Not to become all F911, all the time...

But you really should read this Fahrenheit 9/11 review by a self described "ultra-conservative."

There were no screaming Bolsheviks (one viewer had an anti-animal rights T-shirt) or marijuana-scented bohemians in the crowd. This wasn't the sort of crowd you'd see at a Phish concert, or storming McDonald's at an anti-WTO rally. There were Wal-Mart customers, people who probably listen to country music (even Toby Keith), and even vote Republican. And they were PISSED – quietly, but palpably. A would-be political prisoner Martha Stewart would say, that's a good thing. And well overdue.

The reviewer went to a 1:30 matinee in Wisconsin, and it was sold out.

From a review in Virgina reported two sold out shows, and one breakup.

"Most people are positive" about the film, Hodges said. But there were a few, she said, who made it clear that they thought the film was anti-American, and at least one couple broke up because of a disagreement over its message, she said.

The woman was pro- Bush, Hodges said; the man was anti-Bush. In the middle of the 7:45 show, they began to argue. Several people witnessed the man rip a bracelet off the woman's arm, Hodges said, leaving pearls strewn about the theater.

The couple left and broke up outside Hodges' ticket booth.

Heh.

Ever get that hopeless feeling?

After watching "Fahrenheit 9/11", my thoughts strayed onto the highly partisan mood in this country and how such a mood can exist. Some of the facts Moore reveals about the Bush family's connections with the Saud's and bin Laden's are quite shocking and, unfortunately, quite true. He's got the documentation to prove his claims. But, to some people, since it's Michael Moore revealing these facts, that automatically invalidates them. It doesn't matter what solid documentation he provides to back up his assertions, the partisan mindset in this country has reached such feverish heights that many people outright refuse to listen to a thing Moore has to say.

I probably sound hypocritical complaining about partisanship. Anybody whose spent 10 seconds reading Loaded Mouth can accurately deduce that I'm one of the biggest partisans on the planet. But even when I try being as fair and balanced as possible, people still won't listen to me. For example, here's a few messages in a lengthy exchange with somebody who I thought had mischaracterized"Fahrenheit 9/11". They will be referred to as "Them". (No link, sorry.)

Them: It makes me feel sick to realize that a great many people who live in America will not only see his new "documentary", but believe in the false priniciples and ideas that this incompetent and just plain inflammatory "director" poses in that rubbish he wins awards for. The first clue that his work is less than true and balanced is the fact that his production company, which is owned by Disney, refused to market the movie based on the fact that it is to radical and biased. I have a lot of respect and tolerance for authors, actors, and politicians whose views differ from mine, because most of those personalities take time to research and back up their assertions with evidence. Micheal Moore does not. He simply uses anything he can find to add flame to his blatant attacks on our government and leaders. In layman's terms, he doesn't back us his shit. He should join the pantheon of slanderers and Rita Skeeter-esque reporters, not the ranks of respected political theorists and directors. If my words can convice anyone, don't go see his new film. If you do, wait until it is on video or in the Super Saver cinema, rather than let your hard-earned $8.00 go to a fanatical and already over-exposed blowhard.

tas: So are you going to see his film before criticizing it? If not, then you're simply not taking the "time to research and back up their [your] assertions with evidence."

Them: Having seen previews, I believe I know enough to make a confident decision.

tas: I disagree, you can't judge a book by it's cover. And having seen the film this afternoon, I can tell you that it's filled with plenty of factual information; often times Moore has the information documented, and he's willing to show those documents on screen. If that doesn't qualify as "backing up assertions with evidence", then I don't know what does in your view.

Them: I am merely stating the beliefs that I hold, similar to what Mr. Moore does in his work. If I had spewed revolting praise about the movie without having seen it, I probably would not have received half that comments that I did. It is merely the fact that I hold an opposing opinion that has made this an issue. If Mr. Moore really believed in changing the opinion of the American public, he would make himself and his work more open, clear, and well-researched. Resorting to Bush-bashing and tricks such as asking pro-war Congressmen to have their sons enlist does nothing but alienate more people from his message, which you claim is so universal and true. By telling me that I am a hypocrite, you only stop your opinion from going any further by pushing me away. True revolutionaries and teachers do nothing through shock, but rather brought about their change through a calm, balanced, and universal statement of their views.

