Defenders Saturday

The Hulk #126

By the way talk about giving away the story right on the cover – the cover blurb is “The Hulk is Doomed! He’ll never defeat . . . the Night-Crawler.” Incidentally that little dash in the middle clues you in to the fact that this is not the X-Man’s Nightcrawler (who frankly would last about 30 seconds in a fight with the Hulk, unless he ran away). The title begins with Bruce Banner laying on the ground after having battled the Absorbing Man (Thor villian with the power to, you guessed it, control gravity) – a group of evil cultists grabs him and carries him to an old house.

One of the group, a young blonde woman named Barbara (who ends up being surprisingly important later on) has some doubts, but she is quickly reminded of her “oath.” Bruce Banner awakes in a cultish temple, with a big wheel in front of him and a priest who offers this philosophy. “Sometimes it is necessary to play with fire, unbeliever, so that a universe might be consumed.” That seems kind of obvious. Anyway, Barbara uses a pot of vapors to overcome Banner. Then there is a brief scene of the Army worrying about the Hulk because they can’t find him. “Have you noticed how nobody has smashed us in a while?”

We return to the cult leader, who, by the way, has a goofy hat (thus continuing the theme of goofy headgear) who casts a spell hurling Bruce Banner through Space and Time, causing him to comment, “Good Lord! This - - Can’t be - - ! I Feel like I’m hurtling thru space - - thru time itself.”

Then we see Dr. Strange standing in the dimension he was trapped in at the end of his Sub-Mariner crossover, clearly disgusted that he hasn’t been the center of attention, until now. Also he’s being tortured, in some sort of mystic hoop, by the undying ones who continue to look like fish/frogs although they now have bull horns too.

Meanwhile Bruce Banner doesn’t know where he is but weird stuff is happening. And then the Night-Crawler appears. He has a weird crown head, metal body, and a mace. Banner tries to resist his growing fear because he doesn’t want to become the Hulk again. Meanwhile in the real world, Barbara, the doubting cultist, notes that trying to make Banner into the Hulk is kind of mean. So her cult leader thrusts her through the portal. You know what they say, spare the portal-thrusting, spoil the cult.

Anyway after the Night-Crawler attacks the hapless Barbara, Banner becomes the Hulk – and plows into the Night-Crawler. The Hulk, showing typical well-adjusted honesty, says “Hulk is only like himself! And there is none like him!!” Hulk offers to take off and not fight, but Night-Crawler refuses this generous offer and uses his Scepter of Shadow to plunge the Hulk into darkness. The Hulk fights the darkness for a while, falling off of the floating rock (by the way, all the other dimensions in the Marvel Universe seem to consist mostly of floating rocks). Anyway Hulk hits the rock so hard that it creates light.

Then the Night-Crawler threatens to use his scepter to blast the hulk, but Barbara somehow destroys the scepter by throwing a rock at it. They don’t make scepters like they used to. Anyway the Night-Crawler, understandably upset, threatens to pound Barbara, but the Hulk leaps from his rock to punch the Night-Crawler, and after a sonic attack, Hulk claps his hand and destroys the universe (it wasn’t a very big universe). So Night-Crawler, remembering the plot must somehow involve the Undying Ones, whisks them off to the home of the Undying Ones.

Upon arrival, the Night-Crawler attacks the Undying ones and Dr. Strange, in a traditional fashion, takes credit for stuff he had no control over. Barbara, showing characteristic sense, takes Dr. Strange’s place on the torture wheel, as some sort of penance for her past sins. Hulk comments, “There’s so much - - Hulk doesn’t understand - - !” Dr. Strange, ever the soul of generosity and kindness, replies “Nor do you need to know, Monster that once was man!” Dr. Strange then teleports them back to earth where they part ways.

The Generosity of the Hulk (speaking to the Imprisoned Dr. Strange)– “You want out, weird one? Hulk can free you.”

The Humility of Dr. Strange (last page of the comic) – “Still there comes a time to put aside the trappings of a former life - - and walk among men - - as a man!”

The Liberal-Haters

We all know that Bush-Hating or Bush-Bashing is wrong right? The Conservatives love to harp on how we liberals hate Bush, and it's bad. It shows that we don't have love in our hearts and it shows that we don't have a positive agenda of our own. Bush hatred is just plan wrong, darn it!

Well, yesterday Rush Limbaugh stepped up to the Golden EIB microphone to answer the suggestion that the Conservative Base isn't as eager to support the Republican Party that nominated Harriet Miers. And let's look at the reasons Limbaugh gives for why the Republicans will stick together.

