More Sludge From Drudge

I have a confession to make. I read the Drudge Report almost every day. It’s one of my many bad habits, like smoking, drinking, or succumbing too easily to hatred (I also used to read a lot of Ayn Rand, but once that second testicle dropped I got over it). I never get tired of the sleazy and misleading way he phrases his headlines. It really is entertaining. For example, if Obama makes a statement about capping executive bonuses, it comes out of the Drudge machine something like this: Obama Wants To Control Wages Throughout Private Sector! And, of course, any freak cold spell or snow storm is snidely presented as ‘evidence’ against global warming.

It’s amusing in the same lurid way that crappy reality shows are, like Ice Road Truckers or Ramsey’s Kitchen Nightmares. Or, my favorite, Bizarre Foods With Andrew Zimmern, in which a chubby, bald metrosexual in loud pastels travels the world eating disgusting things like slugs, meal worms, or bull balls (the latter seems to be a particular favorite of his, and he invariably pronounces them to be either ‘gamey’ or ‘elegant.’)

Today Matt Drudge unearthed a shocker via Politico:

In what appeared to be a coordinated exchange, President Obama called on the Huffington Post's Nico Pitney near the start of his press conference and requested a question directly about Iran.…

Reporters typically don’t coordinate their questions for the president before press conferences, so it seemed odd that Obama might have an idea what the question would be. Also, it was a departure from White House protocol by calling on The Huffington Post second, in between the AP and Reuters.

CBS Radio's Mark Knoller, a veteran White House correspondent, said over Twitter it was “very unusual that Obama called on Huffington Post second, appearing to know the issue the reporter would ask about.”

Who ever heard of a staged press conference before? It’ s an outrage. This goes against every American political tradition. And don’t think The People haven’t noticed. Here’s a sampling of the comments:

Wow..Obama staging a question at a news conference...Say it ain’t so! Everything this buffoon does is staged and choreographed. He dances around things better than Fred Astair.

Of course the whole thing was staged, just like Obama’s town meetings, completely with fake questions and pre-scripted answers. He learned this scam from Bill Clinton. The only way Obama looks good answering questions is when the answers have been cleverly devised by someone else and memorized beforehand.

Wouldn’t you know it, the whole nefarious process can be traced back to Bill Clinton, that wicked serpent who got us all kicked out of Eden.

But wait a second. If memory serves, I seem to recall this exchange not so many years ago:

W: The risk of doing nothing, the risk of hoping that Saddam Hussein changes his mind and becomes a gentle soul, the risk that somehow — that inaction will make the world safer, is a risk I'm not willing to take for the American people.

We'll be there in a minute. King, John King. This is a scripted — (laughter.)

Q Thank you, Mr. President. How would — sir, how would you answer your critics who say that they think this is somehow personal?

Here’s how that press conference was described by one of Bush’s own propaganda ministers:

In the Washington Post, White House Communications director, Dan Bartlett, revealed that the White House knew of the questions in advance:

“[T]his White House uses news conferences more sparingly than other types of presidential events, because if you have a message you’re trying to deliver, a news conference can go in a different direction.”

“In this case, we know what the questions are going to be, and those are the ones we want to answer,” Bartlett said. “We think the public will see the thought and care and attention he’s given to a lot of the different questions that are being asked about the diplomatic side and the military side and the potential post-Iraq issue. These are all legitimate questions that he has answers for and wants to talk about.”

Whoopsie Daisy! Nice try, Drudge. Just keep throwing shit against the wall.

Cash For Clunkers

They’re breaking out the champagne again at the War Department:

House passes $106 billion war funding bill

(AP) — War-funding legislation survived a fierce partisan battle in the House on Tuesday, a major step in providing commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan the money they would need for military operations in the coming months.

The $106 billion measure, in addition to about $80 billion for military operations, provides for an array of other spending priorities, including $7.7 billion to respond to the flu pandemic and more than $10 billion in development and security aid for Pakistan and Iraq as well as countries such as Mexico and the nation of Georgia.

The bill also extends credit to the IMF and contains a so-called “cash for clunkers” provision, “which gives people vouchers of up to $4,500 to trade in their old cars and buy new ones with higher fuel efficiency…”

So, when you trim away all the fat, it’s only $80 billion for the military. But remember, this is a supplemental spending bill, which means it’s not part of the Pentagon’s normal budget. In essence, it’s an $80 billion dollar bonus.

