initial invasion of Iraq has risen somewhat as the White House has continued to ask the public to reserve judgment about the war until at least the fall. In a New York Times/CBS News poll conducted over the weekend, 42 percent of Americans said that looking back, taking military action in Iraq was the right thing to do, while 51 percent said the United States should have stayed out of Iraq.

WTF?

Isn't it 5th-grade wisdom - perhaps rather 2nd or 1st - that an invasion with no justifiable purpose that has only gone from worse to worst is not and was never worth supporting? Why does America now so value its presence in Iraq? (Did no one else read Theater of War?)

The article doesn't help a ton, and neither does Mark Schmitt's snarky attempt at boo-hooing Democratic pres. candidates' ability to make detailed plans.

It's not comforting to e-open the paper and see that 1) Americans are increasingly, not decreasingly comfortable with the idea that America invaded Iraq, way back when (Gawd, that was, like, four American Idols ago!) and 2) New America Foundation members are not fans of good policy papers.

They want more blather. Empty, Republicrackerish blather, good for nothing, to be held to nothing, to be sprinkled like the chaff of millet on the strong winds of a next CBS fall lineup, or the next celebrity murder-suicide.

"The candidates disappear behind a screen of white paper," Schmitt writes. Paper = reading = the intellectual = reason. And we can't have that. We're a country of Faith, a good, honest, Sarkozy-ian realm...

Ba-humfuckery.

I suppose comfort isn't to be wanted or even warranted these days. I'll keep my policy papers and my anti-war stance, thankyouver'much. How much longer before this America now starts to resemble the Britain of Children of Men? Not much longer, perhaps. But by then I'll have my alligator ranch, so the New American "centrist" faux-radicals won't be able to sneer at me without (reptilian, masticatory) repercussions.

The Washington Post has a scoop - Hillary has breasts!!

This is truly unbelievable. The Washington fuckin' Post has a story today which includes the following:

There was cleavage on display Wednesday afternoon on C-SPAN2. It belonged to Sen. Hillary Clinton.

She was talking on the Senate floor about the burdensome cost of higher education. She was wearing a rose-colored blazer over a black top. The neckline sat low on her chest and had a subtle V-shape. The cleavage registered after only a quick glance. No scrunch-faced scrutiny was necessary. There wasn’t an unseemly amount of cleavage showing, but there it was. Undeniable.

It was startling to see that small acknowledgment of sexuality and femininity peeking out of the conservative — aesthetically speaking — environment of Congress. After all, it wasn’t until the early ’90s that women were even allowed to wear pants on the Senate floor. It was even more surprising to note that it was coming from Clinton, someone who has been so publicly ambivalent about style, image and the burdens of both.

THIS IS NEWS?!?!? Next up at the Post : "Rudy scratches testicles during campaign stop".

Beef eaters bad for the environment

A study in Japan has concluded that preparing 2.2 pounds of beef is the environmental equivalent of driving a car non-stop for 3 hours at 50 mph. You can read the story here.

LAST TWO DAYS AT WCS!!

Alas, the final two shows are upon us. For the final shows, WCS will be hosting one at the Culture Project and one at the Knitting Factory to conclude EMANCIPATE (a series of concerts featuring women musicians who are also activists in their communities).

Tonight (July 16th) at 7:00 pm. at the Culture Project (55 Mercer Street) WCS will present Laura Flanders on S. Dakota. In this presentation, Laura Flanders is joined by community activists to discuss organizing initiatives to defeat an abortion ban ballot initiative in 2006.

Tomorrow night (July 17th) at 7:30 pm. at the Knitting Factory (74 Leonard Street) WCS will host the final EMANCIPATE concert. This final concert will feature Chantal Kreviazuk, Marta Gomez, Imani Uzuri, and Aguafuego.

And that's it. Don't miss these final two shows: they're going to be amazing!

My New Favorite Song

Sisterhood out the window!

I think that imaginative, vocal, and serious protest to hold our elected leaders accountable is crucial, especially in the world we're living in today. That's what Women Center Stage here at CP is all about after all - amplifying the voices calling for change. But I get very concerned when "liberals," "Democrats," "lefties," and related ilk decide to go after "liberals," "Democrats," "lefties," and related ilk.

Why do we keep going after one another? What happened to solidarity?