The liberals have no concept of how they are perceived. The media, Democrats, have no concept of how they're perceived, but I'll tell you what we haven't forgotten. We haven't forgotten forged documents to try to bring down a president. We haven't forgotten "Bush is a Nazi." We haven't forgotten Abu Ghraib. We haven't forgotten Club G'itmo. We haven't forgotten the efforts to demonize and criminalize Republicans and conservatives simply because they are conservative and Republican. We haven't forgotten all of the character assassination, the filibustering of qualified men and women to sit on the federal appellate bench. We haven't forgotten any of this -- and we're not going to forget it because an attack on all of those people is an attack on us. We have not forgotten that they think we are racist, sexist, bigot, homophobes. We are nowhere near having settled the score with these people . . .

Hmmmm. To me that reads a bit like the big reason to stay together as a party is hatred for democrats/Liberals. But I think when you are hating Liberals there's no problem. It's only hating President Bush that is morally questionable.

I'm curious, by the way, as to what Republicans remember about Abu Ghraib. Do they remember the awful abuse, much of it inflicted on innocents? Or do they remember that Liberals are rat bastards for having complained about such abuse? Yeah probably the latter.

Change to links

Hi all! : )

Just letting you know that we updated the link to Corrente to reflect their current website, which they have updated.

Round the Horn. An Irwin J. McIckleson Production

Salutations. This is Irwin J. McIckleson, fictional 1910's Plutocrat, writing about the blogs of the Future. Specifically I am referring to the Blogs of the Liberal Coalition, of which this blog is apparently one.

Rick's Cafe Americaine has a piece on his reaction to some gentlemen who shared an auto-ascender with him. Apparently they were discussing a popular female's use of cocaine. Good for her. Cocaine truly is the most marvelous invention of the modern age. I use it regularly; it always gives me plenty of energy, cleans out the humors, and provides the pep I need to run my businesses.

firedoglake has more about that blackguard Karl Rove who has apparently, for those who don't know, revealed the identity of an American Spy in an attempt to smear a political opponent. Mr. Rove works for President Bush, and it turns out president Bush may not be as fond of him as previously though. In fact Mr. Bush might be concerned that Mr. Rove is overshadowing him. Mr. Rove is apparently described as Bush's Brain. I have to say I am with Mr. Bush on this one. You can't let an underling get ideas above their station. That's why if a supervisor starts getting a little too personal or big-headed, I invite them out to my country residence for the weekend. That usually solves the problem, one way or another.
rubber hose has called for the nomination of a Mr. Chewbacca to the Supreme Court. He is apparently a Wookie and there are no Wookies currently serving on the Supreme Court. I have to say I find this reasoning flawed. I have no problems with a wookie or a Negro or even a woman serving on the court, but I'd like to see their qualifications above and beyond their personal history. Does this Mr. Chewbacca have strong legal qualifications?

Speaking of Negroes, Scrutiny Hooligans has a story the numbers of Negroes supporting President Bush. It is apparently very very low.

The News Blog has information on the person that President Bush has actually nominated for the Supreme Court; apparently she has served him well in proofreading Christmas Cards. That is important, but I'm not sure it prepares one to be on the Supreme Court.

Speedkill has been reading the drawings and stories by fundamentalist Christians; he finds them amusing.

The Yellow Doggeral Democrat has the news that the Bush administration is considering Nuclear weapons tactically. I don't necessarily understand what he is talking about, but he is very persuasive none the less. It does seem a like throwing the baby out with the bath water.

The Invisible Library has a review of a recent movie named Serenity by a person named Orson Scott Card. I don't know why this is significant, but Bryant sent me a Electronic Mail and said I had to link to this post. So I'll trust that you future people will know what to make of it.

And that is it for another week. Enjoy your weekend. I shall be spending it out at my country estate with one of my supervisors. Should be enjoyable. For me at any rate.

On Salon

I'd just like to say that Grumbly Muffin's comments below are not representative of the staff of Make me a Commentator!!! as a whole. I really enjoy reading their political coverage and War Room. Cheery likes those to, and also enjoys their movie reviews. Space Lobster can't shut up about how much he likes "Since You Asked." So we do really enjoy Salon in general, Grumbly Muffin aside.

As for Mr. Almond's article, it wasn't really my cup of tea, but certainly not worthy of the scorn Grumbly dumped on it.