Does the Pentagon really deserve a bonus? Let’s take a look at its record over the past sixty years and see. Bear in mind, I’m only counting the ‘big’ wars, not all of the ‘peace-keeping’ or ‘humanitarian’ missions, or silly show biz bombings like Libya or Sudan; nor am I making any judgment about the morality or necessity of these wars. I’m just viewing them from a simple standard of win or loss. Here goes:

Korea, tie; Vietnam, loss; Panama, win; Iraq War I, win; Serbia, win; Afghanistan, loss; Iraq War II: This Time It’s Personal, They Tried To Kill My Daddy, loss.

By my reckoning, that makes the War Department 3-3-1 at the very thing that justifies their limitless funding, fighting wars. Given this record, I think all talk about supplemental spending increases is, to use the Pentagon’s own style, highly premature at this stage of operations.

And it gets even worse:

Passage of the bill, which provides funds through the end of this fiscal year on Sept. 30, would bring to nearly $1 trillion the amount spent on the wars and other security matters since the Sept. 11 attacks. More than 70% of that has gone to Iraq, the Congressional Research Service said in an analysis.…

The Pentagon has said that without the bill the Army could start running out of war funds as early as July.

One trillion dollars over eight years and it’s still not enough, the Army could start running out of funds … They should move the Pentagon to Wall Street.

Cash for clunkers indeed.

Fortunately, the House debate over the bill wasn’t totally devoid of statemanship. Here’s what Dennis Kucinich had to say about it: “Another $106 billion, and all we get is a lousy war. Pretty soon that’s going to be about the only thing made in America: war.”

To which I can only say: Kucinich in 2012!

The Not-So-Great Generation

That would be us.

I had an angry rant prepared about the contrast between the Iranian people’s reaction to a fraudulent election and our own less than heroic response to one in 2000, and, it seems likely, 2004, but Chris Floyd stole my thunder:

Then again, the Iranians are in general a braver, bolder people than some other peoples we might mention, who in recent memory sat slack-jawed and supine when their franchise was stripped from them in broad daylight by powerful elites. The Iranian people have already overthrown one seemingly powerful and permanently entrenched regime in the last 30 years, and could well do so again -- or at least force the current regime to become more open and humane. In any case, the hundreds of thousands of ordinary Iranians who have taken to the streets, risking -- and in some cases, losing -- life and limb to demand their rights shame the bloated, bored, distracted masses of the American empire (and its British satrapy), who have watched numbly and dumbly as their liberties have been systematically dismantled, their public treasuries looted by plutocrats and war profiteers, and their own children thrown into murderous wars of aggression and occupation.…

I would add that the “bloated, bored, distracted masses” here in America are guilty of more than simple apathy. The fact is, your average American doesn’t really give two shits about democracy, freedom, or constitutional rights, nor will he risk his ass for such. We just aren’t like that. Period. All we really want is a chance to slither our way into that rich ten-percent of the population who owns everything, and we’ll abide any injustice, fraud or humiliation as long as we think there’s a possibility we can do so. If you keep the illusion of wealth and opportunity dangling in our faces, abstract notions of liberty and justice are negotiable and we won’t rock the boat. We worship Mammon, not Madison.

Memo To Iran

Memo to Iran: Get over it. Move on. Don’t play the blame game. There’s nothing to be gained by pointing fingers. The past is the past. Go forward. Now is the time to focus on solving the problems facing the Iranian people.

Best Wishes,

The United States House of Representatives, the United States Senate, the Supreme Court, Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, The Washington Post, The New York Times …

P.S. What’s the worst that could happen?

Third World America

Welcome to Third World America:

Rural Mich. counties turn failing roads to gravel

LANSING, Mich. (AP) - Some Michigan counties have turned a few once-paved rural roads back to gravel to save money.

More than 20 of the state’s 83 counties have reverted deteriorating paved roads to gravel in the last few years, according to the County Road Association of Michigan. The counties are struggling with their budgets because tax revenues have declined in the lingering recession.

Montcalm County converted nearly 10 miles of primary road to gravel this spring.

The county estimates it takes about $10,000 to grind up a mile of pavement and put down gravel. It takes more than $100,000 to repave a mile of road.

Reverting to gravel has happened in a few other states but it is most typical in Michigan. At least 50 miles have been reverted in the state in the past three years.

Here in California, Schwarzenegger is proposing to close state parks, abolish welfare programs and Cal Grants (which are state funded college grants), and gut money from education and health care. In my county, summer school classes have been cancelled this year. With any luck, we’ll soon be getting gravel roads, too.

Hell, why stop at gravel? Why not just go all out and return to dirt roads?