Also, the "judging a book by it's cover mantra" has grown quite old.. how many people do I know that have dismissed Ann Coulter as a conservative bimbo without so much as a glance through Slander? Who have railed against Reagan's policy on AIDS without first consulting the exponential growth of funding to research during his presidency? Who dismissed the movie "The Passion" with a mere glance at its' "religious" content?

Sometimes, the cry of "hypocrisy!" will only echo back upon its' originator.

tas: Actually, all I said to you was that I saw the film this afternoon and not only was it filled with factual inofrmation, but Moore was able to provide a solid basis for his facts. You claimed that he had never done such, even though you admitted to not having seen the film yet.

If you would like to preach about how much of a hypocrite I am, be my guest. That's your right, and I can't change somebody's opinion about me. However, I would like to note that in your latest comment, you have placed a bunch of words in my mouth that I never actually said.

By telling me that I am a hypocrite, you only stop your opinion from going any further by pushing me away. True revolutionaries and teachers do nothing through shock, but rather brought about their change through a calm, balanced, and universal statement of their views.

I never explictly called you a "hypocrite". While I have pointed out actions that are hypocritical, I have done such in the least insulting manner possible; without resorting to name calling. As for how I have handled myself, when have I not been calm, balanced, and universal? I have merely pointed out that you should see Moore's film before saying things about it that aren't true. I have seen "Fahrenheit 9/11", and I'm telling you that your criticisms against the movie are false. How can you argue against my points when you have yet to see the film? Where's the basis for your statements?

As for pushing you away through "shock", where exactly have I been shocking? All I've asked you to do is see the film before spreading falsehoods about it. I can't see where this has any shock value to it.

What do you make of this? Was I purposely trying to insult this person? Was I "shocking"? Did I call them a "hypocrite"? Was there anything about my writing, or maybe I showed a lack of poor manners, that would have caused them to back away from my opinions?

If you see such, please point your examples out to me, because I don't see it. I tried being as open and non-insulting as possible, yet the message I get from "Them" is that it just doesn't matter. No matter how I handled myself, I'm wrong. I'm being insulting. I'm the one who hasn't been open.

This is the highly partisan mindset that I'm talking about. No matter how an opinion or, more importantly, a fact, is presented, people don't want to listen. If you disagree with them in anyway, you're guilty if being insulting. You're guilty of pushing them away when they refuse to even open their minds. It's like nobody dares to think for themselves anytmore.

How did things get to be this way? How come the message thread I was in tonight took place? It amazes me that common sense doesn't prevail at some point. Here's what the message thread should have been:

Them: [insert slam piece about F911 here]
tas: Actually, Moore backs up his factual assertions with documentation.
Them: Oh, really? Maybe I should see the movie before saying he doesn't.

But instead, I'm the bad guy. Why? And don't get me wrong, the "why?" isn't about me, and it isn't about Michael Moore; it isn't about anybody in general. I'm asking why this partisan mindset exists. Why can't people who disagree with each other on politics hold a rational discourse on the matter anymore?

What, no nipple clamps?

Fahrenheit 9/11

I took the first opportunity I could to see this movie - 12:45 matinee showing. I'm not going to post my full thoughts on it until Monday because I don't have time to compose them until tomorrow, and weekends are typically the days when this blog receives its least amount of traffic. I don't want my review of Fahrenheit 9/11 to get buried. But, a few quickies:

* Yes, this is a must-see movie.

* Even if you already know most if the information Moore details, it's still a powerful film.

* I plan on calling as many friends as possible and dragging them to it this weekend.

* Is it biased? Yes, and no. Moore reveals things that are simply, undeniably, facts that should not be ignored. To the people who seek to label Moore as biased, perhaps they should ask themselves why Republicans refuse to discuss what he has no problems with airing.