In fact, we are going to be giving away a subscription to Salon as part of a contest (as part of our third anniversary spectacular) in a couple of weeks, assuming we can get our ducks in a row.

Look at Me!!!!!

Salon, the Liberal (practically Socialist) web magazine, has an article today by Steve Almond, entitled "The Blogger who Loathed me." Well after reading this self indulgent crap, let me assure you that Mr. Almond has more than one.

The entire story is about Mr. Almond coming to terms with a cyber-nemesis, through the metaphor of gay love. Almond concludes early on that his nemesis must love him, and so he writes about spanking him on his "hot little blogger bottom."

Almond's beef is with both his nemesis and the blogging phenomenon, incidentally. He describes bloggers as lazy, unwilling to do the hard work of actually writing complete works. Although he seems focused on "Lit Blogs" as opposed to Political blogs such as this one. Modern Literature being pretty well USELESS, I'm not sure I'd argue with him on this one.

Anyway totally self indulgent crap; but I'm not surprised Salon published. Even ignoring the frequent references to gay sex, it's reflective the self-obsessed culture liberals love. So, in a way, it's their perfect article.

Faith and Works and the Bench

Cal Thomas's latest article covers much of the same ground as Linda Chavez's did yesterday, but comes from a different angle. He's interested in what having a deeply religious person on the court means, and the answer he comes up with is troubling.

He quotes Miers longtime friend, Judge Hecht, who suggested that Miers religion wouldn't dictate her legal opinions, because judges are required to decide cases on the basis of law, not their own opinions. Mr. Thomas finds that troubling.

From that answer comes this question: If Harriet Miers can easily set aside her faith on the job, what is the point of nominating someone with such faith? Why not nominate someone of no faith and the question would never come up? Is faith good only for the confirmation process, but not the job?

The article continues in this vein (and could stand some trimming, truthfully). The main point seems to be that if you want a person of faith on the court, well, that person should base her decisions on her faith.

The implication is that Miers opinions on the divine should supersede her decisions on what the constitution says (Thomas excuses this by pointing out that different people have different opinions on what the constitution means). One wonders if Mr. Thomas would be equally comfortable if Ms. Miers were a devout Buddhist and planned on letting her philosophy guide her judicial decisions? One doesn't wonder for long, because the answer is self evident. Christianity gets the pass; all other religions and philosophies do not.

That doesn't seem like a good basis for a free society. I like the old way better, where we were a nation of laws and judges decided based on the constitution, the law and precedents. Seems more fair.

The Problem

Let it not be said that I am not willing to, once in a blue moon, praise a conservative. Linda Chavez's latest article is quite well written and makes several good points. She covers why the White House's defense of Harriet Miers as a evangelical Christian and sure to vote the right way on issues is kind of a miscue, coming so soon after the Roberts confirmation (where Robert's Catholicism was not supposed to be part of the debate and he didn't provide his views on anything).

And Ms. Chavez argues, correctly I'd say, that what is of far more importance is how she comes to her decisions. That's why her review of Miers career is a bit troubling to me, and possibly equally troubling to her (and other conservatives).

Harriet Miers is doubtless an able lawyer, but her career gives us no indication that she has the requisite knowledge and skill to be an effective justice. We know she has been ambitious and successful and can assume she is very bright. But she has largely chosen administrative and managerial roles in her legal career. She was the managing partner of a large Dallas law firm -- the first woman to achieve that distinction, as the White House keeps reminding us. We should assume that she is good at bureaucratic in-fighting or she would never have climbed so high in her firm or in the local and state bar associations, where she became president -- again the first woman to do so.

OK here's the problem from the liberal side of the fence. Harriet Miers is skilled at "bureaucratic in-fighting" which largely consists of knowing whose butt to kiss and how hard to kiss it. And for the last several years Ms. Miers has worked for President Bush. So presumably she's in the habit of telling him what he wants to hear. This might come in handy if a case on, say, the outing of Valerie Plame or the Rights of Prisoners not to be Tortured.

The problem from the conservative side springs from this; she's been skilled at climbing administrative ladders. But there's really no higher for her to climb. So there's no reason to keep kissing butts. She's free now to expose her real feelings about the issues as she likes. This would be true of any nominee, to a certain extent. But someone who had come up as a judge with a firm judicial philosophy would be far less likely to change that philosophy. Someone who's philosophy largely consists of doing what the boss says, well, they are going to need a new philosophy for a new job. So it's problematic.