Meanwhile, the U.S. is probably going to squander another hundred billion for the Empire’s glorious crusades in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, and the only controversies about it are the earmarks that some congressmen are tacking on to the bill.

The Soviet Union was a bloated, militarised empire with a crumbling infrastructure too, and look how that turned out. The only difference was that they had to keep pace with our military build-up. What’s our excuse?

Hey Fellas, Have You Heard The News?

I just saw a stunning revelation from Pravda: “Bad girls are fun in parties and sex, but boring in family life.”

This changes everything. Here I am, fast approaching middle-age, and I have to re-evaluate my entire worldview:

Millions of girls that live on planet Earth and make men’s lives better, brighter and healthier, can generally be divided into two major categories: good girls and bad girls. Of course, if a man meets one of the girls from the second of the two categories, his life will get nerve-racking, dull and sick. An evaluation criterion is quite simple. It has to do with a stranger asking a girl for favors. A good girl will say a quick and categorical “no” while a bad one will ask the man “when”. There is a set of virtues and shortcomings both types of the girls are bestowed with.

Let us talk about the bad girls first and make a list of their unquestionable virtues.

Their ability to be great fun is on top of the list. They can party all night and they can party the next day too. They laugh a lot, they are fond of flirting. Anybody can feel like a professional lady-killer when hanging out with them.

Bad girls have an optimistic attitude to life. They are full of energy. They do not indulge in self-analysis. They do not tend to fall into a period of depression. Life is a never-ending show for them.

Bad girls are hungry for sex. They enjoy sexual experimentation. They will do anything they want and maybe more than you want them to when having sex with you. Their screams of joy will make you think you are really hung like a stud.

That’s the good news, but you knew there had to be a catch. Turns out those bad girls carry some pretty heavy baggage:

First, they can not be trusted. Indeed, these vultures are serial flirters and were made to seduce anything that moves. How the hell can they be trusted?

Second, they can be dangerous if they happen to be behind the wheel. They can be as wild and reckless driving a car as they are when making love. These girls are always unpredictable, they often end up in a company of junkies or rummies.

The author’s advice? Avoid the meretricious charms of those reckless driving, junky loving, hypersexual sirens and go for the good girls instead. Choose the broccoli over of the ice cream:

So you had better court the good ones. The good ones can vary as well but this is the truth: you can experience the precious moments of inner peace and comfort only when a good girl looks after you. She will takes care of you when you fall ill, she will miss you when you are out somewhere. Sex is not the top priority for good girls so you do not have to be a super lover.

Isn’t that a relief. It gets so tiring having to please women in bed. I just want one who gives me precious inner peace, cares for me when I’m sick, sits home and pines for me when I have to run to the store for cigarettes, and won’t nag me for orgasms.

A girl like that is unlikely to cheat on you. Stop worrying even if she is exceptionally pretty. Remember how she told you to beat it on the first date when you tried to make out with her after having a few drinks. She can discourage any guy in a similar way. Good girls are mostly stick to monogamous relationships.

If only Archie had known this before he dumped Betty and married that tramp Veronica, he could have saved himself a lot of pain. Alas, wisdom always comes too late in life to be of any use.

No Laughing Matter

We’ve invaded a country to rip off its resources, subjected its people to bombardment, kidnappings, rape and torture, and a comedian goes over to yuck it up with the troops. Does that strike you as a tad bit unseemly?

What if Chinese troops occupied San Francisco, turned the Presidio into a torture chamber, looted the de Young museum (or at least allowed it to happen because they were ordered to guard the financial district instead), and were building a gigantic, armed fortress in Golden Gate Park. Then, after six years of this, sent a comedian over who subsequently made jokes about all the steep hills and the damp fog, engaged in funny banter with the commanding general, and buttered-up the soldiers by calling them the best looking fighting force the world had ever seen?

What if all this was going on as car bombs were blowing up and killing people at the same time?

I’m a big Stephen Colbert fan, and I appreciate that he’s trying to help the morale of American soldiers. They are, apart from the Iraqis themselves, the biggest victims of the moral catastrophe called ‘Operation Iraqi Freedom’, which at best was naked theft, and at worst was George W. Bush’s wicked attempt to get his face carved on Mt. Rushmore. But this whole thing feeds into a deep, underlying militarism that pervades our language, outlook, and culture, which in turn enables the U.S. government to persist in vicious and costly imperial follies that will, eventually, bring this country down (if they haven’t already).

Here’s James Madison, writing in 1795:

Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes... known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few... [There is an] inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and... degeneracy of manners and of morals... No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.

