George Gets His Pee Pee Whacked

Whaddaya know? It turns out the granddaddy of all the Emperor’s “completely” legal programs is unconstitutional after all. Who woulda thunk it?

The Supremes’ 5-3 ruling puts – albeit temporarily – the kibosh on military tribunals for Gitmo detainees. Why temporarily? Simple, the Emperor has a long history of disregarding laws based on personal whim and an even longer history of not leaning from his mistakes. A brighter man would assess the situation and say, “You know, I might have just gotten a little carried away there. Perhaps this Constitution thingee deserves a fresh look now that the courts have handed me my ass.”

Could you ever imagine Shrub thinking something like that? I didn’t think so.

No, George will piddle ever-onward, as determined as ever that God and Dick Cheney are on his side and have endowed him with the superhuman ability to see and know all. He’ll stroll on up Capitol Hill for a closed door session with the other raving right wing loons and emerge with freshly-minted legislation that says, “yup, he’s the Emperor, sure ’nuff.”

It doesn’t really matter if the new law is equally unconstitutional, because by the time it fights its way back to SCOTUS, he’ll be back on the ranch in Crawford basking in the reflected, but distorted, light of his glorious reign. Let’s put it this way, the GITMOsters can stop packing their Korans for a trip back to the madras. That trip will be postponed for many years to come. And, if I were them, I wouldn’t bank on the Jailer-in-Chief coming through with his heartfelt desire to shut Gitmo down either. Even if he does, they’ll only be bundled onto an unmarked airplane on it’s way to some other penal garden spot – perhaps Cheney’s “undisclosed location” for all I know – where they’ll still be detained and no one will know where they are. I can see the Smirking Chimp pantomiming locking his lips and thrwoing away the key as I write this.

Some view this latest ruling as an indictment of Brother Chickenhawk’s other self-proclaimed “legal” intelligence programs, but there’s a high probability they’ll be disappointed as well. It’s still a long way before the courts test the legality of warrantless wiretapping, banking surveillance, and God knows what else. Meantime, Lord Bush and his Cabal can, and will, continue to bleed the Constitution to death from a series of small cuts. By the time he’s done, the Constitution will be reduced to a single amendment in the Bill of Rights – “All hail Master Bush and all who glorify him.” We’ll be lucky to get out of this without the inscriptions on the face of quarters changing to “In Cowpoke We Trust”.

I really do wish I felt less cynical about this – but hey, I’m a Daily Show watcher and we all know what that means. The Skater-in-Chief has repeatedly shown his uncanny knack for seizing defeat from the jaws of victory and I suspect this time will be no different. Some of my weak-kneed and weak-minded countrymen have already begun creeping back to the fold – proving once again that people will do the dumbest things if you tell them flags should be fireproof.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not averse to seeing the idiot get his pee pee whacked, I’ve just seen him enjoy it a time too many.

So there you have it. Our liberties are falling like trees in the George W. Bush National Forest and we’re being led by a man who has concrete where his brain should be. When will people stop frittering away their precious Constitutional legacy based on advice from a smirking Alfred E. Neuman lookalike? When will they stop allowing the terrorists to win at the very game they always planned – destroying our way of life? When will Americans grow backbones to resist this sort of chicanery? Never, unless someone does something, so it might as well be me.

I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it any more!

Jellyfish of the world unite! Forward float!

One Man’s Comedy is Another Man’s Threat to Society

Jon Stewart and the Daily Show are a threat to America. That very odd phrase is being bandied about in the wake of research showing that 18-24 year old viewers get most of their news there and as a result, have become cynical about politics.

I haven’t read the report, so I can’t comment on it. But, I have heard the talking heads pontificate about it and their logic seems a little flawed.

One guest on MSNBC’s Scarborough Country suggested that 18-24ers are cynical because of the Daily’s clear left wing bias. He contended that Jon is leading these young adults down the primrose path of anti-politics where people don’t vote, people don’t believe in politicians, and people view much of what they hear as just one more damnable pack of lies. Seems like a logical conclusion to me, but what do I know?

