Thursday, August 30, 2007
I got started on a lengthy review of a Libertarian convention more than a month ago, but became so bored doing it that I got an old man’s wang for blogging. So I’m just going to paste it unfinished and not deal with it anymore, so that my junk will remain crunck (to maintain virility in the johnson) for blogging. I will then post some of my other musings from the past little while.
Went to a Libertarian conference in Las Vegas this past week; 3 full days of speeches by anarchists, those who like to think that they are anarchists, and conservatives who tend to like the "Libertarian" label more (there were also a number of speakers of other persuasions speaking on other topics, including, humorously, a tiny shrimp of a British guy describing himself as "a hard core Darwinist"). Anyway, the highlight of the whole deal was a Libertarian vs. Conservative debate on foreign policy and Iraq between Ron Paul and Dinesh D'Souza. Ron Paul was joined by Doug Casey, a true anarchist and apparent non-believer in the Constitution. D'Souza was joined by Larry Abraham, a life-long Libertarian who supports the Bush Doctrine. Simply put, D'Souza owned Ron Paul and co. The Libertarian side did make some good points (common-sensical reasoning but severely outdated for this conflict), but I couldn't even believe some of the other stuff that passed as worthy of our consideration. This Doug Casey guy, savvy investor sensei he may be, could have been the worst arguer I've ever heard (apart from those who resort to lies to make their points). For example, this is, verbatim, what passed as serious debate material from this dude: "And let's bring home all our troops from all foreign bases, all they do is bring home bad habits anyways!" Great reason, you dimwitted old fart! I do have a great deal of respect for Ron Paul though, if not for his views, then because the guy is principled to the core, as opposed to the flaccid penises who make up 98% of the reps in DC. Larry Abraham was good too, his best point being, basically (and simply) that, "all the foreign policy and other bullshit from the past 90 years does not matter. All that matters is the hand we are dealt right now." On the way out I overheard some real numbskulls patting themselves on the back as they regurgitated one of Ron Paul's talking points-- that over the past 50 years the largest percentage of suicide bombings have been in Sri Lanka (or some other bullshit that I don't even care to remember), and those cases have nothing to do with America, and so terrorism is all just being overblown. Hey, let's see what happens to that percentage when we only consider the last 10-15 years, DICKHEADS!!
Saturday, August 25, 2007
When the State controls an entire industry, that industry will experience two things: shortages and a healthy black market. Utah is learning this about booze. Not that watery piss at 7-eleven. I'm talking about the delicious stuff that tastes as its creators intended.
Although there is no actual shortage of fluids of libation in this great country, the weird and unfathomable dance that Utah does with liquor has created an actual shortage of licenses. Yes licenses. They sport a quota system that's too stupid to quote, but it is being tapped at too fast of a pace to issue many more.
I'm not arguing against a state's right (or a county or city in some cases) to regulate unseemly and unsightly things such as liquor, nuclear waste, drugs and fat bitches, and while I'm a fairly strong federalist-dude, it is my duty as a drunk to point out things that piss me off. So I am posting a point-counterpoint to the top five standard issue arguments about Utah's lacivious libation and liquor laws:
1) If you don't like it, then leave. - Fuck off, I like it here.
2) Look over there, that other state/county/city has even more rediculous regs on liquor than Utah! - Yeah, they suck too.
3) These regs reflect the opinion of the majority of Utahns. -That's fine. Set that in stone. You should be aware of the "bite you in the ass" effect of such populist arguements. As the demographic constitution of this state continues to change, the majority opinions in Utah may just change. Then I will say to you "These regs reflect the opinion of the majority of Utahns".
4) So you have to go to the liquor mart to buy drink. Big friggin deal! - The selection, being controlled by the state, sucks ass.
5) Making people do a little dance discourages people from lascivious behaviour. - Maybe. We do know it greatly enriches our neighbors in Evanston and Wendover. Just go count the Utah license plates when you enter those locales. The levels of contraband entering the state at any given point probably rivals the Texan Border towns, although laden with different cargo. It's simple economics. Three or four trips to Evanston saves, depending on level of alcoholism, hundreds of dollars a year to intrepid shoppers.
A parting note: you think we would've won WWII without Churchill getting his gallon of scotch per day? I think not. I know it's a lame argument, but I get to say things like that because I'm arguing with myself here.
I love talking to myself. I always win that way.
Noah: I don't drink, but I agree with Sean. Making people go to state liquor stores or Wyoming is ridiculous. I hate the state liquor stores. I buy stuff for cooking every once in a while and somehow I always feel like a criminal in there. It's like buying your booze at the DMV.
Any true Conservative should hate the situation in Utah. When is a government monopoly ever a good idea? The law does nothing but cause hassle, expense, and annoyance for taxpayers.
BOOOOO! BOOOO I say!
Sean, I have a solution. Let's go into business together making moonshine and bathtub gin.
Friday, August 24, 2007
I may change my mind now that it is being reviewed as one of the worst films of the last 30 years. The New York Times puts it thus:
But these aspects are eclipsed in the film by the Mormons’ Snidely Whiplash-like treachery. Their evil is established in an early sequence that cross-cuts between two dinner-table prayers: the travelers wishing the Mormons well, and Jacob urging God to please send Satan’s children to hell, amen — in a grimly righteous tone that begs for the punch line, “Now please pass the ham.”
Now this is starting to pique my interest. An anti-Mormon Reefer Madness? Pretty much:
Cain has turned the Mormons into baby-eatin’ Nazis to suit his argument, parading around these black-clad, chin-bearded, testicle-slicing gunslingers without any thoughtful consideration. To Cain, the Mormons were hulking, borderline insane fundamental gorillas who flung excrement at anyone daring to besmirch the name of Joseph Smith (played by…oh man…Dean Cain), and led around on a dog collar by a Zod-like deity in Brigham Young.
And when you have the Village Voice defending Mormons, you've a certified historical anomoly, up there with the original Dream Team and discovery of a very much alive Elizabeth Smart:
September Dawn has the ham-fisted lyricism of political ads and pharmaceutical commercials.
With renewed Mormo-phobia being bandied about thanks to the Romney run, it's interesting that the filmmakers have been running around proclaiming this movie to be a warning about all forms of religious fanaticism. Of course, they didn't have the courage to make a flick about, oh say, Beslan.
So Hollywood gets to smack around a slow-moving and harmless target, secure in the knowledge that they will not be subjected to Fatwas or stabbings. This is modern courage.
I have to see this, so I will be the official INFDL guinea pig, plug my nose and plop down six bux to wade through this dogshit flick. Now that's courage.
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
The words vote, ballot and other electiony words would only be uttered on stations like C-Span or PBS and would be strictly prohibited on MTVs 1-13 and the Cartoon Network within six months of an election.
A more eloquent opinion on the matter can be found here.
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Monday, August 20, 2007
This guy has a few ideas about the possibility of drastically reducing the inordinate amount of economic power our current strategy in Afghanistan has created for the bad guys.
It would be a good start, but why not consider other places in the world where our snazzy War on Drugs has empowered some really shady dudes. Like, say, our southern border. I would love to see some data on the exponential increase in border crossings since the 1980's with its attendant crime wave. I'm more than curious to see if the advent of drug paranoia helped create that beast. Anybody else wonder if one of the many elephants in the room, along with political chaos in Mexico and the ineptitude of our bureaucracy in handling immigration effectively, is our obsession with looking "tough on drugs"?
Update: Volokh Conspiracy has a good post on this (Via Instapundit).
Friday, August 17, 2007
Update: Took me thirteen seconds to find a lunatic over there who loves her Chavez cherizo! Oh, how the ignorant seem to think alike.
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
The former Utahn excelled in the realm of politics, rising to President Bush's deputy chief of staff. But he never learned the ethics of the game, says J.D. Williams, a former U. political science professor who taught Rove. "He certainly demonstrated a command and love for politics," Williams, a Democrat, said Monday. "He loved politics. [But he] missed out on the other critical aspect of it and that was . . . the ability to play the game fairly and with honor."
You see, the game in Washington is all about playing "fairly and with honor". Right. When I think of Washington, I think of it being all "fair and with honor" and shit. No more comment on that one.
I've never quite understood the fervor with which the left hates this man, who was an excellent electioneer, as evidenced by his ability to repeatedly win for the prez despite the big man's inability to speak English and a certifiably shiddy policy guy, as evidenced by the big man's many craptastic ventures into big government. Is the source of hatingness the Voodood Majik he whipped out in 2000 and 2004? I certainly once thought so, but I think it goes deeper. A small sampling of the rabid Rove-Haterz over at the Trib:
powerofone: 8/14/2007 4:29:00 AM
Rove was nothing more than a political hit man for the republican mafia. His job was to take out the opposition. He excelled. Now he must pay for his indescretions.
booker: 8/14/2007 10:21:00 AM
Creep, no other word for this jerk. Ruin our country, will be years before this great country can recover if ever from all the damage this cretin and GWB had done to it. All in the name of power! Ruin lives, taken lives (mistake of war, Iraq) ethics, this quy doesn't know the meaning of the word. He has none. I like what a guy said on Countdown last night, with this guy gone from the White House, it's lame brain, instead of Bush's brain.
Why do angry leftist always sound like either Darth Vader or Gomer Pile on human growth hormones? Bad spelling, heavy breathing, black cape, etc.
One positive: I think I've just chosen my Halloween costume. I'll get really fat and keep my hair a little too long, get that Rove-style chemotherapy hairdo and lurk in the shadows. And I'll only trick-or-treat on the east side of Salt Lake for full effect.
Noah: The reason they hate him so much is because they think Bush is a retard. And you can't really hate a retard (although, come to think of it, they do) but you can hate the person who gives a retard the nuclear football. Also, the Left is addicted to conspiracy theories, and in any good conspiracy theory there is a front man (Bush) and then the shadowy figure behind that man. They decided a long time ago that Rove was the puppet master.
Thursday, August 09, 2007
Looking down camera-left, biting lip, head bowed and heavy with the guilt of obvious sins. Sins we all know about.
But the award for most adventurous and clever blaming of Bush goes to the Chicago Tribune, who manage to tie Muslim-backlash exploitation, 9/11 and the Minneapolis bridge-collapse into one quivering suicide-stew of Bush blaming. Beautiful and absurd at the same time. Like Woody Allen.
Monday, August 06, 2007
Rescue Dawn is the story of Dieter Denglers' real-life imprisonment and escape from a Laotian prison camp in the run-up to full blown conflict in Vietnam. He is the only American survivor of the Laotian camps as detailed in Herzog's 1997 Documentary Little Dieter Needs to Fly. His story is friggin incredible.
Christian Bale and the usually comedic Steve Zahn form an on-screen friendship as genuine as I can remember. Bale once again makes Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise look like zit-faced Degrassi Junior High actors and Zahn should be nominated for best supporting role for his incredibly real take on a man who has had the life sucked out of him, but not quite all of it.
But the most pleasant surprise of all has to be Herzog. His matter-of-fact style is still at the forefront, but the film almost has a decidedly sunny bent about it that I have never before seen him display. The jungle scenes have an awesome majesty (no surprise here, as Herzog has a storied history of jungle films), but he almost always balances the claustrophobic jungle-struggles with bits of humor or almost religious appreciation of the incredible natural landscape. He never lets the joy sink out of the film and pays scant attention to the obvious torture that Dengler endured. Many contemporary directors would undoubtedly be lured into the trap of showing, with great glee and close-up detail, the various cliched and obvious offenses.
As a fan of Herzog, I was struck with the tone of the film. There is no introspective moment of the realization of the horrors inflicted upon innocent indigenous peoples of Laos. No scenes of guilty stuffed-suit white senators drooling over the prospects of slaughtering more innocents (I find it sad to say that I fully expect modern movies to preach to the viewer constantly about the various and sundry evils of our country), but Herzog makes an obvious choice not to take the conventional route. Instead he tells an inspiring story, stripped of bullshit and in all its patriotic glory. That's also why it won't get any awards.
Pickled fish rating: Four kipper snacks out of four. Best flick yet in 2007.
Friday, August 03, 2007
"We don't want to introduce plumbing, electricity and housing and doorknobs because that's going to take away what it means to be inherently African"
The rancor erupted shortly before 11 p.m. as Rep. Michael R. McNulty (D-N.Y.) gaveled close the vote on a standard procedural measure with the outcome still in doubt.
Details remain fuzzy, but numerous Republicans argued afterward that they had secured a 215-213 win on their motion to bar undocumented immigrants from receiving any federal funds apportioned in the agricultural spending bill for employment or rental assistance. Democrats, however, argued the measure was deadlocked at 214-214 and failed, members and aides on both sides of the aisle said afterward.
One GOP aide saw McNulty gavel the vote to a close after receiving a signal from his leaders – but before reading the official tally. And votes continued to shift even after he closed the roll call - a strange development in itself.
Yes, very strange indeed. It does bring to mind some of the more fantastic bouts in the Taiwanese Parliament, though without any actual bloodshed (Dammit!). It is, however, sad that one might compare this Congress to the Taiwanese Parliament. Sign of the times, I guess.
P.S. I would pay good cash too see a Bono-Boxer inter-league bout. So would Vegas.
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
I suspect that in America, there is only so much of this that can be gnawed upon. There has to be a breaking point where we refuse to be silenced. This seems to be just the job for.... Well, you know who (QUINTUPLE CONTENT WARNING!!! NOT SAFE FOR WORK OR BAR MITZVAHS).
Noah: My question is, if putting a copy of the Koran in the toilet is a hate crime, why aren't works of "art" like Serrano's "Piss Christ" hate crimes as well? Does hate crimes legislation only protect Muslims? If Shmulevich had taken a dump on it, taken a picture, and then called it "art" would he have been all right? Probably not, but if he'd used a Bible everything would have been a-okay.
And if putting a Koran in the toilet is so awful, why doesn't anyone care that the Saudis routinely destroy all non-Wahhabi approved versions of the book that they find at their borders?