* It took a lot for me to keep from crying at some points.

* The theater was much too packed for a 12:45, Friday afternoon matinee. I still had room to sit next to an empty seat, but that's probably because I was in the first row - who wants to sit there? But it was my only option, and I'll be nursing a sore neck at work tonight.

* If this film can pack a Friday afternoon matinee showing, I wouldn't be surprised if it made $15-20 million this weekend. Trust me, Fahrenheit 9/11 is going to be huge.

From the "I can't believe I just read this" department

Why do people have a problem with the truth?

A federal judge offered his "profound regret" Thursday for saying President Bush's rise to power was similar to that of Mussolini and Hitler.

Judge Guido Calabresi, 71, of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan, drew an audible gasp from lawyers attending Saturday's convention of the American Constitution Society in Washington, according to the New York Sun, which quoted the speech in Monday's editions. ...

Calabresi, a former dean of Yale Law School, was quoted saying the U.S. Supreme Court "put somebody in power" when a ruling it made in December 2000 settled the dispute over whether Bush had defeated Al Gore.

"In a way that occurred before but is rare in the United States ... somebody came to power as a result of the illegitimate acts of a legitimate institution that had the right to put somebody in power," Calabresi said. "The reason I emphasize that is because that is exactly what happened when Mussolini was put in by the king of Italy.

"The King of Italy had the right to put Mussolini in, though he had not won an election, and make him prime minister," the judge continued. "That is what happened when Hindenburg put Hitler in."

Calabresi told the lawyers: "I am not suggesting for a moment that Bush is Hitler. I want to be clear on that, but it is a situation which is extremely unusual."

Calabresi went on to say the public should expel Bush from office to cleanse the democratic system. "That's got nothing to do with the politics of it. It's got to do with the structural reassertion of democracy," Calabresi was quoted saying.

The sad thing is that everything Judge Calabresi said is true. Why aren't we allowed to say the truth in this country without apologizing afterwards? God, I'll just come right out and say it: Bush lead a coup. After he led a coup, he committed actions and signed bills that completely circumvent the Constitution, the backbone of our law and governmental system. How are these not the actions of your typical, cookie cutter dictator?

Going to Yurp

Work has been busy and I'm very, very tired, two factors which don't translate into a lot of blogging. So why not post a funny cartoon to fill up some space? From the Guardian:

"Full Metal Sovereignty"

Foreign Aid Watch dissects our offer of "power" to Iraq's new "government."

Full metal jacket refers to a lead bullet that is covered with a jacket of a harder metal (usually copper). 'Full Metal Sovereignty' refers to a military regime with a very, very thin covering of democracy such as the o­ne that is quietly being imposed in Iraq. A definition of sovereignty is a government that is free from external control. The covering of democracy o­n the military regime in Iraq is so thin that it is quite transparent to the scrutiny of anyone that is so daring as to disbelieve the words of George Bush.

Go read the whole thang.

Victims in Sudan? Fuck'em!

The Senate, in a 98-0 vote, passed a $419 billion Pentagon budget for next year. The AP article includes this final paragraph:

It also used a voice vote to add $95 million for victims of warfare and famine in Sudan and Chad, in an amendment sponsored by Senator Mike DeWine, Republican of Ohio, and others. But by a vote of 54 to 44, it rejected an effort by Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., Democrat of Delaware, to provide $118 million more.

I realize that $95 million is a lot of money, but when you have $419 billion to play with, another $118 million is a drop in the bucket. But in the face of a huge defense budget to pay for a couple of bullshit wars, I guess asking for a drop in the bucket to contribute to humanitarian aid for one of the world's worst crisises is just asking too much. Long live those rape camps.

I could criticize Cheney for dropping an F-bomb...

