Saturday, March 06, 2004

Horse With No Name

Well I'm off for a bit, and I haven't posted anything this morning so I wanted to leave you with something. So here are the lyrics Horse with No Name by America.

Do they hold a clue as to where I am going? Only the Shadow knows.

Horse With No Name

On the first part of the journey
I was looking at all the life
There were plants and birds and rocks and things
There was sand and hills and rings
The first thing I met was a fly with a buzz
And the sky with no clouds
The heat was hot and the ground was dry
But the air was full of sound

I've been through the desert on a horse with no name
It felt good to be out of the rain
In the desert you can remember your name
'Cause there ain't no one for to give you no pain
La, la ...

After two days in the desert sun
My skin began to turn red
After three days in the desert fun
I was looking at a river bed
And the story it told of a river that flowed
Made me sad to think it was dead

You see I've been through the desert on a horse with no name
It felt good to be out of the rain
In the desert you can remember your name
'Cause there ain't no one for to give you no pain
La, la ...

After nine days I let the horse run free
'Cause the desert had turned to sea
There were plants and birds and rocks and things
there was sand and hills and rings
The ocean is a desert with it's life underground
And a perfect disguise above
Under the cities lies a heart made of ground
But the humans will give no love

You see I've been through the desert on a horse with no name
It felt good to be out of the rain
In the desert you can remember your name
'Cause there ain't no one for to give you no pain
La, la ...

Friday, March 05, 2004

New Member of Liberal Coalition

He's called New World Blogger and he has a lot of cool pictures.

Edited to add; he is a she and not a he, as was originally assumed, by me. So that sentance above should be "She's called New Orld Blogger and she has a lot of cool pictures.

I get winded just reading David Limbaugh

Let's take the first paragraph of his latest article, "Democrats unified around 'the Goal'"

"Have you noticed that Democrats don't have a vision, much less a coherent platform this election year?"

Can't say that I have noticed that, mainly cause it's not true. Although I'll take them down eventually, you can look over there the left and see that all the Democrats put forward positive ideas along with their attacks on President Bush.

"It's because they don't have serious alternative policies to offer the voters."

Well from David Limbaughs limited perspective this might be true. The clincher is "serious." If the Democratic candidates wrote their platform so it would seem "serious" to David Limbaugh, we would have something that looked exactly like the Republican Platform. So maybe placating someone who isn't going to vote for us anyway isn't the wisest course of action.

"But they are nonetheless united and motivated like never before, behind an overarching objective: defeating George Bush (the goal)."

And here we get to the route of the argument. I wonder if David Limbaugh ever feels any hypocrisy slamming Democrats for criticizing President Bush, after he and his brother and his fellow Conservative commentators have made such hey out of slamming into President Clinton. Probably not, but I like to consider it.

And that's just the first paragraph. Check out these other Gems

"Democrats are mostly against the war because they are against Bush, who is leading it. They had no objections to Clinton's interventions in Bosnia, Kosovo or, yes, Iraq."

Two things wrong with this. First many of those who protested President Bush's war in Iraq protested against these previous wars. Granted they didn't get as much news coverage, but the stakes didn't seem as high; which brings us to the second point. President Bush's invasion of Iraq was categorically different than anything Clinton did. The operations in Bosnia and Kosovo were approved by the U.N. and the international community, and President Clinton stopped short of a actually invading Iraq.

"It was never Kerry's policies or his charisma that attracted the Democratic base, because he had neither."

Here's a lie we're going to hear a lot over the next couple of months, both from Republican Firebreathers and Democrats upset that their favorite candidate didn't make it to the finish line first. Kerry is not as good a speaker as Edwards or Dean, but he's good enough. And he has policies. All you would have to do, Mr. Limbaugh, is visit his website and you could check out what they were. But I suppose then all you'd have to do is qualify your policies with the adjective "serious."