Now look at the effusive praise we’re required to heap on our soldiers. Notice that saying, “Thank you for your service” has become standard etiquette when speaking to veterans (and which is uttered with the mechanical hollowness of a Safeway clerk telling you to have a nice day). And consider the continual reiteration that our soldiers are “defending our freedoms” when, at least in the case of Iraq, they most certainly are not. All of these seemingly benign displays of patriotism effectively place the army above criticism, which also, conveniently, places the Pentagon above criticism, allowing it to indulge in its bottomless need for more war, more money, more political power. Our patriotism and good manners are cynically turned against us so the Warfare State can rumble along, unimpeded by any significant opposition. We become damned by our virtues. It’s Madison’s “degeneracy of manners and of morals” in action.

This also serves to relieve us of the guilt we all share for acquiescing in the abuse and maltreatment our soldiers. Despite all the jingoistic noise to the contrary, this country has a long and shameful history of mistreating its veterans, from Shay’s Rebellion to the suppression of the Bonus Army, right on down to the epidemic rates of alcoholism and suicide among Iraq veterans and which the Pentagon is only belatedly recognizing as a problem. We know, down inside, that our soldiers our being used as de facto mercenaries for venal contractors or pawns in the service of grubby political aims that have nothing to do with our freedom or security. So we ostentatiously brag about how we support the troops, stick a magnet on the back of our car, and convince ourselves that we really are good patriots. It’s like a man who constantly tells his wife he loves her to conceal the fact the he’s having an affair.

Meanwhile, have you heard about the $100 billion dollar military appropriations bill to fight the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq currently going through Congress? Maybe you have, maybe you haven’t, but I bet you’ve heard about Stephen Colbert getting his head shaved.

[Cross-posted at Bad Attitudes.]

Not That They Deserve It …

Not that they deserve it, but I have a helpful hint for Republicans. If they want to regain some credibility with the American people and get back on the right side of history (or maybe even just learn to walk upright), all they have to do is what comes naturally to them, look backward, but not to Reagan, or Calvin Coolidge, but further back, to their supposed hero Teddy Roosevelt, who once said the following in a speech before Congress:

“When all is said and done, the rule of brotherhood remains as the indispensable prerequisite for the kind of national life for which we strive. Our aim is to recognize what Lincoln pointed out: The fact that there are some respects in which men are obviously not equal; but also to insist that there should be an equality of rights before the law, and at least an equality in the conditions under which each man obtains the chance to show the stuff that is in him when compared to his fellows.”

An equality of conditions and a level playing field, codewords in today’s degraded political discourse for liberalism or, shield the children, socialism. But there you have it, straight from the Rough Rider’s mouth.

Instead they turn to Newt ‘the Idea Man’ Gingrich, who announced last night to a gathering of right-wing morlocks that, “I am not a citizen of the world.” Now there’s an inspiring rallying cry. Well, tell us something we don’t know, Newt.

That was my altruistic act of public service for the day.

Special Thanks

Special thanks to Skippy for the gracious shout out today.

Many thanks, and welcome!

One Small Step …

I was sitting at the counter of a local coffee shop next to two heavy-set, blue-collar guys who were discussing politics. I couldn’t make out most what they said, but this came through loud and clear: “Rush Limbaugh is such an idiot. I can’t believe I used to listen to that guy.”

They’re Not Even Funny

What the hell is this all about? Did the National Review hold a contest at a local middle school to see who could come up with this week’s cover? I mean, regardless of whether you think this racist and offensive or not, it’s worst sin is that it’s just flat out fucking dumb. Honestly, this is just juvenile, mean and stupid. This is something Biff and Skip thought up in the locker room after practice.

Then again, the National Review is run by adolescents. Let’s not forget editor Rich Lowry’s immortal words from last October:

I’m sure I’m not the only male in America who, when Palin dropped her first wink, sat up a little straighter on the couch and said, “Hey, I think she just winked at me.” And her smile. By the end, when she clearly knew she was doing well, it was so sparkling it was almost mesmerizing. It sent little starbursts through the screen and ricocheting around the living rooms of America. This is a quality that can’t be learned; it’s either something you have or you don’t, and man, she’s got it.

As for the racism, the wee lads are just following Daddy Buckley’s example, who in a 1957 article entitled, “Why The South Must Prevail,” wrote the following:

The central question that emerges . . . is whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not prevail numerically? The sobering answer is Yes–the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race. It is not easy, and it is unpleasant, to adduce statistics evidencing the cultural superiority of White over Negro: but it is a fact that obtrudes, one that cannot be hidden by ever-so-busy egalitarians and anthropologists.”