The NY Times reported yesterday that Cindy Sheehan has issued an ultimatum to Nancy Pelosi:

The war protester Cindy Sheehan, whose 24-year-old son was killed in Iraq three years ago, said in May that she was quitting her prominent role in the antiwar movement and severing her ties with the Democratic Party. But her retirement from politics may prove short-lived.

Now Ms. Sheehan, right, is talking about running for Congress as an independent candidate against Speaker Nancy Pelosi in 2008 if Ms. Pelosi, left, a Democrat, refuses to move for the impeachment of President Bush.

Maybe I'm naive, but I feel so strongly that those of us trying to change this country do ourselves a major disservice by publicly attacking our allies.

Especially as women in movements for change, we are in a position to further and facilitate solidarity, to change the paradigm of power-mongering and scapegoating.

Not that we should let leaders like Nancy Pelosi, who are in powerful positions to make change, get away with resting on their laurels. But to go to battle publicly like this...I think it does far more harm than good, and allows Repubs to keep calling us flip-flopping dummies.

The Health of the Doctor

The next surgeon general might be a gay-hater.

The candidate, a self-described Christian conservative named Dr. James Holsinger, supports research into cloning, has backed lesbian issues in the past, and is anti-big tobacco.

Yet, as a lay leader of the United Methodist Church, Dr. Holsinger opposes gay membership in his congregation and believes that homosexuality is "incompatible with Christian teaching."

Worse, Holsinger wrote a paper for a church committee that outlines the various ways in which male homosexuality is abnormal and unhealthy.

I propose a counter-nominee for Surgeon General - Atlanta's own Dr. A. Verras, M.D.

Verras was my doctor as a kid. He's a tiny Greek man with a perma-smile and the most whimsical, non-threatening accent on the planet. All of his medicinal metaphors involve Mickey and/or Minney Mouse (sometimes an ear infection is worthy of a Donald Duck).

I never specifically asked Verras about his views on gay rights, since I am not gay and was not as interested in social justice when I was twelve as I am presently.

However, Verras' bipartisan approach to solving tummyaches and constant references to Disney characters [isn't Disney is one of the gayest-friendly {gay-friendly-est?} companies on the planet?] make him an obvious choice to bridge the pro-anal sex/anti-anal sex divide (or crack) and unite this sad country.

Unicorn Blood & Michael Moore

Post-Sicko, all candidates full-steam ahead on health care reform. Veeeeery interesting...

But how would one pay for universal health care in so large and freakish a nation as ours?

Well, surprise surprise, the Dems want to end the war in Iraq and roll back the tax cuts that Bush handed the richest 1% of U.S. shitheads.

The Republicrackers, however, see a way to pay for universal, effective health care for all Americans without rolling back taxes for those rich shitheads.

They just won't tell us what that way is, of course.

Well, Ghouliani does says that "the market" will fix everything, but that notion's so retro, so eighties [1880s], that I wonder if he isn't cribbing his economic and health care policies from Queen Victoria - or perhaps from everyone's favorite discontinued cereal mascot, the brother of Count Chocula, Baron von Phenomenally-Bad-Plan.

I mean, I'm not an economist, but couldn't we use the ~$500 billion per annum we spend on blowing up brown people to fund a health care system? Doesn't that make some fucking sense? Or do we just hate the brown people that much, because Allah is that bad, that we would sacrifice our anatomy to kill them?

What is Mitt Romney's plan, one wonders? Boil enough unicorn blood to summon the health care fairy?

Man, I can't believe the same universe produced both Dan Dennett and Mitt Romney. That's a nerdcore celebrity deathmatch I'd love to see...

Al Gore - heed the call!!!

Steven Weber (Studio 60, Wings) has a great post today on The Huffington Post. It's a rather intuitive question posed to Al Gore - why WON'T he run?? Here it is in its entirety:


STEVEN WEBER JULY 9, 2007

What does Al know that we don't?

Why, given the opportunity that's been presented to him on a silver Prius, is this man not going to run for (and win) the presidency of the United States? If ever there was a clarion call to be answered it is this one: heed the will of the majority of the people, take back the yoke Bush and his cracked team of highjackers have used to steer the country into the ground and pull the ship skyward again.