If I didn't have 14 such instances of the word on the page you're currently looking at. Hell, Cheney used my favorite word. :)

The irony is just too much

Michael Moore names his latest documentary after a novel which describes a society where the government burns books, saying "Fahrenheit 9/11" is the temperature at which freedom burns. I think we can safely assume that book burning by a totalitarian regime is a form of censorship. Now the modern book burners are asking the government to stop Fahrenheit 9/11 commercials from airing on television. The fact that they may be successful keeps this from becoming a laughing matter. But the real story is how their actions prove the premise behind Moore's film to be correct.

Furthermore, the fact that a complaint of this nature can be taken seriously by the FEC is absolutely fucking ridiculous. Moore isn't running advertisments for a PAC or non-profit group, he's hawking his latest movie. And while this movie heavily skewers the Bush administration, he also points jabs at the Democrats. Hell, in the first minute of the trailer, Moore criticizes the entire Congressional body for giving us the PATRIOT act. Last time I checked, both Republicans and Democtrats voted en masse for that piece of trash!

What's next? Maybe books critical of the current government will be illegal to publish until after the election? Any television show that has political overtones could be pulled off the air? Lord knows the media is already kept in their place. Once we start censoring the arts, when does it end? And who will be left to tell us the truth?

I'm going to post something this morning, I swear

Work has been rather hectic. Not busy-busy, but just enough mistimed [16:23 update: "Mistimed"? Is that even a word? What the fuck was I talking about? Somebody tell me, because even I forget right now.] crapola flowing in to break ones concentration. You know how it is.

...Now it's rather busy, judging from the fact that it just took me an hour to type out a 3 line paragraph.

...And now I can't get back to that draft of my 3 line paragraph to add to it. Sigh. I give up.

After today's attacks, what else is there to say?

Saturday night, I'll be attending a going away party for a friend of a friend being deployed to Baghdad. And, you know, I don't know what to say. The countdown is now at six days before the supposed handover of power, and not only are attacks still being launched, but the resistance seems to be more powerful than ever.

Then I have to read things like this:

Many of the dead yesterday wereIraqi policemen of whom there are 89,000, mostly ill-equipped. One of the many extraordinary aspects of the US occupation is that after a year of heavy military expenditure Iraqi policemen still lack effective submachine guns, bullet-proof vests and armoured vehicles. Even farmers are often better armed than the police.

And are we even going after the right people?

The US has long pushed the idea that a Jordanian called Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, linked to al-Qa'ida and supposed head of the Tawhid and Jihad movement, is the organising genius behind the suicide attacks. This may be so but the evidence for his role is still slight, consisting of a long letter he is believed to have written and statements on Islamic websites. Many members of the present Iraqi government say they believe that Syrian and Iranian intelligence play a much bigger role in the anti-US campaign than is generally appreciated.

Does anybody in the Bush administration even have a clue anymore? Do we even know who we are fighting? What we are doing? When we'll get out of this quagmire so I don't have to worry about friends, and friends of friends, coming home injured or worse?

...and I can't believe he just said this: '"We don't think these attacks were coordinated," Mr Allawi said.' Uhm, what? What? I'm glad we appointed an Iraqi PM with such smarts! God, this whole situation is FUBAR.

So it wasn't about the oil...

Yeah. Right.

According to documents posted on its own web site, the CPA's little-known Program Review Board (PRB) has quietly committed billions of dollars in Iraq's oil revenues to new contracts that critics say will enrich U.S. and British corporations while limiting the amount of revenue Iraq's new interim government will have at its disposal when it assumes authority from the CPA on June 30.

Installing another murderer in power

John Negroponte is officially Bush's ambassador to Iraq. Just in case your memory is fuzzy, I printed some information about Negroponta in April:

Negroponte served as Reagan's Ambassador to Honduras from 1981 to 1985. He was personally responsible for carrying out the Reagan administration's illegal policy of training and arming Contra rebels inside Honduras for the purpose of overthrowing Nicaragua's Sandinista government. He also oversaw the build-up of the Honduran military, while turning a blind eye to their campaigns of death and torture.

This was a period when the Honduran military's notorious Battalion 316, trained by the CIA, killed or "disappeared" at least 184 political opponents. Hundreds of articles in Honduran newspapers reported on the brutality of the government's death squads.

International human rights organizations condemned Honduras. Negroponte's predecessor had warned him about the alarming increase in extrajudicial military executions and torture of political opponents. Yet Negroponte insists, still today, there were no death squads in Honduras and, if there were, he knew nothing about them.

Maybe he can grow a mustache so we can call him "Negddam".

Erk...

My logs tell me I've received hits referred from iaea.org - the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Uhm.. Hi. I swear I don't have any weapons. Honest!

Wal-Mart's rolling back prices.. And morals!

It's true, just look at their new mascot!:

:)

But seriously, in honor of the sex discrimination lawsuit against Wal-Mart, Green Voicemail has printed some quotes from Wal-Mart management to female employees who dared to try moving up the ladder:

A male manager in South Carolina told a woman worker that "God made Adam first, so women would always be second to men."

A female manager in Arizona was told she got paid less than a less qualified man because she "didn't have the right equipment."

God, what a bunch of fucking assholes.

If the Bush administration supports a beheading, will the media make a sound?

Apparently not.

Amnesty International today condemned the reported extrajudicial beheading of Taleban prisoners by government soldiers in southern Afghanistan this week. The organization stated it was appalled at the grotesque and retaliatory nature of the incident which reportedly occurred during "anti-Taleban" military activities in southern Afghanistan.

Beheading by Afghan government soldiers... Do they mean the government that we installed there? They're beheading people? Yet we're shocked when we hear about another beheading in Iraq? Is anybody ready to point out the hypocrisy of this situation, or will I continue to ask rhetorical questions?

[05:46 Update - Looks like the Afghan troops doing the beheading were trained by the US.]

Burning the Green Flag (or, "How the mighty have fallen, part 3")

As a (still) registered Green who voted for David Cobb in the primary, I hate to point this out but Cobb is full of shit.

But the Green Party is here to stay. We're getting larger, stronger, and better organized with every election cycle and we're electing more people to office and when elected, greens are demonstrating they can governor effectively.

Larger? Stronger? Better organized? Your party is heading into a convention that's poised to tear all that "organization" into itty-bitty pieces. At the forefront of this inadvertent attempt to destroy the only third party in America that matters is the party's former standard bearer, Ralph Nader. His campaign, which has been endorsed by the Reform Party, who were originally started by a corporatist Texas billionaire and ran Pat Fucking Buchanan for President last election, has received so many signatures from Republicans trying to get him on the ballot in various states that I'm beginning to wonder how many donations he has received from such a base. Now that Nader has tapped a leading Green, Peter Camejo, to be his running mate, this places an actual Green Party member in the position of being involved with a campaign that has received unquestionable support from Republicans whose sole aim is to keep Bush in office. And now the Republican backed Nader/Camejo team is trying to take over the Green Party.

"Organized" my ass. The only way the Greens can show organization in this situation is by telling Nader to go fuck himself if intends to keep Republicans and former Buchanan voters has his friends and allies.

How the mighty have fallen, part 2

The Providence Phoenix, my local "alternative" weekly paper, used to be my favorite regular read. They also had great articles on politics, added a new spin to state political events, and had great arts coverage. But these days, after seeing too many covers featuring such "artists" as Britney Spears and Avril Lavigne, I've had trouble taking the paper seriously. I guess having the web at my fignertips, enabling me to read about news a week before the Phoenix comments on it, helps.

But the Phoenix should at least keep their website updated with current events. Yet when I click on the "Movies" section, there's not one mention of the hottest movie currently under the sun - Fahrenheit 9/11. For a paper with a liberal agenda, that's a shame. If their coverage is going to lack this much, all while trying to make out people like Britney to be "serious" musical artists, then I still see no reason to pick up the Phoenix.