Torture

Molly Ivins, chronic Bush-Basher, writes in her latest column that the G.O.P. has stood up for torture.

According to the Bushies, if the United States is holding a prisoner on foreign soil, our soldiers can still subject him or her to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment -- the very forms of torture used by the soldiers who were later prosecuted for their conduct at Abu Ghraib. Does this make any sense, moral or common?

So deeply does President Bush feel our country, despite all its treaty commitments, has a right to torture that he has threatened to veto the bill if it passes. This would the first time in five years he has ever vetoed anything. Think about it: Five years of stupefying pork, ideological nonsense, dumb administrative ideas, fiscal idiocy, misbegotten energy programs -- and the first thing the man vetoes is a bill to pay our soldiers because it carries an amendment saying, once again, that this country does not torture prisoners.

The problem with Molly Ivins is that she, like most liberals, doesn't trust our military to act with wisdom and compassion as well as with valor. She thinks of them as bloodthirsty goons who just grab who ever is near and force them to make human pyramids.

I trust our troops, and so I know that most of those who were in Abu Ghraib and in other such facilities are terrorists who would kill me and Molly Ivins as soon as look at us. I'm not going to spend a lot of time worrying about the fates of such BLOODTHIRSTY monsters. It just doesn't strike me as morally relevant. If President Bush says we need to torture such people to keep ourselves safe, so be it.

Oh, and Ms. Ivans, calling the Bush Administration the "bushies" shows a lack of character. Whatever you think of them, they do deserve a minimum of respect.

Mea Maxima Culpa

Brent Bozell is mad at CBS and Dan Rather. Well that goes without saying. Bozell founded the conservative "critique" of media, the Media Research Center.

You all remember last year Dan Rather participated in a report which flagged up the AWOL story. The story was later demolished by the presence of forged documents. Dan Rather and many others (including myself) still believe that the substance of the report was largely accurate. President Bush was lax in his performance of his guard duties. This is intolerable to conservatives.

To conservatives the presence of the forged documents prove that President Bush served with no laxness (as President Bush has claimed). And Dan Rather should have committed seppeku live on television out of shame for his mistake. And CBS should have replaced their entire news staff with hardcore Republicans. So the fact that Dan Rather is being honored for his career in journalism on the event of his retirement is a slap in the face.

To me, it seems like Bozell is getting worked up after nothing. Rather's gone. He's been replaced by someone of a much more conservative bent. On the other hand, Bozell's goal isn't good journalism, it's conservative propaganda. So keeping up the pressure, well, I guess there's no harm in that.

Our anniversary

Hi All!!!

We are approaching our third year anniversary. Our first year we did a collection of Ann Coulter Posts, and last year we (by which I mean Bryant) collected 5 humorous posts, 5 Rush Limbaugh Posts and 5 serious posts. Anyway we want to know if you have any suggestions on what we might do to celebrate this upcoming milestone.

What really hurts

Lying hurts.

Dennis Prager's latest column is entitled "How the Left Harmed America This Week." It contains this passage.

The first example involved the ACLU, which has threatened Southwest Airlines with a lawsuit. Southwest ordered a passenger off a flight after she refused to cover her T-shirt on which was printed an expletive -- "Fu--ers" -- referring to President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

And this from CNN Money.

Lorrie Heasley, of Woodland, Wash., was asked to leave her flight from Los Angeles to Portland, Ore., Tuesday for wearing a T-shirt with pictures of President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and a phrase similar to the popular film title "Meet the Fockers."

Fockers is not the same word as Fu--ers, Mr. Prager. Why did you lie to the American people? To make your wounded sentiments seem more plausible?

According to Mr. Prager the left likes cussing, while most Americans don't like cussing. Someone should tell that to Vice President Cheney.

Anyway the other ways we liberals are hurting America is that a judge released more pictures from Abu Ghraib (the judge was a liberal, apparently), and we said some mean things about Bill Bennett (mostly by simply repeating what he had said). That's it in a nutshell; liberals hurt America when they tell the truth about what is going on.

Or at least according to Dennis Prager. My own opinion runs somewhat differently.

Lying Hurts.

The X-Men

Those of you who enjoy the X-Men may enjoy this flash movie about the many deaths of the X-Men.

Monday Mail Bag

Hello all. Time for another look at the mail we get from slack-jawed yokels.

I wasn't here last week because I didn't feel like it, ok? But I'm here this week, and that should be enough.

Anyway our first comment comes from Aureantes (who has his own blog) who responds to an old old post referencing the X-Men.