Why, after his self-imposed banishment to the wilderness (suburbia), where he along with every other sentient being has observed the feckless evil of the current executive tenant and his Neo-posse, does he demur? Could he know that any run at the office would surely turn out to be a hollow chrysalis which, after gestation, would not incubate a butterfly but more likely belch forth a wingless, blind slug; that an educated, experienced, wise adult can lead more effectively and make more of a difference by being an activist/celebrity and riding a wave of pop-culture popularity, rather than relying upon the rusted and jury-rigged contraption quaintly referred to as the electoral process?

Maybe Al knows that America (to paraphrase Paddy Chayevsky) is a dying giant, that perhaps she is dead already. And the "business of government" is merely the scramble of organisms over the carcass's wan, flaking skin; any rumbles from within aren't the sounds of legislators engaged in constructive debate but the gasses issuing from the anuses of the bacteria digesting the sad corpse's putrefying innards. Are we destined to have the presidency so finally and utterly mediocritized that it no longer holds any attraction for the most qualified person in recent memory who would imbue it with the honor and prestige it -- and we -- deserve?

Well then, that's what Al must know. Because only that kind of realization would prevent him from participating. He says that politics no longer holds any allure for him. And really, why should it? He won an Oscar, for chrissakes. He's raised awareness of a real issue that actually effects us all in a way that makes him truly a uniter -- not a divider. He is the world's activist uncle. George Bush standing in front of his American Enterprise Institute portable backdrop can barely scrape up a strangulated hosanna from his meticulously vetted and dwindling audiences.

Having only once appropriated the toxic phrase "cut and run" to describe the result of catching my fishnet stockings on a partially extruded staple embedded in the side of a bed post (A long, dull story. Forget I mentioned it.) I am forced to resurrect it once again. It's an extremely ugly phrase, wielded by extremely ugly people but I will use it as that mediocre apparatchik/harridan Jean Schmidt never intended: to provoke the discouraged conscience of the marginalized true-patriot who would ably restore what has been so ignobly destroyed. On second thought, it's so shallow and inflammatory that I can't stand to apply it even in a good cause. There has to be some other way to convince this man of his worth. May be we need to convince him of our worth?

Because this country, for all its gaudy fascinations, for all its daily desperation to fend off reality by consuming goods from China as though they were oxygen atoms is also a country of souls betrayed by their loyalty to the idea of America the beautiful, the judicious and the brave. And it is not the loyalty itself that is at issue but those whom we have entrusted with it. A presidential election is not a parlor game, though it may resemble one far too closely. It is as close to being a sacred exercise as this secular republic asks of its congregants. We require a real leader now, one with a true understanding of the importance of why this country must function correctly and efficiently. We and the world depend on it. So here's your hat. And there's the ring. America needs you need to lead us now more than ever.

That's what we know that Al doesn't.

Marvelous Thoughts About... Thought

Dan Dennett is somewhat of a cranky old dude, and not as brilliant a writer as Laing or Jaynes or B. Russell - but he kicks ass on video. He freaks out about Pointillism, which he pronounces in a very funny faux-Gallic way, and he huffs and breathes heavily, but you can't miss this video, it's dope. Even if my boi Dylan isn't into him - I'd hug the dude. Check out Consciousness Explained for more.

Unorthodox And Unafraid

Consider the case of the young atheist:

He loans a friend a book. Then the boys' school administrators freak out because, in loaning another student a book about religion, the atheist somehow violated the "establishment clause."

Funny.

The kid has a great blog, and he tells his story much better than I could.

(His reading list is very good, by the by, if heavy on the R. Dawkins and Nietzche. But give him a break, he's young.)

I'm quite glad there are others in the world who support free thought. Actually, I just wrote a Sir Salman Rushdie tribute for Wishtank which veers off into a discussion about why we should never limit language/thought/questioning.

Basically, telling kids they can't question their faith is as ineffective as it is immoral. The kids--all of them, bible-thumpers, young Saudis bound for the Madrasah, or even little Dawkinses who think themselves Brights but have never really asked the Hard Questions about existence, consciousness, etc.--are going to find out that others don't necessarily agree with them.

And then they will probably blog about their findings. O Internet...

Well, this says quite a lot

From today's White House press briefing (with Scott Stanzel in for a vacationing Tony Snow):

Question: Scott, is Scooter Libby getting more than equal justice under the law? Is he getting special treatment?

Scott Stanzel: Well, I guess I don't know what you mean by equal justice under the law.