How the mighty have fallen

One of the worst things a music fan can go through listening to a shitty album put out by one of their favorite artists. Enter Communique's "Poison Arrows," the latest shitty album I purchased that will go on the bottom of my CD rack, never to be touched until I move again.

Communique is borne from the ashes of American Steel, one of my favorite punk bands from the past 5 years. Some fans muse that Communique is simply, "American Steel with a keyboard player," but this album proves them wrong. This is American Steel who forgot how to write a song. The last two American Steel albums were just that - albums. There's a difference between an album and a mish-mash of random songs thrown together on a CD and called an album; the latter seems to be the norm for most bands these days. But American Steel put out albums. They put out cohesive units of songs that fit together, that demanded you listen to them in their proper order.

"Poison Arrows," though, is not an album. Not only do the songs not fit together on one CD, but most of the songs don't fit together as individual, standalone units. Besides the single, "Perfect Weapon," every song sounds as confused as the album as a whole. The real painful part is listening to the potential of a great album slip through the cracks; every song has a great intro and sounds spectacular for the first 15 seconds, then it just falls apart. The choruses, a strong part in American Steel songs that made them so damn catchy, are virtually undefined on this album. You can't understand anything Rory is singing about. And the keyboards simply need to go; some keyboard parts are worthy of guest appearences on an "Atom and his Package" album, which is the only place where they belong.

I'm very, very disappointed. I just blew 15 bucks on this shit? It makes me wish record stores had a return policy. If anyone wants a free album, let me know. Otherwise, I may use this as a basis to gather up some CDs I don't want and sell them to the used CD store down the road.

Arg. [mumbles something incoherently]

Try as I might, because sometimes I need it just for its value as a distraction, my mind isn't on the news this morning. I can't focus. I'm just being moody again, which I seem to do quite a lot. It'll pass.

Saddam-a-thon

So much for the US handing Saddam over to that supposedly sovereign Iraqi government.

Did Bush authorize torture against prisoners?

This may not be a smoking gun, but it comes pretty damn close.

"I accept the legal conclusion of the Attorney General and the Department of Justice that I have the authority to suspend Geneva (conventions) as between the United States and Afghanistan," Bush wrote. "I reserve the right to exercise this authority in this or future conflicts."

Don't they have better things to write about?

Or, for the matter, to spend their money on? The AP commissioned a poll a week ago to see which president had a more favorable rating with the American public, Clinton or Reagan. And after a week of nothing but Reagan, Reagan, and more Reagan on the news, Reagan won! Gee, what a fucking surprise!

Honestly, why did the AP even conduct this poll? Do they expect the results to somehow be unbiased while flags are still flying at half staff? Jesus Fucking Christ. Whatever editor authorized this and let the story go on the wires should be fucking fired for being a fucking dipshit.

Dirty dirty dirty

Toxic pollution is up by 5 percent. And I've been wondering why my throat is sore. (Stop thinking about that smart ass remark, perv.)

Here's a surefire sign of the apocalypse

The Tampa Bay Devil Rays are currently riding a 12 game winning streak, they're in third place, and they're winning percentage is almost at .500. WTF?

...is gonna get you

There's never been a time in my life where my belief in karma is as strong as it is now.

Fark Headline of the Day

"Much like Reagan himself, Reagan dime idea 'pretty much dead'"

I can't believe I'm reading this

Welcome to the police state.

Here's how the law would work. Police, at their discretion, could order motorists during a traffic stop to undergo a drug test, most likely a urine test. If the driver's urine tests positive for prior pot use then he or she would automatically be charged and eventually found guilty of the criminal offense of driving under the influence of drugs -- even if the pot in question was consumed weeks earlier. Under the law, the fact that the driver is not impaired is irrelevant; the only "evidence" necessary is the positive test result.

What if this legislation, H.R. 3922, passes in both houses of Congress? Will we all have to submit to piss tests after getting pulled over for not wearing our seat belt?