Thursday, March 04, 2004

Well this is a Busy Day

For those who don't know it, apparently while in Canada, Oklahoma Congressman Tom Cole compared those who would vote against President Bush to voting for Hitler during World War 2. Well, apparently those comments are not exactly accurate and Mr. Joshua Michah Marshall, of Talking Points, has the whole story.

Not sure Mr. Cole comes off all that much better in this version.

Also since Kerry is the nominee at this point, and also a fellow member of Congress . . . don't Republicans have some kind of hangup about criticizing the United States while on foreign soil? Or does that just apply when Democrats do it?

A bonus quote. "When I am abroad, I always make it a rule never to criticize or attack the government of my own country. I make up for lost time when I come home - Sir Winston Churchill.

Via via via

This comes from Mercury X23's Fantabulous Blog who got it from Atrios who got it from The Los Angeles Times.

"I am a high school teacher and the daughter of Holocaust survivors. Monday morning, Period 1, a student, age 17, comes into my room. She asks me if I had seen the film "The Passion."

I answer, "No."

She continues, "It was so sad. I cried so much. I hate the Jews."

Very, very sadly, that tells the whole story, Mr. Gibson.

Anna Paikow

Los Angeles

Other comments

"What has been lost in the debate about the film and its alleged anti-Semitism - I've seen the movie, and there isn't any . . ." - Cal Thomas

"The other complaint from the know-nothing crowd is that "The Passion" will inspire anti-Semitic violence. If nothing else comes out of this movie, at least we finally have liberals on record opposing anti-Semitic violence. - Ann Coulter

"Is the film anti-Semitic? It didn't seem so to me, but after talking to friends, maybe I underrated some of the film's touches . . . " - John Leo

"The Anti-Defamation League's Abe Foxman has charged that the film may arouse anti-Semitic feelings because of its depiction of the role the High Priest Caiaphas and the Jewish crowds played in Christ's death. In my view, nothing in the film itself is anti-Jewish, but it does reflect -- accurately -- the Gospels' narrative about the role the Sanhedrin played in urging Jesus' persecution. The critics' quarrel is with the Gospels, not Gibson." - Linda Chavez

You can choose for yourself who you believe, but Miss Paikow seems believable to me.

Hey! Go Look at This!

Echidne of the Snakes has written a great piece on David Brook's latest.

David Brooks is someone I would call a dope, except that I'm trying to raise the level of discourse. So instead I'm going to call him a nitwit.

A question from Maureen Dowd

I don't regularly read Dowd, but her article today was quite good. I particularly liked this bit.

"Mr. Bush continues to imply that we should be scared because we're not safe, so we need to keep him to protect our national security. Which seems like a weird contradiction. If he's so good at protecting us, why aren't we safe?"

It's a good question.

Lazy Parents + Evil Video Games = Negative Fun

That's not the title of Brent Bozell's latest, but it might as well be. Of course Bozell, being a conservative, doesn't put the responsibility in the hands of the parents but in the makers of evil video games. In conservative America, the only people who have to take responsibility for their actions are the poor.

Anyway back to the matter at hand; evil video games. Are some video games evil? Yes. A thousand times yes. OK, just three times (my hand is already cramping). Here's a whole article on evil video games (which benefits from having a good subject, because the writing is a bit confusing). I don't know if this is what Bozell is talking about; but these are bad games. There are also games like Grand Theft Auto and the like that glorify gangland behavior. And apparently the ratings don't tell the whole story. So what is the solution?

He doesn't propose one really. Oh he laments the rating system (as he should; it's pretty so so), but other than that he doesn't suggest a solution. Being the helpful guy I am, I do have a two-part solution. First part; look at reviews of the game. Both Gamespot and Gamespy feature reviews of video games, which will almost always give enough information to evaluate whether the game is suitable for your home. A new video game costs some $30-$60. Even without kids I follow reviews pretty closely to see if a game will be something I will like--other wise you are just throwing your money away.

Secondly, talk with your kids about games. Don't write off the gaming experience as something completely alien; particularly with your younger kids, make time to understand. I saw that as an unmarried person with no children, so I know what I'm talking about.

Wednesday, March 03, 2004


You know just when I start feeling like things are going on an even keel a story like this pops out of the woodwork.

McDonald's to dump supersize portions

I know all my loyal fans rely on me to make sense of the unsensable, and certainly a story like this fits into that category. But I don't know if I can. I don't know if there is anything I can say that will make up for the shock a story like this causes. Oh wait, I think I've got something.

McDonalds Sucks

Yeah, that's it. That's what needed to be said.

Palatability to 7 Year Olds

Linda Chavez wrote on the airwaves this week, presumably in the wake of the Howard Stern / Clear Channel situation. She commented on how she gave a little radio to her niece, but then realized that because of all the filth out there (from Rap Stations and Howard Stern) it was not a good gift.

I find myself torn on this issue; but ultimately disagreeing. I do think there is a lot of crap on the airwaves. I don't listen to the radio that much. I'll usually catch a bit of Rush during the lunch hours (all in the service of you, my loyal readers), and sometimes Hannity or Glen Beck or someone. And sometimes I'll pop on NPR and the classical station on the weekends. But other than that I never listen to the radio in my home, I usually listen to CDs in the car, and at work I'll listen occasionally to a techno station from Helsinki (or some other made up place). Radio sucks. Ms. Chavez should have given her granddaughter a CD Player and the Velvet Underground's Loaded (brilliant album).

On the other hand, her solution doesn't strike me as ideal. "Sure there's an audience for trash -- and if adults want to buy this smut, the Supreme Court has ruled they have that right. But why not force those who want to buy obscene and indecent products to be the ones inconvenienced rather than the rest of us? With all the various methods of delivering images and sounds, why use the public airwaves to present the likes of Howard Stern? You've always been able to buy pornography, only it used to be sold under the counter and in brown wrapping paper, it didn't come into your home uninvited.

Maybe if we put the onus on those who want this garbage by insisting it be available only through direct purchase and not on the public airwaves, it would be safe again to give a child a simple radio.

OK. But what about the law of unintended consequences, Ms. Chavez? I mean do you really want your granddaughter listening to the liberals over at NPR or at George Soros new Liberal talk radio (which by the way has yet to call me. I'd really be great on the 3 a.m. to 6 a.m. slot. I could play Velvet Underground tracks and explain why everybody (but me) is a jerk)?

The other possibility is that once the door is open, the new liberal administration at the FCC has precedent to yank, say, G. Gordon Liddy or Cal Thomas off the air. Maybe even Rush Limbaugh. I mean if they are the public airwaves and we want to protect the children, why not protect them from the crap that Rush Limbaugh is doing (apparently two days ago he gave a seminar in how to be a Juvenile Delinquent, and spent a lot of time yesterday whining that nobody got the joke).

So my solution once again is leave the airwaves along and give every seven year old a CD Player and copies of Velvet Underground Loaded, Miles Davis Sketches of Spain, and Joy Division Closer. Everybody wins.

Tuesday, March 02, 2004

Molly Ivin's Latest

I like Ms. Ivin as long time readers know. Her latest article concerns our efforts to rebuild Iraq and the recent forced vacation for President Aristide of Haiti. On Haiti she writes, "And now they've gone and whacked the hornets' nest in Haiti, and they're not even willing to deal with the hornets themselves. There are no plans for nation-building in Haiti -- even bad, inadequate planning, as there was in Iraq. Near as one can tell, the administration's only plan for a post-Aristide Haiti is to send the Coast Guard to prevent anyone from fleeing the place as it descends into anarchy. This will not improve our image around the world, and our image around the world does have something to do with the terrorism we are supposed to be fighting. "

Good thing we have these culture war issues to distract us from President Bush's foriegn policy.

Nice Responsible Commentary

"The war over same-sex marriage and the war against Islamic totalitarianism are actually two fronts in the same war -- a war for the preservation of the unique American creation known as Judeo-Christian civilization.

One enemy is religious extremism. The other is secular extremism.