Somehow Stewart accomplishes this by conducting fake interviews and having good hair – a description that fits most of the mainstream anchorbots as well. Remember, Stewart has been a Time magazine coverboy (“eat my dust Anderson Cooper”), frequent target of Bill O’Reilly, and responsible for coaxing CNN to unload the walking bow tie that is Tucker Carlson. You can’t buy power like that!

One particular piece of oddball supporting evidence was CBS’s momentary flirtation with pairing Stewart along with someone else as Evening News co-anchors before they decided on Smilin’ Katie Couric. The talking head felt this would blur the line between news and “infotainment” so severely that these young, impressionable people would no longer be able to distinguish real news from faux news. I suppose there is some imperical evidence of this happening. Exhibit A – Fox News watchers.

Through the entire droning interview, the implications were clear. Most 18-24 year olds are incapable of telling fact from obvious fiction, they’ve become cynical because someone tells them a few jokes, and someone should be investigating what should be done about it – though he wasn’t stupid enough to suggest who or what.

Here’s my proposal. Jon tell more jokes. We need more cynicism. Young adults, remember Jon isn’t real. Goofy Scarborough guest, look at the actions of politicians and tell me with a straight face that you’re not cynical too.

Now, on to something important and non-cynical, the Flag Burning Amendment!

Tech Tags:

Do Unto Others

My recent post on Gay Pride Day festivities generated a little heat at Bring It On. “Sandy” said she found the event “revolting” and cited her belief in the Bible as justification. I’m not surprised at comments like hers. In fact, they’re depressingly predictable and Sandy’s followed a rather predictable path. However, they did get me thinking about religious arguments and how they play out.

I don’t think anyone can seriously deny the Bible, Koran, Torah, and most other religious books are great works of literature. They are full of stories designed not only to entertain, but also teach, and that’s what makes them so amazingly successful. I also don’t think that anyone can seriously deny that most of the events they chronicle have at least some grounding in fact, even if they’ve been coated in a heavy metaphorical layer. Like the Constitution, they are infinitely malleable and subject to almost any interpretation. That is both their beauty and weakness.

Proof of this ability to interpret diversely is shown by the believers themselves. They have endless arguments, and sometimes wars, over who’s interpretation is right or wrong and all seem to believe God is directly behind whatever interpretation they espouse. Fundamentalist Christians have the same slavish allegiance to their principles as fundamentalist Muslims. Each claims ironclad proof the other is an infidel and there’s not much objective evidence to prove the point either way. Meanwhile, they kill each other and drag the rest of us along for the ride.

While the religious are certainly free to say what they want, it seems to me there’s always a fatal flaw in their arguments – they almost never include clear logic. I can’t count the number of times that the more zealously religious accuse their enemies of something that is wholly in their own head. For example, Sandy seems to think that gays are out to “inherit the kingdom of God”. That statement seems to suggest there is a gay plot to take over Sandy’s religious beliefs when I doubt any gay person wants to be part of her religious circle anyway.

Christian zealots often claim to “love the sinner, but hate the sin” while in the next breath saying the most vile things about the sinner. Verbally, and sometimes physically, assaulting someone you love seems a odd to me. How can someone “love” the sinner if their position is that the sinner is the scourge of the Earth?

Religious discussions often alight on the idea of the zealous being offended by the sinners. I could lay an equal claim to be offended by their words, but I would never demand they not be allowed to say them. In fact, this is a principle I learned during my own religous education – “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”.

It seems a shame to me that belief systems created with a general sense of goodwill have become so perverted. It’s a shame that those like Sandy have become so close-minded and hateful. And the biggest shame of all is that their own perversions are the biggest threat to their beliefs. The great religious books are full of cautionary tales about the consequences of acting this way. It’s just a pity the zealous don’t read them a little more often. Perhaps if they did, we’d live in a world where the principles of all religions could carry the day and make it a better, more wholesome place for all of us.


Tech Tags: