S.M.B. - Logic and Rhetoric
Friday, September 12, 2003
I AM BACK! PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST! SUPPORT GEPHARDT, DEAN IS DEAD ANYWAY!
I am happy to be back, writing for this great, distinguished source of news and center of political discourse, okay, that was a little over the top, but I'm sure Kalonji enjoys the flattery.
For those of you who have been reading only since the summer, I am Wrathful Ricardo, Kalonji's angry counterpart from Massechussetts. I am currently a junior at Harvard College and am majoring in Political Science. I am a Leftist who supports Dick Gephardt for President (this is not as bonkers as you think), and I hope to engage Kalonji in debates proving why Dick Gephardt is better than Howard "Hamas" Dean.
Speaking of the Israel v. Palestinian run of violence, Israel refuses to rule out killing Arafat. What is Israel asking for? Another Arab v. Israel war? Who knows, but this violence begets peace mentality needs to stop, it reminds me of the Orwell Youth too much... Here's what the Vice Prime Minister of Israel, Ehud Olmert, has to say:
"Arafat can no longer be a factor in what happens here," Ehud Olmert, Israel's vice prime minister, told Israel radio.So Ehud, Ariel and Neo-con maniacs over there really think that, by getting rid of Arafat the terror will stop? Has Arafat been a factor at all in the recent months? Or has he simply been a scapegoat for the Israeli leadership to point at and say SEE! WE DIDN'T F^*# UP! ARAFAT MADE US DO IT! SEE! THE PALESTINIANS AREN'T CAPABLE OF SELF CONTROL, LOOK AT ARAFAT! SEE! WE HAVE TO BUILD A WALL THAT CUTS INTO THEIR TERRITORY SO THAT ARAFAT'S MINIONS CAN'T BEDEVIL US ANYMORE!
"The question is: How are we going to do it?" he said. "Expulsion is certainly one of the options, and killing is also one of the options. In my eyes, from a moral point of view, this is no different than the eliminations of others who were involved in activating acts of terror."
IT'S TIME FOR WRATHFUL RICARDO'S STUPID QUESTIONS!!!!!!!!
Why are they orgasming about killing Arafat before they get the job done?! Will Israel's leadership, especially Ariel and Ehud, endorse a coherent proposal for a Palestinian State if Arafat is out of the picture? Will anybody in the corporate media put up these questions? Where does President Bush stand on the question of killing Arafat? Is there an Israeli vision of an end to this saga? Or is it all fun and games with settlements pushing forward into Palestinian territory, provoking more Palestinian animosity? Oh boy oh boy, that's it for tonite...
Thursday, September 11, 2003
IRAQ'S PORN INDUSTRY NOW EXISTS
The fall of Saddam Hussein liberalised Iraq's cinema industry overnight.
Pornographic movies which had circulated only secretly before suddenly came into the open. The smuggling of films from abroad became overt importing. And demand has proved high despite Iraq's strict Muslim morals.
With no Ministry of Information censorship department to get round any more, most Baghdad cinemas are now showing primarily "romantic" and "sexy" films as Iraqis euphemistically call soft- and hard-core movies respectively.
Wednesday, September 10, 2003
CORPORATE MUSIC GESTAPO EXTORTS $2,000 FROM 12-YEAR-OLD HONOR STUDENT
WASHINGTON - A 12-year-old girl in New York who was among the first to be sued by the record industry for sharing music over the Internet is off the hook after her mother agreed Tuesday to pay $2,000 to settle the lawsuit, apologizing and admitting that her daughter's actions violated U.S. copyright laws.
Tuesday, September 09, 2003
WATCHING THE OPPONENT; SCREAMS OF 'UNELECTABLE' HOWARD DEAN ARE RISING; FULL COURT (BAD) PRESS AGAINST DEAN IS COMING HARD AND FAST
Today's New York Post op-ed column by Little Dick Morris brings a lot of ridiculously bizarre political scenarios into play. Among Morris's myths are the following:
A) If Bush's poll numbers continue to regress to their natural state (20%) Al Gore will enter the Presidential Race.
B) If Hillary senses that Al Gore will enter the race, she will pre-empt his entry by announcing first, because she knows that Gore would beat Bush again in 2004 and does not want to wait until 2012 to run for president when she'll be a hagly 65 years of age
C) Bush has nothing to worry about if Howard Dean wins the nomination, because Dean is an "ultra-liberal" from Vermont who is like George McGovern (D-MN 1972)
D) The Democrats now understand that they must stop Dean because they NOW know that they can actually win and Bush is not unbeatable.
E) Bush's poll numbers are down because of the lack of domestic terror, paradoxically due to a Bush success on the Homeland Security issue.
People like Dick Morris, the Machiavellian types, the "politics is a constant bloody, consistently ruthless engagement" types never seem to trust the intellect of normal people very much. Morris apparently believes that people are too stupid to attribute Bush's successes to Bush himself. Bush's poll numbers are not falling because terrorism is becoming a non-factor. Bush's numbers are falling because not a single net job has been gained under his watch, Bush cares only about the zillionaires of the universe, and HE IS A LIAR L-I-A-R. For example, Bush will title a bill "No Child Left Behind" and give it no money, people with children are not too stupid to know that their kids go to shitty schools, Little Dick Morris is completely out of his element and up his ass on this one my friends.
On Morris's second premise, Al Gore already announced (and made a huge deal of announcing) that he will not run for president in 2004, so did Hillary Clinton for that matter; anyway neither Little Dick, nor I can read minds, so we should just leave it to time to prove Morris insane on this count.
HOWARD DEAN IS NOT AN ULTRA-LIBERAL.
This bit is from Salon's article on Dean:
According to professor Gary Nelson, a liberal political science professor at the University of Vermont and no fan of Dean, "Howard is a natural triangulator. I think at heart he's a Rockefeller Republican....
Dean goes on:
"Now why would you say that?" Dean bristles, citing his fiscal conservatism and his support for the death penalty. "What makes me a 'big liberal'?" he asks.
"I don't mind being characterized as 'liberal,'" he says. "I just don't happen to think it's true."
Now on to Little Dick's 4th premise, taht the Democrats are "waking up" and realizing that they actually are not going to throw away this election, so they have to stop letting Dean win and actually put up a real candidate. Is this premise really a political reality? Is a national political institution such as the Democratic Party so impotent, spineless and pathetic as to assume defeat before the beginning of a contest? This assumption of Morris's is rubbish.
Dick Morris should put a Fair and Balanced logo next to the title of his column in the New York Post.
BY THE WAY
I JUST BOUGHT PAUL KRUGMAN'S BOOK!
I haven't opened it, there's a lot of literature I have to get through, not to mention my scholarly responsibilities. Here's what the book looks like, get it if you'll read it, apparently he claims what nobody has quite gone out and claimed, that there is a Revolutionary right-wing conspiracy, and they are shockingly advanced along their extremist checklist...
FROM TALK LEFT:
The land of the free now has the highest incarceration rate in the world in large part due to the war on illicit drugs. It's not possible to wage a moralistic war against consensual vices unless privacy is eliminated, along with the Constitution. If America is to be a free country, the war on drugs must stop.
US Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage said yesterday US troops would not leave Iraq until they found weapons of mass destruction there.
MARK YOUR CALENDARS, ANOTHER BUSH LIE IS BEING TRUMPETED IN THE PRESS!
So Bush wants $$$87,000,000,000 to continue the war in Iraq, a lot of money. The catch is that this is not simply about the war in Iraq, it is also about linking the invasion, conquest, and occupation of Iraq with the struggle against international terrorism. The truth that Iraq and terrorism had nothing to do with eachother has eroded the trust that Americans had in Bush. The real political battle has yet to begin, and if the Republicans can prevail when they lose, they can definitely win when people are confused.
Eric Alterman notes something interesting about the mainstream press parrots, and their lazy tendency to repeat what Bush says:
In-between reports on potato salad and allergies, my AOL pop-up screen keeps announcing a “Huge Price Tag for the War on Terror.” Calling the invasion of Iraq the “war on terror” is part of the president’s strategy of deception, and those who embrace the usage are lending themselves to his campaign of lies....Ladies and gentlemen, Eric Alterman.
This is worth remembering, because it is apparent that George W. Bush needs to be reminded that this is the real terror field, the one he neglected while he and Little Dick Cheney were closing the Halliburton business contract in Iraq.
The [P]resident almost had me fooled when I watched him the other night. Jeez, I've got to be careful. Although it seems that other Americans are starting to sense Bush's bullshit, check this out:
President George W. Bush’s job performance ratings have reached the lowest point since his pre-Inauguration days, continuing a steady decline since a post-9/11 peak, according to a new Zogby America poll of 1,013 likely voters conducted September 3-5.AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!! KICK ASS, I AM NOT TYPING ON MY SEAT RIGHT NOW; WHERE THE HELL IS CORVOISSIER?! WHOOPS, I'M TOO POOR TO BUY IT, BUT I DON'T CARE BUSH IS NOT JESUS, THE DEMOCRATS AIN'T SATAN!
A majority (52%) said it’s time for someone new in the White House, while just two in five (40%) said the president deserves to be re-elected.
In the same poll, likely Democratic primary voters give a plurality of their support to former Vermont Governor Dr. Howard Dean (16%), whose campaign has been gathering support in recent polling. He is followed by Massachusetts Senator John Kerry (13%), Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman (12%), and Missouri Congressman Richard Gephardt (8%). No other candidate polled more than 3%.
I've calmed slightly from my natural high, and I've got to say, this is one part of the poll I do not understand:
Nearly two-thirds (63%) of the likely Democratic primary voters said it is somewhat or very likely that President Bush will be re-elected in November 2004, regardless of how they intend to vote.NO NO NO NO NOOOOO!!! There is HOPE! Democrats, Democrats, Democrats! There is hope, remember, John Lennon said "as long as there is life, there is hope," give regular people more credit than what you're giving them right now, even if people don't know why they can't trust Bush to run the country, they feel they cannot do it, don't assume most folks are too incompetent or brainwashed to know that 2 + 2 = 4; even Radiohead in England realizes that the Bushies have said 2 +2 = 5 since the very beginning!
That was a long post. It's been trapped inside of me, while I get my academic and social lives straightened out, readjusting to college is tough right now, I'm taking 19 credits and am double majoring in Economics and History, my fraternity is also pushing our early semester rush drive, so, it's been hard keeping up with everything, even the blog. Peace to all, more to come.
P.S. - Did you hear that P.L.A. is shutting down?! P.L.A. is the first blog I've ever read, and to see it go is a major drag. P.L.A. and Blah3 were my dual inspirations in creating a blog to begin with, I feel as personal a connection with P.L.A. as anybody feels with their favorite book, or first passion.
P.P.S. - I talked to Ricardo today, he says he will be back soon as Wrathful Ricardo, although he supports Dick Gephardt for president. His return (if Harvard doesn't kill him) should be rather interesting, to say the least....
Monday, September 08, 2003
EVERYBODY WANTS HOWARD'S BLOOD; AND I RANT
I just watched the first official D.N.C. debate on C-Span yesterday, which featured constant attacks on Howard Dean. I just read an article from Lexis Nexis about the 2004 Democrats. Desperation is rising in this Democratic field, different parties are starting rumors that the labor unions will sit out of the general election if Howard Dean wins the Democratic nomination, or that many party insiders view him as "inspiration" for a new generation of Reagan Democrats.
Imagine Howard Dean wins the nomination...
labor supports Bush;
labor sits out;
labor endorses Joe Lieberman's backstabbing third party run.
Umm, nooooo, not a fat man's chance in dodge ball.
But maybe if the Republicans, Greens or Democratic backstabbers and DLCers throw enough shit at the wall some of it will stick long enough for the press gather it and share with the American people at large. I don't understand why such a rumor about labor 'sitting out of the general election' if Dean is nominated has enough credibility to make it into the press, but such a statement concerning Joseph "Slave Labor" Lieberman is non-existent.
I suspect the press is about to turn negative on Howard Dean. But this triggers the question, WHY IS THE ESTABLISHMENT SOOO THREATENED BY THIS MAN?! John Kerry is a "front-runner" who supports civil unions. Dick Gephardt is against NAFTA. Joe "Let's Trade with Chinese Torturers" Lieberman is a Republican! Bob Graham, Dennis Kucinich, Carol Moseley Braun, and Al Sharpton are all against the Iraq War. There's not much to say about John Edwards, except he's a Southerner who's cozeyed up to the Southern Confederate establishment in the Carolinas. What makes Howard Dean so much more odious, terrible, potentially devastating for Democrats (according to the nay sayers in their high horses)?
Joe Lieberman says this:
'I worry that he cannot win....'So this is only about POWER to the honorary Republican Senator? Howard Dean is leading to no such political wilderness. The Howard Deans, Dennis Kucinichs, and Al Sharptons of the Democratic Party are bringing in the folks the Democrats left in the political wilderness long ago.
Howard Dean has done well and he's energized some people, brought them more actively into the election. I think, in the long term, that's going to be good for the goal that all of us Democratic candidates share, which is to deny George Bush a second term. ... In the positions that Governor Dean has taken and the positions that some others of my opponents have taken, they threaten to take us back to the pre-Clinton time when the Democratic Party was, in fact, in the political wilderness for the better part of two decades. I don't want to do that.