One enemy is led from abroad. The other is directed from home.

"Hmmm. I just read this article by Dennis Prager on how them liberals are ruining everything. He says that they are just as bad as Muslim Terrorists who killed 3,000 Americans on September 11th. And right now we are doing everything we can to get rid of those Islamic peoples (so long as it doesn't step on the toes of President Bush's bestest buddies, the Saudis). But nobody is trying to get rid of liberals. That don't make no sense. Maybe we as individual freedom lovers can do something. I know that dry cleaner guy is a liberal. Maybe i should . . ."

Of course if anybody actually thought this way, Dennis Prager can't be held responsbile in the slightest for equating liberalism and islamic fundamentalism.

Monday, March 01, 2004

Forgot to mention

Got the Peanuts quiz thing from BlogAmy. So there it is.

Monday Monday

It's such a dull day. For those following the Passion Story, well, there's William Saffire's take over at the New York Times. Long story short; he sees some validity in the criticisms of the movie.

Let's take a gander around the Liberal Coalition. Mind you stay on on the sidewalks. Bark Bark Wolf Wolf asks us to look at what President Bush was doing 20 years ago, while we're pounding into Kerry for what he did 20 years ago. Good strategy, but many will say, "Hey we already did this back in 2000 and pronounced President Bush purer than the driven snow." If only that were true. Well the first part of that sentence, not the second.

I really like Archy, he seems very willing to speak his mind, in a sort of grumpy old man dialect. He has a story on students who would rather be taught science rather than creationism.

Chris "Lefty" Brown relates his encounter with the John Edwards campaign.

Edwardpig has a bit about Fox News advertising in the Nation. In a related matter, I note that my ad in Glass Eaters Quarterly has generated a surprisingly small amount of hits.

The Gotham City 13 has a whole section on transformers and the Bush Administration. They did make Scott the Press Secretary that goofy tape recorder transformer, who was always one of my favrotes. "Spring out of my chest, my loyal flying bird and panther and goofy little guy and attack." Yeah, always loved that.

And that's only half way down the page. Check out the Liberal Coalition. They're great.

And you might enjoy this as well--a quiz and a little insight into yours truly.

You are Schroeder!

Which Peanuts Character are You?
brought to you by Quizilla

States Rights and Same Sex Marriage

Good article by Paul Greenburg (Conservative) over at Townhall about these two subjects. He explains why it's a big deal for Mass. to accept Homosexual Marriages (such marriages would, according to the Full Faith and Credit Clause, have to be accepted by all the other states). He comments that if the Full Faith and Credit Clause could be made to not apply to marriage, than we could allow states to come up with their own answers.

"But so long as Massachusetts does not force the rest of us to go along with its supreme court on this issue, surely the Union can abide this exercise of states' rights, or even a state's wrongs. If we don't have to imitate it, we ought to be able to tolerate it. It is only when such "marriages" in Massachusetts become the law in the rest of the Union that tolerance becomes tyranny.

Some states might like to follow Massachusetts, while others would deny homosexuals the covenant of marriage, and still others - the most sensible and fair, some of us would argue - will offer citizens some form of domestic partnership or civil unions. Not just homosexuals need apply. Think of elderly sisters or trusted friends who want to assure their inheritance or hospital visitation rights. The nature of civil unions could be as varied as, well, the states of the Union. It's a big country. There is no reason to make it a uniform country. That's the genius of states' rights.

The problem is that neither side seems willing to let parts of the country go their own way. Both those who support Same Sex Marriage and those who oppose it think they can win it all; why settle for half a loaf?

Edited to add; changed the title. I initially had the title Homosexual Marriage and States Rights, but thought that sounded clunky, so determined to replace Homosexual Marriage with Same Sex Marriage. I missed and so the title for the morning was Homosexual Marriage and Same Sex Marriage. Oh well.

Sunday, February 29, 2004

New Quote

Todays quote comes from the Digger Papers. Go check out The Diggers.

Plus a new Quotes Page.