National Perpetual Fund Drives

It seems like everytime I turn on my local NPR station, they are having another fund drive. Their news coverage hasn't improved at all, and now since they are begging for money every minute of the day, there's even less news, which in turn leaves me less of a reason to donate. It's come to the point where I can flip the dial to a commercial station and get more news; I'll hear the same exact national news, and the local news coverage is much better. Maybe NPR should focus less on money grubbing and more an doing their actual jobs.

If it was worth printing once...

In honor of Connecticut's governor finally resigning, I'm reposting this gem from 12/19/03. It caused some fits of giggles over at Information Virus: "you gotta read this, slowly, while not drinking any fluids that might shoot out your nose."

This article is beyond belief. I have to quote the whole thing and make fun of it.

Corruption claim governor says he was called by God
By David Rennie
(Filed: 19/12/2003)

The governor of the strait-laced New England state of Connecticut has rejected calls for his resignation over corruption allegations, saying he is in direct contact with God. [tasnote: It gets better.]

In a performance worthy of a fallen "televangelist" John Rowland, who has admitted accepting favours and gifts from powerful businessmen, defended his position by saying the Almighty had called to him "loud and clear" in his "adversity".[tasnote: ?????? WTF? I quoted this to my coworkers just to make sure I'm not nuts, and they have no clue what the governor said, either. In his adversity? What? I honestly have no clue what this means. This guy should step down becuase he doesn't know fucking English.]

Mr Rowland, a Republican who faces a federal inquiry into the awarding of lucrative state contracts, spoke flanked by local soldiers recently returned from Iraq.

He hailed the capture of Saddam Hussein, conceding that the operation did not involve any troops from his state, but adding: "It could have been any one of our Connecticut servicemen or women." [tasnote: I believe this is called trying to change the subject. And failing.]

He declared that such heroism "puts everything in perspective real quick". [tasnote: Actually, this is called being an asshole.]

At the same public appearance, before a sympathetic audience of businessmen and lobbyists [tasnote: You know, I just can't let this one pass without a comment. The governor has already admitted to the corruption, yet his audience of lobbyists and businessmen, the same group of people who paid for service to his summer home, are reported as being sympathetic?! Jesus Christ! Can we at least point out that these people are in knowing support of a criminal, and this is WRONG?!], the governor's wife delivered her own version of the poem The Night Before Christmas, in which she predicted that Father Christmas would deliver coal, rather than presents, to a local newspaper which unmasked her husband as lying about who paid for expensive repairs to their lakeside cottage.[tasnote: OK, this just goes beyond ridiculous. This is over the top. There's no word in the English language to describe this situation, but I'll make in attempt by quoting the governor: "Adversity."]

In the poem, which drew gasps from the audience [tasnote: Remember, the sympathetic audience!], Mrs Rowland compared staff at the Hartford Courant newspaper to "grinches who have stolen our tree". Her parody went on to describe a Christmas wish "for the man next to me: a new year that is peaceful and refreshingly free of rumours and hearsay that do nothing but smother the positive works we should do for each other". [tasnote: Thanks for addressing the issues involved in the situation, bitch. Let me translate since this couple seems to be English-impaired: "We did something wrong, but you should ignore that because we do good things while we ripoff the taxpayers with a smile!]

Connecticut, a haughty sort of place, is not accustomed to finding itself in the same lists as Louisiana or New Jersey, where corruption is more or less taken for granted among state politicians. Mr Rowland, a three-term governor, has vowed to remain in office despite being caught lying this month when he insisted that he paid for work at his cottage, including the installation of a hot tub.

Several of his aides also face inquiries, including a deputy chief of staff who pleaded guilty to steering state contracts to firms in exchange for cash and gold, some of which he buried in his backyard. [tasnote: Buried gold in his backyard? If this is indicative of the mentality of the people the governor had for his aides, this alone is enough to call for his removal.]
[EoF]

And I thought that the Rhode Island political scene was comical.

Bush doesn't care if more people go homeless

And if he did, he wouldn't cut funding for Section 8 housing, thus creating more homeless people.

This is so fucking awesome

The 94 year old, and indefatigable, Granny D will be running to become New Hampshire's next senator.