That is, in a nutshell, one of the most sociopolitically trenchant declarations ever thrown forth in a popular medium. The first time I came across it (X-Men anthology from the library--okay, I started late on the reading) I pegged it as a quote to definitely keep on hand.

For those wondering the quote is "Befriend the Fanatic. Often his crazy schemes work out great for all involved. Also Lobsters are your friends."

Second we have comments on a post on Intelligent design by the ubiquitous Random Goblin and anonymous (poor guy).

Random Goblin : I'm all for ID being taught in schools. Just as long as ID-FSM goes hand in hand with it.

Random Goblin : Because I too have been touched by His noodly appendage.

anonymous : Indeed...
http://www.venganza.org/
Really, that's all you need to say...

Funny, but at the same time, how are you going to argue against this?

I have to say I find that Flying Spaghetti Monster very annoying. For one thing I know him. And when you get to know him, he's much less exciting. For one thing, he's not Spaghetti, he's Linguini.

I remember this distinctly. We were casting for episode 3F12, "Strands of Space" which called for enormous magical strands to grab Captain Starfallers ship. They brought in two actors - Lenny (Linguini) and Sylvia (Angel Haired Pasta). That Sylvia could really bring the passion to her role, and she was very attractive as well. But then she disappeared, under mysterious circumstances. So Lenny got the part.

He was terrible. I kept calling him Carbonara because his acting was so hammy. He didn't like that. Anyway the episode is now pretty much forgotten (thanks be), but I'll always remember him flailing around the stage, squawking with all the dramatic power of a constipate parrot.

And Carbonara the linguini is now pretending he created the universe. I can see why he went with spaghetti; nobody would believe linguini capable of creating the universe. Anyway if he really did create the universe, why would he be working on a children's tv show! And failing! Just something to consider you noodle lovers.

Anyway everybody knows it was really a lobster who created the universe.

Finally from the mail bag, we have a letter from Mr. Patrick Colombo. That's right, we got a letter from Mr. Patrick Colombo. Mr. Patric Colombo wrote and begins his letter this way.

I want to transfer ($125,000.000.00 USD) One Hundred & Twenty five million United States Dollars from a Prime Bank here in South Africa to an oversea account.First, I must solicit your strictest confidence in this transaction. This is by virtue of it's nature as being utterly confidential. I am sure and have confidence of your ability and reliability to prosecute a transaction of this great magnitude.

Ooops. Did I mess up your little plan Mr. Patrick Colombo. I guess that means I'm not eligible for swindling any more, eh, Mr. Patrick Colombo? However will I carry on?

Anyway I'm out of here. I've been sober for nearly three hours, and frankly, my body can't handle that. Have a good week, and remember "I will crush Captain Starfaller in my mighty pincers!"

I've gone a little commercial

I created an Amazon Wish List and posted it over there.

Also the site e-mail address. Please note early in your e-mail who you intend your message to go to.

Torture!

I'm typing that in the same way a characters speaks in the seminal movie "Teen-Agers from Outer Space."

Anyway Random Goblin has a post about the people we pay to torture and their appearance on the Glen Beck show. Go check it out!

Some Liberals are Christian

Just read a column by Joel McNally who makes the astounding claim that some Liberals describe themselves as Christian. Apparently Mr. McNally feels that the Right Wing and Christianity are too closely tied together, and it's not fair. Poor Liberal Christians.

Of course these same liberal Christians apparently have little problem with ABORTION or with GAY MARRIAGE. Now I go to Sunday School most weeks, and it seems like Christianity has an opinion on those issues.

He also quotes Kurt Vonnegaunt, atheist, on why we don't want the Beatitudes hung in the court room in favor of the Ten Commandments. Well, the Beatitudes aren't law; they are religious statements, relating to our ultimate destiny. The Ten Commandments, on the other hand, are both divinely inspired AND civil laws. So they belong in our courtrooms, while the Beatitudes belong in our hearts. Simple.

Witty is as Witty Does

Good morning everybody!!! : )

This is the title of Doug Giles latest article.

PETA is full of SHEETA

Thank you for that vulgar display, Mr. Giles. I guess you probably have some serious things to say about PETA (an organization with which I have my own problems), but your vulgar title ensures I won't read them.

New Format, New Quote

Hi all!!! : )

Hope you are having a great weekend. As advertised we have a new quote and new format. As you can see we are switching to a dark on light. So we'll have that for a few months. We hope you enjoy them.