National Review believes that the South’s premises are correct. . . . It is more important for the community, anywhere in the world, to affirm and live by civilized standards, than to bow to the demands of the numerical majority.

Boys will be boys.

The Great Tension

One of life’s great pleasures is reading David Brooks’ column in the New York Times. It always gives me that rarified, disembodied form of pure cerebral joy that high-brows claim to experience when reading Marcel Proust. Take today’s offering, “The Chicago View.”

All smart analyses of the Obama administration begin with Chicago. That’s where the top members of the administration were tested and formed. The Chicago mentality is the one they take with them wherever they go.

That means they start with an awareness of diversity. The nation and the world are a bunch of jostling wards that have to be knit together. That means they are not doctrinaire. Chicagoans like to see themselves as pragmatists, not ideologues.

That means they contain both sides of The Great Tension. In Chicago, there is a tension between the lakefront and the neighborhoods inland. The lakefront tends to be idealistic, earnest and liberal. The neighborhoods are clever, cautious and Machiavellian. In all great endeavors, the Obama administration weaves together both of these tendencies.

Ah, The Great Tension, a uniquely Chicago phenomenon which, until David Brooks identified the concept, left sociologists struggling to explain how the same city could produce both Studs Terkel and Al Capone.

I’m having difficulty grasping the idea that the world is composed of “jostling wards that have to be knit together” because I’m originally from Los Angeles, where they have no awareness of diversity and everyone lives in perfect harmony. But that’s why I read David Brooks. He helps me grow.

This unique ‘Chicago View’ is the only thing that sufficiently accounts for the fact that Obama’s speech in Cairo seamlessly combined lofty idealism with gritty realpolitik; or, in Brooks’ formulation, the earnest, liberal, idealistic traits of the lakefront with the clever, cautious Machiavellianism of the inland neighborhoods (where, I presume, all the ethnic darkies dwell). Had Obama come from, say, Albuquerque, he may not have been able to achieve this magnificent synthesis.

But wait. I seem to recall Brooks referring to Obama as a ‘rootless cosmopolitan’ and a ‘sojourner’ who most definitely was not the product of any single political or cultural milieu, a fact which accounted for his “fantastic powers of observation.” What gives, Dave?

Hmmm, I think I sense a contradiction at the heart of the Brooksian Dialectic of the Great Tension. The world awaits a resolution to this most perplexing conundrum, but it need not wait long, because I think I’ve found one: David Brooks is just plain full of shit.

An Historic Day

Why is it so important to recall where we were on any given historic day? This seems to be the parlour game du jour on any famous anniversary. It was all the rage this morning on CNN (in addition to Obama’s Cairo speech), with Kyra Phillips announcing the twentieth anniversary of the Tienanmen Square massacre with the breathless excitement of someone declaring we’ve found a cure for cancer. “Where were you on that historic day?”

She reminded me of a sexier, kinkier, russet-haired version of Miss Nancy from Romper Room making sure we all knew that today was a BIG DAY!

So where was I?

Uh, I dunno. Going to work? Doing the laundry? Watching it happen on TV? (Bingo!) The same thing I do every day. Why ask? An individual’s immediate, perceptual experience of a given event may be important to them, but it isn’t really all that significant in a larger context, and it’s beyond tedious to hear about.

Just once, I’d like to hear some man-in-the-street testimonial of this sort that had some symbolic or metaphorical value:

Well, I was sitting at my breakfast nook eating Grape Nuts and doing a crossword puzzle, trying to figure out a seven letter word for masturbation that starts with ‘O’, when word came over the TV that the U.S. had captured Manuel Noriega. I stopped, stared at the television, marvelled at what a historic moment it was, and resumed eating. When my children came downstairs, I told them, “Look, kids, this is an historic day,” to which they brusquely replied, “Who cares?” “I hate history,” and “I can never remember dates.” That was that. I went back to my crossword, with terms like ‘Operation Just Cause’, ‘Pre-Dawn Vertical Insertion’ and ‘Operation Nifty Package’ jangling around my head when it suddenly hit me: Onanism! That was it! Onanism, a word I’d never heard outside of Bible study. Now, and for the rest of my days, I will associate the glorious climax of Operation Just Cause with defeating Panama and re-discovering a synonym for masturbation. Ah, yes, January 3, 1990, a magic day!

[cross-posted at Bad Attitudes.]