Nader goes Green

Earlier this year, I predicted that Nader wouldn't be a factor in the upcoming presidnetial race because there was now way he could launch a grassroots efforts to net the signatures he needed to get on the ballot in many states.

Technically, I wasn't wrong. But on my main point about Nader not being a factor, I'll probably be very, very wrong.

Nader recently annouced his running mate: Peter Camejo. This name may not be familiar to you, but you're also not a former member of the RI Green Party's Coordinating Committee. I have such status, so I can tell you that Mr. Camejo's name is huge among Green Party activists around the country. They all know his name, and they all love him. Hell, I'm not going to badmouth the man; from what I gather, he's a nice guy who would make a fine vice president.

So, what importance does this have if Nader is running a campaign independent of the Green Party? Here's why:

This year, the party's strategy has pundits guessing: more than 40% of delegates are either uncommitted or pledged to "none of the above," an option the party gave voters in several Green primaries. As a result, Greens hold the only major convention whose outcome won't be known until delegates actually vote (on Saturday, June 26).

Even though David Cobb "won" the most delegates in Green Party primaries, Nader just made himself the favorite.

If Nader wins the Greens nomination this weekend, he'll be on the ballot in 22 states.

I know I sound like a traitor complaining about Nader simply being on the ballot, but this is a problem. We all know what Bush is capable of if he's elected to a second term, and he has to lose this election. Even if it means propping John Kerry as our next president. We can fight Kerry's policies after he's elected, but in the meantime, we have to make sure he wins the election. Nader will sap votes from his campaign. It's Republicans who are signing his petitions to get him on the ballots. He's not going to sap votes away from Bush, he must realize this. I just wish he would admit this and bow out of the the campaign before he causes some real damage.

On that "connection" between Iraq and al-Qa'ida

Ivan Eland says it best:

If mere meetings between functionaries are sinister, then U.S. envoy Donald Rumsfeld’s friendly meeting in the early 1980s with Saddam Hussein, just after Saddam had used poison gas against the Iranians, may take the prize.

Don't call it a prequel

Over in Afghanistan, a lack of security risks flawing their elections. This lack of security is partly due to the growing strength of the Taliban. (Remember them?) Just something to keep in mind while bombs exploding outside of Iraqi police stations are buried in the back of the "A" section.

From the land of rape and genocide

Unfortunately, the situation in Sudan hasn't disappear. It has escalated and spread into the neighboring Chad.

I wonder if NAMBLA has been biblically ordained

The Catholic Church is still supports priests who molest children.

Catholic priests accused of sexually abusing children are hiding from authorities abroad, often with the assistance of church officials, according to an extensive newspaper investigation. The Dallas Morning News has conducted a yearlong investigation of priests who are accused of sexually abusing minors, finding that they avoid law enforcement, often with the help of church officials, by moving from country to country. In some cases, the church leaders who participated in moving accused priests were also accused of molesting children themselves. Police and prosecutors in many cases failed to take basic steps to thwart them. Furthermore, “dozens” of priests accused of sexual abuse of minors in the United States have moved on to positions in ministries abroad.

Maybe somebody needs to fuck the Pope up the ass to get this shit to stop. Pardon my crudeness, but honestly, what the fuck? Could you think of anything sicker than this story? Priests have been caught with their pants down before, and the Catholic Church was caught helping them avoid the law. Given the media attention and all this shit about God, sin, hell, lake of fire, etc., one would figure that the Catholic's wouldn't be up to their old tricks again. Guess again. Is there a book in the New Testament where Jesus says it's OK to molest little boys? Have I missed something here?

Pictures!

Click on Wal-Mart's new logo to check them out.

So much to do, so much to say

I have a lot of catching up to do right now, not just with news and the blog, but with everything in my life. I haven't even been able to read everything Matt posted to this site in the past week yet, but I'm sure he did a reat job. :) Barring any major catastrophes happening at work, I should retun to full blogging speed tomorrow morning.